Expert: Divya Narendra – Classmates with Zuckerberg, Co-founder with the Winklevoss Twins, Guest on Equity Mates

Bryce: [00:00:15] Welcome to another episode of Equity Mates, a podcast that follows our journey of investing, whether you're an absolute beginner or approaching Warren Buffett status. Our aim is to help break down your barriers from beginning to dividend. My name is Bryce and as always, I'm joined by my equity buddy, Ren. How you going? 

Alec: [00:00:31] I'm very good. Bryce very excited for this interview. Are we speaking to someone over in the States who has collected a massive collection of investors? Kind of like Equity Mates, but for us it's small dollar retail investors for our guest today. It's some of the best investors in the world. So I'm excited for this one. 

Bryce: [00:00:49] That's it. It is our pleasure to welcome to the Equity Mates studio, Divya Narendra. Divya, So Divya is the CEO and co-founder of Sub Zero. As Ren said, it's the world's largest professional investor community. He also co-founded Harvard Connection with Harvard University classmates Cameron Winklevoss and Tyler Winklevoss. So we've got a lot to crack into today, but let's kick it off. Yeah. 

Alec: [00:01:12] Now, Divya, I think you might be our first guest who has been featured in a movie before. So this is a this is a big moment for us, but we always like to start these interviews with the story of someone's first investment. So can you take us back to the early days? Do you remember your first investment? 

Divya Narendra: [00:01:29] Well, it would have been Harvard Connection. I mean, I it's a little dubious to call it my first investment, because the story is when I was a sophomore in college, I had this idea to to build what later became Facebook. But, you know, I didn't have any money and I wasn't myself versed in Web programming. So I'd taken Harvard as this class called CSS 50. I took that class, but I wasn't super familiar with shameless USS A.P., which was sort of the language du jour at the time, you know. But that said, I kind of knew it was something I wanted to to bring to fruition. The Winklevoss brothers were actually my college roommates, and I knew they were entrepreneurial. Like, you know, I was I knew their family somewhat and I knew something they'd expressed interest in. I brought the idea to them, along with another college roommate of mine, and not a roommate, but a guy who lived in my dorm. And the boys got very excited about it. But, you know, like none of us had money. Ultimately, after we realised that we couldn't just hired a fellow student to do the programming that had sort of failed multiple times. One of those programmers just happened within Mark Zuckerberg. We ultimately hired a third party agency to develop what became Harvard Connexion. And, you know, I think it was the summer or maybe the spring or something of of 20, the or maybe 2004. I'm forgetting where we hired this agency out of Massachusetts. We sort of split the bill. So I ended up asking my parents for some cash. They ended up putting in ten grand into, you know, to pay off these developers. And ultimately, that culminated in a pretty wild roller coaster ride involving, call it, six years or seven years of litigation as well as a Hollywood movie. Yeah, it was certainly like a quirky investment. But if you look at it on a pure like ROI standpoint, it was like wildly successful. Just not as successful, not not as high, quite as crazy as, you know, as a return as it was for for Zuckerberg and some of the folks involved in the Facebook roundtable from 2004. [00:03:34][125.0]

Alec: [00:03:35] Well, Divya, we've we've asked this question for years now, and you're the first person that can say their first investment got turned into a Hollywood movie. But I guess if you look back with the benefit of hindsight, you know, sort of 20 years from when you're at Harvard, what are your thoughts on it all now? And I guess, do you have any thoughts on Facebook now? Now, Meta. [00:03:55][20.8]

Divya Narendra: [00:03:56] They're at a crossroads where the business has evolved massively since when I was, you know, coming out of school. And I think the scope of what they do have has grown Matt as both a name, but also the services they provide have have expanded in scope so much that both consumers and also investors are starting to come to terms or having to come to terms again with what they actually do and where they sort of fit into people's lives. You guys obviously focus on the markets. Maybe we're interested in sort of the market reaction to the business. And I think right now you have this double whammy where on the one hand, they're trying to introduce a huge amount of innovation to how people interact across the globe, at least across their platform, which now has 3.6 billion members, if you will. While this is happening, both the U.S. markets and the global markets are under a lot of stress in tech in particular. You know, it's really gotten hammered over the last nine months, you know, really ever since call it the end of last year. So I think people are investor appetite for risk has contracted significantly. And so I think they're going to have to work that much harder to be as efficient as possible in terms of rolling out all their new initiatives. Merging II and then all things metaverse related new hardware releases and also in terms of showing durability of their their core advertising business. So anyway, there's there's a lot of challenges we're saying we've got a lot of work of now. [00:05:28][92.0]

Alec: [00:05:28] No. One thing that we're watching and apologies, we didn't say this in your bio at the start, but you're also a board member of the crypto exchange Gemini Trust Company, which was started by the Winklevoss twins. They have raised $400 million to build out their version of the metaverse, and obviously Zuckerberg is all in on the metaverse. He's changed his company's name and he's setting up for a round two of the Harvard Connexion fight over the metaverse. [00:05:57][28.7]

Divya Narendra: [00:05:58] I think that's a really good PR narrative. [00:06:00][1.9]

Alec: [00:06:01] I learnt where in mania. [00:06:02][0.9]

Divya Narendra: [00:06:03] These are, these are two very, very, very different businesses. I mean, look, when you think about what Gemini does is a business at its core, it's an exchange for the trading of digital assets. Now there are ancillary businesses at Gemini, so one of those is custody. There's also services revolving around lending, crypto staking crypto. I think over time the firm will sort of build a sort of a broader menu of related services that ultimately help hopefully help people sort of financially. And it just help them with, you know, tapping into the sort of onboarding into this crypto revolution. And, you know, different people have different views on kind of where that that revolution kind of stands and where it's going and sort of what's going to grow, what's going to exist five years from now, what's going to die. But Gemini is an onboard into this new paradigm of blockchain tech, if you will. And I think over the years has sort of proven through numerous crypto winters and other cycles that it's going to be an important player in the space meta. You know, formerly Facebook, their sort of fundamentals really involved connecting people through messaging, through photos, through video, and now increasingly through commerce and specifically connecting individuals with businesses. So, you know, like, is there some overlap maybe. And I think for most large companies, crypto is in the crosshairs. Like if you can transact on your Facebook app or on your Instagram app, there is a finance component to that by definition, some of which could be blockchain enabled, you know, down the road. But, you know, ultimately at its core, like, what are they trying to do? Like they're trying to help you connect with your family, with your friends, with with third parties, with companies, etc.? It's it's a pretty somewhat different mission set, at least for the near term. I mean, and I would say even for the for the medium term, in the long run, I mean, look, my view is that all tech companies are ultimately hunting for eyeballs on hunting for engagement, and they're always looking to expand. So like just today I was reading an article that Mehta through WhatsApp has has invested in its first like I don't know if it was a film or documentary or something, but like they've, they've sort of gotten into the media space. Are they Netflix? Obviously not. Are they Amazon Prime? No. But it's like if they think it's relevant to them and could help, engagement could be positive or alive, they'll do it. But it's not their core business, you know. And I think for an entity like Gemini Trust, Gemini is more likely to put the banking industry in their crosshairs first before they try to do something like Instagram or, you know, I think that's pretty harsh, to be honest. [00:08:48][164.9]

Bryce: [00:08:49] So so yeah, there was there was Facebook, there's Harvard Connexion and now some Xero, which, as we said at the top is the world's largest professional investor community. So I guess the first part of the question is there's something about communities that you find interesting as a as a business model or as something to sort of gravitate towards. And what's led led to some zero? [00:09:11][21.5]

Divya Narendra: [00:09:11] Yeah, there is. And I think if you're a business person, you know, one of the things you learn about is network effects and the importance of network effects. So communities by definition almost attain value by virtue of their size, their scale, but more so their level of engagement. And they're not. All communities obviously are the same, and not every social platform is going to address the needs of, you know, its members in in all of the ways they might need addressed. So, you know, in our case, you know, when I was working I was working at a hedge fund myself in Boston and I realised that, you know, kind of before some zero there was no online network, all LinkedIn or something that really catered to investment professionals and really gave them a venue on which to share their ideas. And I also realised at the time that Wall Street, you know, has its own equity research and research that it offers its customers, including hedge funds and mutual funds and family offices. But that research is oftentimes. Heavily biased because of pretty serious conflicts of interest between the investment banks that produce the research and the consumers of that research. You know, you saw this in the dot com bubble where all the banks were pushing these these dot.com stocks that were grossly overvalued. And, you know, people were kind of buying these things without really understanding valuation risk and all of that. So if you want access to bottoms up fundamental investment research that doesn't have the same conflicts of interest that traditional Wall Street research has, and you want that research to come from people who actually have skin in the game. They're not just like making empty recommendations, but they actually own the things they're recommending. Well, you have to go to the buy side and before some zero, the buy side didn't share it. Research online, right? Like you might call your buddy at another fund, say, hey, I know you cover Danaher Corporation, like let's talk about their last earnings call or hey, I know you cover Metta. What do you think about this tick tock risk situation? But if you didn't know that guy or that gal, you'd be out of luck. Right. And so we've sort of, you know, added an enormous amount of transparency to what professional investors have to say about a very broad array of companies across the globe. And actually, since then, we've we've made that research available even to individual investors who are not professional investors. So our kind of setup is that if you want to contribute content to some zero, at least as of now, you know, you have to be on the on the buy side. But if you just want to consume it because you want to be in the know, you want the best possible information, you can just subscribe to one of our retail tiers and literally you're accessing the same research that a multibillion dollar fund might have access to. [00:11:57][166.3]

Alec: [00:11:57] So I guess the question then becomes you've got tens of thousands of buy side analysts on the platform sharing research. It could become overwhelming that there's so much information on your platform. So we want to understand how you navigate it, how you sift through all that research. And I guess in your mind, what separates the best in class research from the research that isn't quite as good. So when you're navigating your platform, when you're looking for opportunities on some zero, what are you looking for? [00:12:29][31.1]

Divya Narendra: [00:12:29] I rely on a lot of the tools that are on the platform to help filter research. So some of those tools include fundamental screening. So for example, like you can go on the platform and say, show me all tech ideas that trade below 20 times earnings, you know, with growth above a certain percentage or something like that, or show me or shorts in health care where the author has listed accounting fraud as a catalyst. Right. So they're screening tools like that. In addition to that, there's a rankings page on the platform where we actually rank all of our contributors based upon the consistency of their submissions. If you posted an idea on a stock and it's done really well, you're not going to get a high rating on the platform. But if you submit three or four or five ideas and they all do well relative to benchmarks, you will fare well in our ranking system. And it's interesting, there are a number of guys on the platform who just, you know, somehow managed to consistently outperform and they generally sit at the top of the rankings. Now, that's not dispositive. It's not to say, okay, you just buy everything they buy. But it's an interesting data point. It's a form of a screen and maybe a signal to to look into what they're talking about a little bit deeper. In addition to that, we oftentimes run idea contests. And so we'll get a panel of judges. Sometimes those oftentimes those judges are CEOs at family offices, university endowments like MIT. You know, they'll they'll read ideas and sort of, you know, there'll be consensus typically amongst a group of judges as to which idea was the best. Obviously, it's a little hazy. What's what's the you know, what's what's a great idea? What's a not so great idea? But usually a well-written idea will include a pretty serious dive into catalysts, risks, channel checks, evaluation, all the things that fundamental investors care about or somebody who's got more like a Warren Buffett mindset would care about. [00:14:24][114.6]

Bryce: [00:14:24] So much of the analysis focuses on when to buy on the platform. How do you know when to sell to view? [00:14:30][6.3]

Divya Narendra: [00:14:31] Well, every idea has a target price and typically authors will update their idea. So oftentimes they will close out if they see that a stock has either approached target price, exceeded the target price, both in the long side and the short side. It's really on the author, I think, to tell, you know, his readers like what what's on his mind. But I think if you're asking that question on a more philosophical level, ultimately values in the eye of the beholder. And, you know, if you if you've done your homework and you feel like, okay, the thesis has played out, then you're more likely to sell. And if you feel like there's still many catalysts away, you know, that are kind of in the. Pipeline that will further on like unlock value. You may not sell. We might kind of hold off then. Different investors have different time horizons. Some people are like, I tend to be a very long term investor. I don't I don't tend to trade really at all. But some people are obviously more short term in terms of how they think about investing and you get folks kind of in between. And so it's more a personal question. And then for me to sort of tell someone, hey, this is when you should sell. But I mean, look at anyone who's a serious investor has, you know, they have some idea of what intrinsic value is. And if you feel like you own something that has achieved intrinsic value, you should probably sell it. [00:15:49][78.0]

Alec: [00:15:49] Divya, we want to turn to the current market conditions and what you're saying on the some zero platform. But before we do, we're just going to take a quick break to hear from our sponsors. Divya, before the break, we spoke about some Xero, the platform that you've created that there is the largest community of professional investors. And we're speaking at a time where the markets are a bit volatile. Just yesterday, we had the worst day in about two years. So it's a tough time to be an investor. And I guess we want to understand how the professional investors on your platform are managing it. So before we dive into specifics, what's what's the vibe on the platform at the moment? How are they navigating this moment? [00:16:31][41.7]

Divya Narendra: [00:16:32] Look, it's a bloodbath out there. I would say for our members who are running absolute return strategies or they have significant short exposure, this is how they earn their fees. Right. It's in moments like these that they tend to generate the most alpha. And I think those those managers are doing well. I mean, in general, if you're if you if you're running a fairly neutral book or if you have a fairly neutral strategy, you're probably doing pretty well. And even kind of on a more extreme example for the folks on our site who tend to focus on shorts, they're having a field day. But if you're, you know, a long only guy and you, you know, you own Google and Facebook and Amazon, this is a pretty painful period. And so, you know, again, I don't want to generalise for everyone because everyone's got a different mandate. But my personal view is it's always better to stay the course and in names where you have strong conviction. If you don't have conviction in a name, then get it. I mean, it's totally understandable. It's like, get out because you don't know what you're doing, right? But if you've got conviction in a name and what is happening around in the macro environment isn't changing your long term thesis that much? And if you can afford to stay in the name, you're probably better off just kind of holding tight. And it's obviously a tough ride. But look, here's what happens. I've noticed this in the past. Like, you might have a year where for most, you know, out of 360 days, 365 days in a year, the majority of them are either down, trading sideways, but not really up meaningfully. But there might be a handful of days in the course of a year where you might see a big move to the upside. And if you miss those days, like there goes your return for the year. For people who own good companies, you know, and they're not levered or anything like that, I mean, it's a safe thing to do to just sit tight and just stay the course. I mean, I think this inflation thing will correct. It just kind of has to I mean, I feel like common sense would tell you that, you know, if you're seeing the impact of goods and services getting more more expensive, like you as a consumer, you're going to start to rethink, okay, like maybe I need to renegotiate my rent a little bit harder or consider moving, or maybe I need to rethink the things I buy. Or maybe I should rethink kind of what I'm spending on travel or whatever it might be. Right? Like a lot of that discretionary spend I think will take a hit first. You're already seeing it in terms of mortgage applications, like if interest rates triple, you're just less willing to pay up for real estate. And, you know, like, I would think so. You know, I think CPI, obviously it's a lagging indicator, but if you look at some of the forward indicators, you know, it is you know, I think showing a slightly different story that, you know, people are kind of trying to come to terms with this. And, you know, hopefully we don't get any more like crazy spending bills. I think at least in the U.S. elections will be a very interesting time. And could, you know, if we see a sea change in sort of like how many seats maybe the Republican Party picks up in November, you know, maybe that's a positive catalyst for the market, you know? So anyway, I'm not a macro guy, but I don't think that like doom and gloom is going to it's not going to go on forever. And it just I think mathematically it can't there's a little bit of a gravitational force at play here because inflation does kind of self-correct as it sort of enters through people's own budgeting. [00:20:01][208.9]

Bryce: [00:20:02] So before we move to our final three questions to close out the interview, you mentioned that you rank your investors on the platform. So I'm just wondering if looking at those that are top ranked, if there were any sort of common traits between them that you could pinpoint from a philosophy point of view or from how they're currently approaching the market? Yeah. Are there any are there any common common traits? [00:20:23][21.0]

Divya Narendra: [00:20:23] They're all fundamental in nature. So we don't there are no Chartists on some zero. That said, some of them are a little bit more kind of event oriented in nature. Some of our guys are a little bit more focussed on cognitive biases that exist in investing, that create opportunities that they've isolated. You know, some of them take more of a very long term kind of Buffett approach as well. That's not so dependent on quarterly results. But yeah, I think that the sort of the common denominator is really just how much homework did the person do? And usually those folks do a lot of homework. And also, again, just that that focus. Fundamentals. Yeah. Oh, and actually, I, I'll add one other thing. So there's a healthy dose of scepticism that pervades. Professional investors. They're almost trained to be sceptics. So when you look at or when you read an idea on the platform and somebody is talking about their DCF model, for example, you can sort of tell that and you look at their assumptions. They're not putting in typically like wild assumptions or like overly rosy. You know, they tend to be conservative on things like margin assumptions, growth assumptions, you know, all the sort of the sort of things that would typically go in to a model just so they have you know, they've got a margin of safety in terms of, you know, their predicted target price or, you know, kind of just just their own risk that they've got in the name that they're invested in. [00:21:47][83.5]

Alec: [00:21:48] Divya, we want to say a massive thank you for joining us today. We always like to finish these interviews with a quickfire final three questions. So we'll move to them. And the first one is, are there any books that you consider a must read? [00:22:00][12.4]

Divya Narendra: [00:22:01] I would say for folks who are investment focussed and that's maybe where I've got a little bit more experience. Yeah. I mean, I think if you read Warren Buffett's essays like that's or his letters, his annual letters like that, I I'm want to call it a must read, but it's out there. And I think, you know, you can glean a lot just from reading kind of his his annual letters The Intelligent Investor by Ben Graham is like another classic that I feel like, you know, for value investors is really fun. There's a book by Joel Greenblatt like You can be a stock market genius. That's a fun one. It's a pretty quick, quick read. But you kind of get into understanding opportunities relating to spin off situations, which is pretty interesting actually. You know, since I'd mentioned margin of safety like that one is probably I mean, that's one of the most famous. So for folks who are not familiar with Seth Klarman, I mean, he's one of the most widely respected investors in the world, fairly under the radar, but has a very long term track record of success. He's done obviously very well for himself, but his book is legendary, so I recommend that. Outside of finance, I was recently reading String Theory. It's like a series of essays by David Foster Wallace on on tennis. And I just I grew up playing tennis. So for me, it's just it's always interesting to hear somebody write about the sport and he spends one of his essays is just sort of like Roger Federer. Huge, huge Roger Federer fan. So I always find a lot of parallels between kind of sports and work and sort of the you know, the science of the sport is is very interesting as well as the art of the sport. And I think investing is kind of similar. It's like there's a there's a discipline to it that is technical, but there's an art to it that I think is also kind of interesting and almost gets to some of the psychology of of investing, which I think is interesting. Outside of that, I just kind of raised it for fun. I mean, I love reading like military books as well. I find them inspirational. There's a great one. This is going to sound so cheesy, but there's a book by a guy named Eric Haney who was one of the founders of Delta Force. It's called Inside Delta Force, just like this is, you know, the US's main Tier one special operations force. And that's a fun way to kind of dig through. There's so many others I don't I don't even know. [00:24:26][145.1]

Alec: [00:24:26] That's a great list of both finance and non finance books. So we'll definitely be jumping on Amazon after this and picking some up. The second question that we like to finish with, if you forget valuation today, forget it as an investment opportunity today, but just purely on what the company is and who runs it, what's the best company you've ever come across? [00:24:47][21.5]

Divya Narendra: [00:24:48] I mean, the best company. I mean, look, if you go by some of the sort of fundamentals of business, I think Google and Meta are just incredible, incredible businesses for outright monopoly as well as kind of like the margin profile that, you know, I think when you when you say great business like comes to mind, I think I think alphabet Google is really something else. I mean, it just has, you know, a stranglehold on how people find stuff. It's like pretty incredible. So sad to say that other businesses don't incorporate search and you know, like, obviously, like there are other great businesses out there. But I really I feel like from a use case standpoint, Google just I mean, they haven't given up an inch since they were founded. Yes. On search. And because, you know, like people typically search for things that they're interested in. It's obviously an advertiser's you know, it's just like a goldmine for them right matter. Still a little young but I think it. Has the potential to get there. So I think what's interesting about them as a business and one of the reasons why I put them I would short list that is that they've been able to adapt very quickly to forces from competition and just trends that are that are affecting their business. Right. So their ability to transition from desktop to mobile was extremely quick and very impressive. Their ability to, I think, deal with this like a new kind of global regime around privacy regulations has been pretty, pretty impressive. And we're starting to see how commerce is becoming a bigger part of what they do, their adoption of messaging. Like the dude bought Instagram when it had like 12 employees and zero revenues and Instagram, I would argue today is worth probably more than what you can buy metaphor as a stock. So just to kind of speak to like the value of that acquisition, I mean, Instagram might be the greatest acquisition in the history of acquisitions, you know, what's that worth? It's a lot. Yeah. I think all the metaverse stuff is very, very promising. They're going to be announcing in October something called Project Cambria, which is effectively like a high end quest headset. So I'm very curious to see kind of how that changes the world of hardware. And, you know, could that be a future desktop replacement? I think even more interesting is what they're doing with Luxottica with AR glasses because I think the next iteration of that could just be like an iPhone moment. So I think a lot of this stuff is just it's too early to tell. And I think people are caught up in like a lot of nonsense with respect to the company. Like they get caught up in the stock price and like, I don't know, just these like kind of silly, frivolous, like whistleblowers who kind of have an axe to grind and don't really know what they're talking about. But you can tell that Mark has the long game and in his in his mind, like he doesn't care about like the short term stuff that that a lot of companies get caught up in. But I don't know. I mean, there are lots of great businesses. I think Chipotle is a great business. You know, I own a company called Blackstone, which I'm sure you're familiar with. I mean, that's a phenomenal, phenomenal business. So, you know, speaking to like why is it a great business? It's incredibly scalable, has significant network effects both in terms of its customer base, in terms of its like, you know, it's a moat. Is this like contractual obligation on the part of its investors to keep to basically give them like what is almost permanent capital, right. And then to be able to charge two and 20 fees on top of it is like that is an incredible business. An incredible business. It's also an incredible brand, incredible franchise. So I think lots of incredible is out there in different industries and I think I think probably smarter to go industry by industry like, you know, who are the sort of blue chip names, why are they where they're at? What degree of innovation are they're bringing to the table and to their industry? You'll sort of see that, you know, in every industry, like you get you get some of these incumbents that are very large but not really doing much. Like one of the reasons, like I'm not a huge Apple fan, even though it's obviously an incredibly profitable business, they're massive is like the innovation that they bring to the table just seems very incremental. So it works just fine. But like is the iPhone 14 really any different from the 13? I don't know. As a consumer, I'm just like, well, maybe I should just get an android and like spend half the money and, and pretty much cover my phone call needs, you know, like, why am I spending $1,000 on a cell phone? Like, does that even make sense? [00:29:32][283.1]

Alec: [00:29:32] I think the thing with Apple is they they're so incremental and then they'll just blow us away with, like, their version of air glasses or, you know, whatever the next iPhone is. At least I think not. But what does it look like? [00:29:43][11.2]

Divya Narendra: [00:29:43] What are they blown people away with? [00:29:45][1.6]

Alec: [00:29:46] Yeah, since. Since Steve Jobs died. Nothing. Really? [00:29:49][3.0]

Divya Narendra: [00:29:49] Yeah, nothing. And I think it speaks to like the difference a little bit between founder led businesses and just kind of manager led businesses. I mean, Tim Cook is a bank Bain consultant who then became CEO. There's nothing wrong with being consultant, but there's a degree of, I think, risk aversion on his part that is a little different from like a Zuckerberg or a Bezos. I think there's something to be said for that. [00:30:13][24.1]

Alec: [00:30:14] This could be a whole other podcast. Yeah, but I think, you know, the purpose of this question is to try and pull out some of the hallmarks of the best companies and the best entrepreneurs. And I think you've given us a lot to think about there. So we'll jump across to the final question that we like to close the interview with. If you think back to your younger self in your early Harvard days, starting Harvard Connexion and meeting the Winklevoss twins, what advice would you give to your younger self? 

Divya Narendra: [00:30:41] I would probably have spent a little bit more time learning to code, but it's funny. I have this T-shirt in my my dresser. I actually have four of them because they come from a programming bootcamp and it's a snarky. Tagline that says coding is the new literacy as now in 40. So like I feel like like I feel like, you know, like I'm like the grey haired guy in tech now, but it's kind of true, you know? I mean, it just it's a really critical skill for younger people to pick up. Not because you need to do it professionally. And in fact, I would say most people shouldn't. But to have proficiency in it, it's just kind of fundamental. And I think, you know, whether you're an entrepreneur interviewing programmers or maybe you're a product manager who's working with programmers, or maybe you're just dabbling, whatever, I mean, it's just very helpful to have sort of the fundamentals of web programming also is a problem solving exercise. You just start to think a little differently or rant. 

Bryce: [00:31:45] And I certainly lament not some sort of computer science at university as well. But anyway, nonetheless, it's been an absolute pleasure. Thank you for taking the time out to to speak to us and the Equity Mates community today. We've taken a lot out of today's episode, so all the best. And yeah, we look forward to catching up at some point in the future. Thank you very much. 

Divya Narendra: [00:32:06] Appreciate it, guys. Thanks. 

Alec: [00:32:07] Thanks to you.