NOLL TILL 100 — ENGLISH TRANSCRIPT
Episode 107: The union versus Västerbottenssåpa, and the new law for ecommerce businesses #107

English translation of the full Swedish conversation. Original timestamps preserved.
Original audio: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzu23jpTPrU

[00:00:00] A warm welcome to a new episode of Zero to a Hundred. With me as usual is Fredrik Ankarsköld. New week, fresh start, what do you say, Fredrik? Absolutely. The sun's here, so it already feels much better now.

[00:00:12] Yes, excited. I can see it in your expression. You're happy, anyway. Yes, how about you? No, my expression is misleading. I'm happy, but the craziest thing happened last week.

[00:00:26] Tell me. I mean, this is about as unlikely as it gets. For all the years we've worked with Västerbottens Såpa, I've kept thinking: We're doing something good for the world. We're doing something good for society. We're doing something good for the local people up in Vilhelmina. And our intention has always been to support the local community. When we started working with the company in 2022, I read an article that year saying Vilhelmina was one of the places that the most people were moving away from in all of Sweden.

[00:01:01] It's a town with just a few thousand people, right? In percentage terms, there was, well, a high double-digit proportion of people leaving Vilhelmina. Mm. And the reason was a lack of jobs. People didn't have jobs, so they moved to places with more jobs. So when we started creating jobs, that always felt like, oh, you know, nice. You're contributing to the local community, and along the way we've won prizes and awards, and even the County Administrative Board. I mean, what's the head of the whole of Västerbotten called?

[00:01:40] Well, that's a good question. The County Governor of Västerbotten. Mm. She invited us to the palace, as it's so grandly called, in Umeå, to award a regional prize to Västerbottens Såpa in 2025 because we've grown in such a short time and employ lots of people, and yes, as an entrepreneur you feel extremely proud when you see what you've achieved.

[00:02:07] Mm. Do you know what happened last week, then? Tell me. Now there's someone on Facebook starting to call us out for not having a collective bargaining agreement, writing that it's unethical to shop with Västerbottens Såpa because the employees don't get overtime pay or some nonsense like that, completely irrelevant in this context. For one thing, they absolutely haven't spoken to any employees, because everyone loves working at Västerbottens Såpa. They're happy, there's a good sense of community up there. You know, we have terms in line with collective agreements, as it's so nicely put, that are insanely much better than a collective agreement. So the collective agreement is our baseline. We've looked at what's in the collective agreement and then thought: We're a fast-growing, entrepreneur-led company. We don't need a collective agreement. We can have something better. And we've …

[00:03:03] … tried to achieve that through, well, we have Fora, we make pension contributions for employees, we have extra, I mean overtime pay; everything they're talking about on Facebook, we already have.

[00:03:17] Mm. But they're still going to call out Såpa as though we're somehow exploiting the people in Vilhelmina. What do you think that's about, then? I mean, this is the union.

[00:03:29] Mm. So the union has been on our case for a few weeks now to sign a collective agreement. So after, I think after the news about Vendis buying a large part of the company comes out in the media and gets some press attention, IF Metall sees it and thinks, ‘Now, damn it, we're going to divide the spoils between us,’ or take the spoils. So they see this as prey in some way.

[00:03:56] This is a growing company from a local town that's been relatively dead in Swedish entrepreneurship or business. It hasn't had growth for many years. Lots of companies have had to close. The biggest employer is ICA, the local ICA store, apart from the municipality, that is. And no, now we're going to go after this poor little company.

[00:04:23] Mm. So they're on our case with crazy methods: ‘You have to sign here.’ When we say it's a negotiation, because it is a negotiation. It's called a negotiation under Swedish labor law.

[00:04:36] Mm. Then they say: ‘No, what do you think this is? It's not a negotiation. You're going to sign. We're only coming so you can sign, and then it's done.’ What I take from that, having heard similar stories about unions from other companies, is that it's, I don't know, almost criminal things they're doing.

[00:04:58] I mean, it's basically that, and I don't understand politicians allowing this sort of thing. Yes, there ought to be, or there probably is in some quarters, but nobody dares stand up over this.

[00:05:08] Mm. You think you're doing something good for everyone, but all you're doing is driving the whole company away from Vilhelmina. Sure, perhaps we'll keep a small proportion of people in Vilhelmina, but why would we want, in some special way, to negotiate with the union every year? And even if we join the union, it doesn't make anything better for the employees. But I can see that, especially in the past, there may have been a purpose to certain things about unions. There was. No, I mean, unions come from somewhere in the early 1900s, when there was a strong impetus and good purpose for them, with miners, there was, well …

[00:05:57] … a big industry emerging, where there were people who were surely being taken advantage of or exploited or underpaid and couldn't stand up for themselves, because those were the jobs available. Now it's something completely different. I mean, we're living in 2026 after all. We have so much that's positive in entrepreneurial Sweden that there shouldn't be any need for the kinds of methods the union uses. I've followed this Tesla issue and in a way thought it's completely crazy, Tesla standing its ground. They've been basically boycotted by, well, all their suppliers through mafia-like methods like: We won't collect your rubbish unless you sign with the union, eventually.

[00:06:49] Mm. So they no longer even collect the rubbish outside Tesla's premises, even though they pay for waste collection. Right. They don't want electricians to repair their charging stations, even though they pay for maintenance and taxes and VAT and everything else.

[00:07:07] Mm. I mean, these are crazy, mafia-like methods. The government should have put a stop to this along the way. But they haven't. But I'm also thinking, when you talk about mafia methods, if they say: I'm going to impose demands on you and you're going to pay us, and it's for your own good. It's so we can protect you and your employees. Or not even you.

[00:07:28] You're not the one they're trying to protect. It's the employees. But time after time I've seen cases where the employees haven't asked for it and it doesn't benefit the employees.

[00:07:38] No, same here. Somewhere there should be a certain number of employees who want this. Mm. Who want this company, or fast-growing company with [unclear in the Swedish source: tvilämning], to become unionized.

[00:07:52] Mm. And of course they're not going to tell us as employers that yes, we want it, but let them tell the union, then. But we ask for such a simple thing. And the answer is: ‘No, we don't have a list like that.’

[00:08:06] What disadvantages do you see? Because I'm thinking, if the union comes in thinking this isn't a negotiation, you just have to join the union, what are the disadvantages for the employees if you join? The annual pay negotiation is no longer individual pay setting, especially not in a factory and that kind of manufacturing-driven company. So right now we've had individual pay setting, obviously, like all other companies, so we have an annual … employment agreement, wait, what is it? Annual employment discussion, like a review meeting, right? And we discuss what's been achieved, what you've learned, how we see the future. What do you want to do, do you want to develop, et cetera.

[00:08:57] And somewhere in that discussion pay is set, and it's very individual. Whereas at union level they want you to negotiate with the union, and then a percentage is set every year. And usually that percentage is very low. We're talking about two or three percent. Three percent, then it's a high level.

[00:09:22] Mm. But it can be 2%, and you know inflation in Sweden over the past few years has been higher. Right. What's that supposed to … This is set somewhere in line with inflation and how society is doing otherwise, so … But if you take, now I'm not absolutely certain about Såpa and shouldn't guess, but at Porobic Group we've had an average pay increase of between five and ten percent a year.

[00:09:46] Mm. Sometimes 15, 20%. It depends on how the individual is doing, someone who's made a big impact, a big impression on me, developed, wants to develop, wants to move forward. A lot happens in a year, right? So I get both annoyed and at the same time feel: Okay, you want to do something good and then you're disappointed that this sort of thing happens, and you're going to be publicly called out for something bad, as if we'd suddenly become a terrible company here.

[00:10:18] Mm. We have [unclear in the Swedish source: bedrövat] the employees. It's not as if we stole them from another firm. They come … Most didn't have a job, or had a part-time job or hourly work, or got a better job. That's why they come to a company like Västerbottens Såpa, which starts hiring people essentially out of nowhere.

[00:10:36] But what else have they, I mean, what else has the union said when they've come? No, I haven't been involved in the negotiations, so I can't comment. We've only heard secondhand from what colleagues say …

[00:10:48] … who were involved, so what we call a negotiation, they don't call a negotiation. No, of course they want us to join the union. We have to join the union because we're such a small company, and I suppose we've reached the point of: Okay, which organization is best for us and our employees? The vast majority of our employees work in the warehouse and in picking and packing, and essentially in e-commerce. So then we're looking at: Which union should we join?

[00:11:20] Then there's some … the closest union is the e-commerce logistics union. Mm. I'm obviously not good at this, but there's something we're discussing with, and then IF Metall says, for instance: No, no, you don't decide whom you join. We decide that between ourselves.

[00:11:43] We'll divide the spoils here among ourselves. We'll discuss it. I'm just like, okay. As if we were an animal. Yes, but it's completely insane. I mean, I'm thinking: Why should they get to choose? When they come in and say we get to choose what you join. It's not … I'm thinking of a monopoly, except this is worse than a monopoly. Here it's more like [unclear in the Swedish source: en kravspel], so you don't even have a choice.

[00:12:09] Yes, I know. No, it's really strange. But we do have a choice, because we have a company. If the other unions agree to sign an agreement with us, we can sign one with them, and then we can always refuse to sign an agreement with … What's the worst they can do? Well, they can impose some sort of blockade outside the building. Yes. So be it. Like, what's the worst they can do?

[00:12:38] Call their members out on strike. They don't have many members in [unclear in the Swedish source: incomplete information]. Then they can … It'll take them a long time to start mobilizing all the other unions against a small domestic company in the middle of the country. I struggle to see all the unions supporting that. And then even if they do, well, it's not as though it's hard to learn to pick and pack …

[00:13:02] And there's Morgongåva. We can move essentially all picking and packing to Morgongåva if that were the case. I mean, for us, for our business, it's essentially a zero-impact game.

[00:13:17] Mm. But for the employees it's a big deal if we were to move the operation or move lots of jobs. And for those who don't know, what's Morgongåva? Morgongåva is our logistics hub, where we're in the Apotea and Babyland building, already shipping and picking as is. There we work with a fantastic company called [unclear in the Swedish source: Chila Health], which supplies staff to us and works with unionized staff and terms in line with collective agreements. So we hire in staff, usually at a slightly higher cost, but have this scalability, letting us increase and reduce the workforce at fairly short notice. Our intention in opening Morgongåva has never been to reduce the number of employees in Vilhelmina; it's been redundancy for us, so we don't become so dependent …

[00:14:17] … on one town. Even though Morgongåva is a small town, it's a big logistics hub in Sweden. A great many e-commerce parcels leave from Morgongåva. But then perhaps the people running the union think it's mean of you to move it to Morgongåva. What do you think about that?

[00:14:34] It is. But then they'd be forcing us into it. Mm. Right. So we don't need to, that is, we don't need to sign an agreement with the union, because we're not a company that depends on the union in the same way as Tesla. Even though Tesla has now stood its ground and withstood the union pressure. We're not a Tesla.

[00:14:53] Most wouldn't withstand the pressure Tesla has faced. No, most companies absolutely wouldn't have managed it. But we're not dependent, again, on the union like that. Yes, our production department is up in Vilhelmina, and it would have been somewhat … it would've been tough until we'd made that adjustment. But it wouldn't have been the end of the world for the company. But to make things simple for us, and if they believe it'll be better for employees, and they do believe that. Now the employees haven't said it, but we'll make things simple for ourselves and sign a collective agreement. But we won't sign just any collective agreement for the sake of it; we want to sign the best agreement for the company's employees and for the vast …

[00:15:44] … majority of employees, [unclear in the Swedish source: kan man ändligga], and above all if you think ahead. We have to think over three, five or ten years about who else will be employed at the company. We're getting machines in the machinery fleet that make production easier, which means we won't hire huge numbers more on the production line. Instead we'll hire many more on the picking and packing line, in administration, handling, customer service, e-commerce and marketing.

[00:16:13] Those kinds of people don't have IF Metall as their union. Mm. No, but I think this … I haven't been on this side of the discussion before. I've been a union member myself for many years and felt I get no help from the union. I was in Unionen, both as an employee and as an employer.

[00:16:39] I don't think it's worked for me. Things have happened historically where perhaps you've had some discussions with employers, but Unionen hasn't stepped in and said we're going to help in any way. And then as an employer on the other side, I've had discussions with unions who've been fairly easy to deal with, and it's been no trouble at all for me to directly address the union members at the company who wanted that.

[00:17:12] So this is my first time dealing with IF Metall, and it's a completely different company, or completely different union, from those I've dealt with historically, Unionen or Ledarna, or they have slightly different …

[00:17:29] They're a bit nicer, or I don't know, they're very reasonable, more logical, more sensible, work more like a company, of course looking after their employees, I mean their union members' interests, but not wanting to bring down a company in the same way either.

[00:17:46] I remember, because it was many years ago, the Wild’n Fresh salad bar in Gothenburg, between 2006 and 2007. Mhm. Then the Hotel and Restaurant Workers' Union put the salad bar under a blockade. What does it say? ‘Owner Sofia Appelgren refused to sign a collective agreement, arguing that her employees already had better terms than the agreement required.’ But because of the blockade, the company went bankrupt.

[00:18:16] It's completely crazy. But I think this was a matter of principle for the owner. They made it a principle: ‘I won't sign the agreement because my employees are better off without an agreement.’ They carried out this blockade anyway, somehow to leave a mark or …

[00:18:33] But as you said, it's not a negotiation. It's not a negotiation. Yes, you're joining. And eventually this blockade drives the company into bankruptcy. Now we're far from being in the same situation as that poor salad bar, because there's no blockade in the world that could put a spoke in the wheels of Västerbottens Såpa. But again, we want the best for the employees. So we're now looking for the best possible union for the employees to join, and talking with several unions to see: Okay, what would be best?

[00:19:08] But it's also something taking time away from the rest of the business. So instead of sitting and focusing on how we sell more, how we produce more, how we employ more people, a large part of management is now researching unions and talking to unions and thinking about this instead of how …

[00:19:28] How do we keep growth where it's been? Do you think there can be any advantage for employees in having a union? Of course there are advantages too, so it's not all negative, right? The major negative thing I mentioned was the annual pay negotiation being set through the union. And of course that doesn't prevent you as an employer from increasing one individual's salary more than another's, despite that existing. It's just that there's a minimum level that's negotiated. But that minimum also becomes an accepted level, and something companies often, I'd say, exploit by saying: Well, this is the pot for this year. The obvious big advantage for employees is knowing they get pension contributions through Fora, for …

[00:20:16] … example. If you haven't had that, now we do have it at the company, so it's no new advantage, but it could mean better terms for overtime or unsocial hours or something else. So it can be that. It doesn't have to be. It depends on what your employment contract with the employer is like, and we've had a lawyer as a board member or chair at Såpa for many years who's made sure we have very good employment contracts for them. And the company has done well too, so of course you want to reward the employees and have a good workplace and a pleasant community, and it's just got better and better. Then again, we're a young company. Everything started taking off sometime in 2023.

[00:21:06] So with that behind us, and how fast growth has been, we haven't had time for loads of things. But then I'm thinking, you mentioned some employers exploiting it by not raising salaries, just giving the minimum the union says as the standard salary. Couldn't joining the union in some cases make some companies more profitable because they need to pay lower salaries?

[00:21:35] Yes, that's exactly how it is. And what can you say? It's typical in Sweden, I'd say. Particularly production companies and manufacturing companies and that kind of company will benefit from it. Now, there are always rules around employing people in Sweden. So just because you're not union-affiliated, you still have to follow Swedish employment legislation.

[00:22:13] A typical example is: Well, you can fire people however you want if you're not in the union. That's not true. It's the biggest myth there is. We still have to comply with exactly the same rules as a union-affiliated company. Meaning you have these LAS rules, as they're so nicely called.

[00:22:29] Mm. You have, is it the Employment Protection Act or something? Yes. You have the Employment Protection Act. Meaning if you've hired someone later than someone else, the person who joined the company last must also be the first to leave if you need to, well, cut certain roles or parts of the company because things aren't going well. And you absolutely can't get rid of people however you like; there are very strict criteria. The clearest is redundancy. If it is, or say you don't have the finances to pay salaries, then you have to do a, what's it called, not a restructuring proceeding but a reorganization.

[00:23:13] Mm. To make sure the company is viable. As a shareholder in a company, there's also a law saying you need to run the company at a profit. You can't run a company unprofitably for any number of years, because then you're breaking the law too. So if you comply with that law and legislation and are supposed to be a profit-making company, you have to do everything you can to structure the company so it's profitable. Yes, a long discussion, or long digression, about my dissatisfaction with Swedish working life and unions, the Swedish unions. I think many entrepreneurs sympathize with me, and perhaps it doesn't affect most of the small companies listening to the podcast, but it could be something to consider, reading up a little along the way, because suddenly the union turns …

[00:24:10] … up and literally knocks on the door. Mm. Like a letter in the mail. If you're a little informed, yes, if you read up so you know your rights and know you don't have to sign, you can also hire, as we've done, an employment lawyer to handle the negotiation for you, and of course it's a negotiation. It's not as the union itself described it.

[00:24:34] [gasps] But how does it work, then? Because I know Tesla has sued, mm, even, like, the Swedish, I think it's the Swedish government and PostNord and things, I mean …

[00:24:44] I don't know. They've, yes, they've blocked, like, registration plates being sent to people buying a new Tesla car to make it harder for Tesla to sell cars in Sweden. They've blocked certain ports where cars were supposed to come in, and then perhaps they have to be brought up by truck instead. So they've made it much harder for Tesla to operate in Sweden, you have to say that.

[00:25:15] Mm. But Tesla has worked around it neatly and legally, and then they've sued PostNord because PostNord is a state operation and they can't block us from sending registration plates to private individuals, usually, who buy cars from us.

[00:25:34] Mm. I don't know exactly how everything has gone. I've followed it, particularly in the beginning, above all from the employees' point of view, to see how many Tesla employees actually participate in the strike. And it turned out to be very few people, because the vast majority were very happy with their employment terms, it turned out. The vast majority were very happy with their job at Tesla, so there were very few who could be called out in this strike they were threatening.

[00:26:01] Mm. So it didn't affect Tesla the way it could have. But I'm thinking, among pilots and in the airline industry there's been quite a lot of strikes.

[00:26:10] Mm. And then I assume perhaps it reaches a point where it's actually horrible for employees to work, and there's an advantage too. I have no idea what they're about. What I know is perhaps it's a bit easier to organize pilots or airline employees or healthcare employees.

[00:26:29] Mm. Who usually have fewer employers to choose between, and they're where they are, usually for a very long time, and yes, I think that's a different kind of strike, and perhaps it's about other things. One challenge I can imagine from the union's perspective too is that if we have a company abusing its relationship, meaning how employees have to work, they won't want to join the union either. I mean, I'm just trying, I'm just trying to see how different …

[00:27:05] … nuances of it. Yes, exactly. I don't know. I have no idea. Yes, perhaps. Because I'm thinking: Imagine you're a union and you see an organization doing a bad job towards employees. Then they won't want to join the union, so the union tries to force its way in. The problem is when they try to force themselves on others and use that methodology on other companies …

[00:27:26] … on decent companies. Yes. Yes. Yes, actually. I don't know. I haven't reflected on that. It's just what I said at the beginning: I'm disappointed, because all along you've been thinking how good it is that we're doing something good for society here, and then you're portrayed as an evil demon on social media.

[00:27:46] No, but on social media, as if it isn't an ethically responsible company for employees. Mm. So just because the products are good for the environment, they're not good for employees, kind of the headline.

[00:28:02] Mm. What? And these completely insane posts. I'm shocked, disappointed, and somewhere I'm thinking: Well, let it be. Mm. You have to move on. As we said, we're not spending the whole episode talking about unions. A lot is happening in Swedish e-commerce. We have some big news I thought we'd address, what's happening, because there's a company called Ongoing that works with a lot of things many e-commerce companies use. Often if you work with a 3PL provider that picks and packs at a warehouse, they might use Ongoing as a warehousing and management system. Or perhaps you've done it yourself as an e-commerce retailer directly: Okay, we need a system, and you've procured Ongoing. Ongoing has grown fairly quickly.

[00:28:55] Everything is relative, but they've grown fairly quickly. Growing by about 20, 25%. They're very profitable. Revenue around 170, 180 million last year. Made perhaps seventy-something million in profit. So very high profitability. They're now being sold to a private equity firm for 3 billion kronor.

[00:29:17] Mm. That's completely crazy. What do you think? I think it's interesting, these valuations emerging right now, because I'm in a members' club for investors and sat listening to some pitches last week too, and it was the same: Sometimes the valuations can sound a bit crazy. I try … I don't understand the logic behind them myself sometimes.

[00:29:46] No, neither do I. I mean, if you put it this way, draw a parallel, that's about 35, 40 times EBT. Mm. Last year's EBT. That's an enormous multiple. No company in retail or e-commerce gets anywhere near those multiples. Not even the finest quality companies. Like Såpa or Ninepine or Switch Nails, for that matter, which was sold last year. No company I read about gets anywhere near those multiples.

[00:30:22] So of course I'm surprised, partly because I know the SaaS industry is facing its biggest challenge ever through AI. We've talked many times on the podcast about how easy it is to recreate or build SaaS tools. We have …

[00:30:42] I can imagine integrations, because now you have MCPs. It's called MCP, which means if you have two different APIs, let's imagine one API speaks Greek and one speaks, I don't know, Turkish. They're not agreeing at all there. [laughter]

[00:30:57] Yes, good choice of Turkey and Greece, then. Yes. And then you take an MCP connection, which Anthropic helped create. It's essentially an interpreter, so you have one API that can keep speaking its language and the other API speaks its language, with the MCP in between. Yes.

[00:31:11] It interprets between them, which means different APIs, you can make integrations that used to be really complicated much more easily. Yes, that's it. It's much easier. I spoke with a young company that started a service called Pango, I think. Pango AI. It's been around perhaps a year. In the past five months they've grown quite fast. We'll probably sign up for Såpa and start trying it. I can, we can talk more about it after summer, whether it's been good or successful. They say they make two of these integrations a day. Two to four integrations a day they can add; those are carriers, meaning UPS, DHL, Budbee, PostNord, Instabox. There are any number of carriers. And globally it's even bigger, so you have the postal …

[00:32:04] … services, and you have Italia Post and American ones and all sorts. All these postal companies have their own APIs. So for you to know at checkout when you'll get your parcel, there has to be an integration with that delivery company, so you know when it collects, how the parcel is sorted in its terminals, how much there is to sort right now. When will my parcel roughly arrive? And today you can know quite a lot, even almost to the hour when it'll reach the end consumer if you place an order today. We know when we've picked and packed it.

[00:32:39] We know it's collected at four today. We know that if it's collected at four today, you'll get it at two tomorrow, for example. Is that a bit more in the Ingrid direction, then?

[00:32:49] It's in the Ingrid direction, so this is an Ingrid competitor. Pango, Pengo, Tango, some [laughter] something like that. AI. Mm. And then they can also show it on the product page, so it becomes very similar to Amazon. Previously we've estimated ourselves and had our own things making that estimate, but now we can use their tool to make it more credible and more accurate.

[00:33:12] That said, if they've managed to recreate Ingrid and make two, three, four integrations a day, with lots of AI help of course, and about one or two developers working on that tool, while I know Ongoing … Yes, I mean, it definitely should face competition. So it won't be long before companies understand this and leave an Ongoing or an Ingrid and find alternatives. And in this case a Pango comes along as a challenger and just steals half Ingrid's customers. You only need to steal some of Ingrid's bigger customers and Ingrid will feel it immediately. Quick cutbacks needed. What happens to the business model?

[00:33:57] Another thing I saw, because I listened to an interview with one of Klarna's founders the other day. Mm. He said they've replaced most SaaS tools, because his view of SaaS tools was that they live in silos. So you have a SaaS tool owning all the data about one area. Then another SaaS tool owns data about that area. So instead, to have this AI-native setup, they've built everything in, replacing the SaaS tools simply by building them themselves, because they're big enough for it to be worth building it themselves. Then instead you get one unit with all the functions and all the data together.

[00:34:36] Okay, I buy that. For one thing, we're talking about a large listed company. Mm. So that's fine. They have hundreds, perhaps thousands of developers in-house, so it's reasonable for them to build their own tools. But is it reasonable for a newly started e-commerce company to build its own tools? Perhaps not. Or perhaps it is because it's so easy to do today. I mean, we've built our own tools for lots of different services and continue doing so. Just last week a colleague built a tool to [unclear in the Swedish source: measure nonsense]. I mean, we're talking about employee-generated content. We work with a company where all the employees create ads or UGC material, which we call EGC, employee-generated content. And they've made an internal ranking, like how, which, how …

[00:35:29] … is it doing? This is a family company, lots of people at the company make content and their employees make content, so we're like: How is all the EGC material doing? And week after week it spits out reports based on whether, let's call her Klara, or Johnny leads the internal ranking.

[00:35:52] Mm. And it's so damn cool, because you could never have justified allocating a developer budget to a tool like that. But now he made it in a few hours, and you have a tool that actually works. I think somehow that's … it's fun. It's wonderful that you can do that, and I'm just so happy when I see it, because of course it also encourages the team: Okay, I want to make better content, or here's how my content performs based on these parameters, and so on. But back to the valuation.

[00:36:26] I think it's a completely crazy valuation, Ongoing getting thirty-five to forty times. Let's do something here. I'm going to read out, I can't say which company it is, but I can read out …

[00:36:38] … the numbers, and you can give a valuation. Now you don't have very much knowledge based on this, but it's like this, I won't reveal too much, but I can tell you about the company, so they …

[00:36:51] But this is another company. This isn't Ongoing, then. No, this is another company. Yes. So they have a million dollars in ARR, annual recurring revenue.

[00:37:01] They have 300 customers. 300. Okay. And they've had 100% MoM for six months. Month-over-month growth, meaning the growth. So it's a hockey stick. Yes. In month three they had $33,000 ARR and 10 customers.

[00:37:23] Okay. So they're currently running at 10 million, they have 300 customers. That means roughly thirty-three thousand in revenue per customer per year, per year, which isn't that much. Per month we're talking, what does it come to, well, not that much money, a few thousand kronor. It's more likely a SaaS tool in B2B aimed at [unclear in the Swedish source: Small and Enterprise], meaning small- and medium-sized companies, making things easier in a super-niche.

[00:38:05] Unclear which niche it is. But the growth is very interesting. 100% month over month, so not year over year. Mm. So if you have a certain number, it's also easy in the beginning to have high …

[00:38:18] One krona becomes two kronor. Yes, exactly. One customer becomes two, you have 100%. Two become four, again 100% month over month. Four customers become eight. Eight customers become sixteen. But it's still very impressive, right, to grow by 100% month over month. Then it would've been more impressive if they'd done it for four years.

[00:38:37] Yes, compared with six months. Six months is still very early. You could almost say they have a proof of concept, they've created a POC. They've shown there's a need. They meet that need. Obviously customers are willing to pay. We don't know how long they're willing to pay yet, because we know they're willing to pay, and we calculate annually, but we don't know if the customer stays for a year unless they've locked them in for 24 months, which is also [unclear in the Swedish source: oiskt] in such a new company, and they could never have grown if they'd done that, in all likelihood couldn't have grown if they'd done it. Then the question is: What do I think a company like that is …

[00:39:16] … worth? It's hard to say, but you usually calculate ten times [unclear in the Swedish source: is out in]. Then you need to consider growth and the AI factor. If it weren't an AI company, somewhere around twenty to thirty million. They've found a niche in the market they can scale quickly in, where they're doing a new share issue and need more capital for marketing or hiring; say fifty million at most. An AI company ought to get some multiplier, because they only have to mention it's an AI case and more people become interested in investing, which is really strange.

[00:39:56] [unclear in the Swedish source: Världens publish] says a hundred million, a hundred and twenty. Yes, it's not quite there. They're raising ninety million kronor at a valuation of a billion. Fucking hell. I'm off by ten times. Yes, it's extremely interesting how a company turning over, what is it, eight hundred thousand now …

[00:40:24] Yes, if you calculate ten million, that makes eight hundred thousand last month, and it's to be valued at a billion kronor. But they've been around for six months, so then they've … Yes, what's the revenue for one month?

[00:40:40] Yes, it's about eight hundred thousand. They're at ten million ARR. They haven't had that historically; that's the level right now.

[00:40:50] And then you divide that. You said three hundred customers? Then they had a hundred and fifty last month, and probably seventy-five before that. It's laughable, really. Do you understand how easy it is? Of course, perhaps I'm simplifying the whole thing, but it's easy to build a SaaS tool today. It's not that hard to sell a SaaS tool to a couple of hundred customers and then get a valuation of a billion. Completely crazy. Sorry.

[00:41:22] That's okay. It's the craziest thing. We live in a strange industry. Now there are also companies that haven't acquired a single customer getting pre-customer valuations in the billions.

[00:41:35] And then I'm evaluating a company that's made an innovative product, solved an actual problem in the world for families with children traveling, and worked on this [unclear in the Swedish source: this year], had it tested and approved by the industry, and has proof of concept with several hundred people willing to pay. They've done enormous preparation. They also have a really strong track record with other companies in the same niche. They've worked on it for over ten years. They've proved they can scale a company to 100-plus million.

[00:42:22] Serial entrepreneurs doing it again. Looking for a few million at a 20-million valuation. Something is skewed. I'm evaluating it and thinking: This feels like a reasonable case for me to be passive in, because there's a strong e-commerce entrepreneur behind it, so I won't need to spend a huge amount of time on it. At most perhaps I'm a strategic sounding board. I don't even need to involve my agency, because they make good ads.

[00:42:53] They have a good website, they have a good concept. So for me it's more about diversifying the risks and spreading things so you have more companies in the portfolio. But obviously in the same industry I work in, because that makes it easy for me to judge. Is there a chance for this company to succeed? Yes, they tick many boxes, not all, far from all. It's still an infrequently purchased product, which I don't really like. I prefer staple goods. It's much easier to get returning customers. But this could become word of mouth. It could go viral. There's every opportunity in the world for this company to be profitable, and very profitable, if they do a good job. With all the new technology they've even coded the whole website with [unclear in the Swedish source: kad].

[00:43:39] A nontechnical founder has built the whole website himself. That shouldn't be possible, but we're in 2026 after all. Of course he does, why not? I'm impressed. And that valuation compared with a company that's just launched, is younger than this company, has a product that perhaps solves a problem for some until a copy comes along, or 10 copies solving the same problem more cheaply.

[00:44:10] Mm. Or until companies start developing it themselves in-house and think: Why should I buy this service? Should that get a billion valuation? Please. Yes, but what I also look at over time is that the cost of using the service needs to be proportionate to what it would cost to develop and maintain it yourself.

[00:44:29] Yes, of course. And if it only costs a few thousand a month, it's not a huge expense. Usually as a company you can afford to invest a few thousand a month if it makes work easier or everyday operations more efficient. So there's nothing strange about that.

[00:44:44] I buy that. The question is, how much easier does it make things? How much time does it save? What does it streamline? What will people do with the time instead? There's always opportunity cost too. How long is the integration process for the app or the company?

[00:45:04] And that's what I'm thinking, as we discussed earlier with MCPs and things, that you can probably integrate things much more easily now than before. Yes, when you had two APIs. But we also have NA-KD finally in the black.

[00:45:18] Yes, completely crazy. It took many years. When was NA-KD founded? I haven't checked, but 2016, by Jarno and a bunch of good entrepreneurs. Mm. But Jarno fundamentally, it took many years, so it grew, it was Sweden's e-commerce rocket for several years. One of Sweden's most written-about e-commerce companies. They had a fantastic journey built largely on influencer collaborations.

[00:45:51] They had a machine where they brought in thousands of influencers a month, in a structured way of course, and knew how to do it. They expanded beyond Sweden's borders and started turning over hundreds of millions, doubling and doubling towards billions. So the idea was a case that would become profitable through scale, and it's very hard to become profitable when growing at that pace in that particular niche, because there's still a high proportion of returns. An even higher proportion outside Sweden, like Germany, where it's fifty percent returns. It's hard to make the numbers work. Much harder than you think.

[00:46:36] And that turned out to be the case for NA-KD. You don't know everything behind why they were bleeding so much money, but what I know is Jarno is a damn good entrepreneur. He surely would have, actually, if he'd been given the staying power, he surely would've turned it into the black. I'm completely convinced of that. But now it didn't work. During Covid I think they wanted to replace him. The board and management team and investors wanted to replace Jarno. So they did. It didn't go very well. But now things seem to be going well.

[00:47:10] I read somewhere they made three hundred and four million in profit last year. Of that, three hundred and two million was some kind of inventory stocktaking thing, so perhaps it was two million in net profit.

[00:47:26] Yes, still profit. It's still profit. It's still in the black. It's incredibly impressive. The question is what happens going forward. I hope it goes well. The top line has obviously fallen in recent years. Now down from 1.7 billion to 1.6. Still impressively large. So it's not a small company. If they can really turn this around now, it could be like Nelly last year, an extreme rocket and very profitable. Now Nelly has had a tough time too, but hopefully it'll go well. I want things to go well for Swedish retailers.

[00:47:59] But it's interesting. And speaking of you mentioning thousands of collaborations at the beginning. Mm, what's your view on influencer marketing today? There's a company that literally filed for bankruptcy this morning. It's a listed company. I've forgotten its name. But they have the Collabs app. Right, the name was Collabs and the company [unclear in the Swedish source: IKE].

[00:48:20] Yes, [unclear in the Swedish source: IKE]. Their revenue went from something like 130-something million down to 30-something million, and they've had falling revenue, been bleeding money and had a very tough time. They filed for bankruptcy at the district court today. It's sad, because it is, but it's also a result of influencer marketing doing very badly. And the reason it's going badly is that influencers generally raise their prices every year.

[00:49:00] But their followers are less influenced by advertising. It's become more tightly regulated. Initially it was like the Wild West. Nobody labeled anything as advertising. So it was very difficult to tell: Is this advertising, or is this influencer I follow month in and month out genuinely interested in and loving this product?

[00:49:25] It was hard to distinguish. Then it's become easier and easier and easier, and now it's super clear that this can lead to extreme fines if you don't disclose it.

[00:49:34] Yes, it leads to fines, but not extreme ones. Some influencers have received them. In context, for [unclear in the Swedish source: en anden grosso], who turns over a hundred … Yes.

[00:49:43] So considering how much you can bring in from a collaboration. Anyway, crazy. I was also thinking, for instance [unclear in the Swedish source: C media], they had one about Influencer Marketing Talks, I think it used to be called.

[00:50:00] Yes. They've even renamed their podcast Inside the Creator Economy. I have no idea, but what I mean is, this is a company focused on influencer marketing that's now even changed its podcast's name. It's not called influencer but creator now, because they're focusing on creators.

[00:50:19] Yes, perhaps the idea is that we want to create material and content you can use in your paid advertising, and that's what you sell today. And as an influencer there are partnership ads and loads of things you can sell that aren't direct conversions among your followers. But if we go back to the beginning, it was that we wanted access to your followers.

[00:50:41] We pay some money plus products. You post things to your network and sell things. We both make money from it. But making money from it has become very hard. So if I book, say, a hundred influencers, I might lose money directly on 95 of them, in direct conversion, and then it's visibility you're paying for, but I can buy visibility in other ways.

[00:51:09] And it's more effective in other ways too. Fundamentally this is about them having raised prices while credibility has fallen, and people aren't as influenced by that channel as they were, say, from 2015 to 2020, when influencer marketing flourished. Really ever since Covid it's gradually started getting worse and worse, and now it's doing very badly.

[00:51:36] So more companies that made their living from it and had it as a channel strategy in their mix have had to lay people off, have had to cancel apps and platforms. I spoke with the founder of Scope App last week. Scope App is a fantastic influencer marketing tool, where the founder asks: What other challenges in the e-commerce industry can we get our teeth into? What SaaS tools does an e-commerce retailer need today that would solve an actual problem?

[00:52:06] And there are loads of tools we need, obviously, but an influencer tool perhaps isn't one of them today. Yes, because I'm thinking, I recently met another entrepreneur who also said he'd laid off several employees whose only job at his company was working on influencer marketing. The reason was, he said, the employees are fantastic. They're incredibly good at what they do.

[00:52:31] The problem is that whatever they've done, they haven't been able to make it pay. No, I know. It's hard to make it pay. As I said, it's 95 out of 100 failures, and that's companies that are very good at influencers. There are those who are terrible, where it'll be ninety-nine out of a hundred that flop.

[00:52:50] If you're bad at negotiating, we negotiate quite hard and still can't make it pay. We've gone from five full-time employees working on influencer marketing at Porobic Group at its peak to about 1.2 now.

[00:53:03] It's not that it's become more efficient. We've just scaled down the platform as a whole. Såpa, for instance, might have had ten to fifteen percent of its total marketing spend on influencer marketing; today it's a low one to two percent of total marketing spend on influencer marketing.

[00:53:23] What have you moved the money to? To Meta, you could say, unfortunately. No, but we're testing IPTV and radio and other channels instead of influencer marketing, so that's where we've moved the money, with Meta a larger part of the total amount. Perhaps not a larger percentage share.

[00:53:43] Mm. And IPTV, what are you doing there? We tested TV4 in digital, like IP. Perhaps it isn't called IPTV, perhaps it's called something else. [unclear in the Swedish source: CCTV]. Mm. So primarily TV4 Play and their interface, and uploading worked fairly easily; it's like buying media in any other channel. The difference is you have to commit to an amount of money. You can't just test an ad with a few thousand kronor; you sign an agreement with, now I've forgotten the media group's name. Then you get a login. There's a lot of manual stuff that has to happen. You have an account manager. You say how much you'll spend over a whole year.

[00:54:27] And perhaps we commit to, say, 2 million over a whole year across several clients. We sign the agreement through Porobic Group, because then if it went really badly for Såpa, perhaps another company in the setup wants to try it and it goes really well for that company, and that company can take a bigger share of the media space. You negotiate CPM prices, so there's no bidding like on Meta: Okay, right now very few are bidding, so that produces one kind of price to get shown, whereas competition is high during Black Week. Instead you negotiate this in advance and state roughly how much you'll spend. Say two million, and we're testing 200,000 right now on Västerbottens Såpa, perhaps three hundred thousand on Såpa; we'll see how it goes. So far we only have positive …

[00:55:13] … things to say about it. But what are the positives, then? Well, we've had better conversion on the website. It's insanely difficult to measure, though, it's so hard. Of course you can look at UTMs. How many have done it? We have a QR code, very common today in [unclear in the Swedish source: CCTV], where you can scan a QR code if you're sitting at the TV, and land on the website, and then we can measure how many scanned the QR code. How many have [unclear in the Swedish source: ju anslutning till det].

[00:55:40] But it's not like regular traditional TV, where you know exactly when the channel ad airs. If you buy channel advertising on TV4, stationary TV, or I don't know what it's called, old TV, you know: Okay, the ad will air [unclear in the Swedish source: 123], and then you can literally check in your Google Analytics how many more visitors come from 12:03 to 12:07 …

[00:56:04] … from the ad, and then you can benchmark it. If you've had seven ad airings today and seven tomorrow and done that for two weeks, then you have an ad running, so technically you can see how many more visitors you've had, or just look at the whole period and compare with another period. You can see it. But in this case you can see fairly precisely, because you have QR codes; you take out your phone, scan, you're still going onto your phone as usual even if you're watching TV. So the disadvantage is you don't know when this channel airs, because as a consumer you can turn on TV4 Play whenever you want today and click play, and the advertising appears sporadically during the episode. So …

[00:56:45] That's the difficulty and challenge for a marketer to crack. But you have the QR code on an iPad, so they can click through to the website. I don't think they complete the purchase on the iPad if they're watching … When do you watch [unclear in the Swedish source: CCTV], or something like The Traitors? Yes, you're not going to sit watching The Traitors, pause the ad and go shopping at Såpa.

[00:57:10] Mm. That's very unlikely. But perhaps you click through to Såpa and put it in the background and think: I'll save it here for later. Yes. Or even whether you remember … The question is whether you remember it later. You can see an ad for Felix Ketchup, and that means when you're in the shop you buy it.

[00:57:27] Yes. But then it's more natural, because you go to the shop and it's there. But it's not as if you get to Såpa through someone else. Såpa has its own site. That's what I'm thinking about.

[00:57:36] But I'm just thinking of myself. It's actually a really bad analogy. But I usually save tabs. So if I'm on TikTok and see a good ad for something, it's not as though I order it immediately. Usually I'm on TikTok on the way to or from something, or perhaps in the evening after putting the children to bed, with an hour to kill or half an hour to kill, so perhaps I'm scrolling a little.

[00:57:59] And when you've gone to the website, you put it in the background among your tabs. Then when you know you have a little more time, I go in and do my research, and then I buy. So I think some people put it among their tabs and then come back, or get more advertising from us on Facebook after visiting …

[00:58:20] Because then you have a retargeting pixel, I assume, for those who scan the QR code and visit the website. Yes, then you've done that. So then it's more likely they do it. One final thing we have to mention before ending the podcast: the return button.

[00:58:39] Yes, do you know what that is? It's a new law requiring a return button, isn't it? Meaning you can have contracts and things that you previously had to [unclear in the Swedish source: sigera]. But it should be that simple. So if you want to cancel something now, you should just be able to press cancel or the return button.

[00:58:57] Yes. Or return something. So this mainly concerns consumer brands. Previously people thought it concerned SaaS products or service companies. But it's primarily consumer companies like us running Såpa or Mockberg, or you listening to the podcast. By the nineteenth of June at the latest, which is just around the corner, we must make it easier for customers to return their goods. Whether we have an easy process or not. Many of us are already there, and we've installed apps for return flows where it's very easy for the customer to make a return. But there are still websites where it's fairly difficult, where you have to fill in a form on the site, email pictures and speak to customer service, and so on. Now there must be an easier way to do this. The proposal, or legislation, says you shouldn't have to call …

[00:59:55] … a company or email a company to make a return; you should be able to do it with some kind of self-service button on the website. How do you think this will affect companies? Not at all. I think, as I said, ninety-something percent of companies want to make it as easy as possible for customers, because they know it's primarily about making a customer happy or satisfied. If you make return processes harder, we know you lose customers and shoot yourself in the foot long term.

[01:00:26] So I don't think this will affect most of us, and many of us already have apps and flows for it. There are lots of good apps that have existed a long time. I won't name any so I don't forget any, but I don't think it'll have an impact. Still, it's worth mentioning because some companies have probably completely missed that this is coming.

[01:00:50] Yes, because I'm thinking, if you're on Shopify at least there are apps for it. Yes, but there are apps on other platforms too. Perhaps not apps as such, but there are other names for it. And then I work a lot with AI, so I could offer, if anyone listening needs an order button like that, I'd think it would be a fun challenge to fix one for them with AI.

[01:01:09] A return button. Yes, exactly. But it depends on their platform and their integrations. [unclear in the Swedish source: det där kommer ju ta det]. You've shot yourself a little here now …

[01:01:21] … but I can see it as a challenge, anyway. It could be a fun challenge. I don't think it's a difficult project. I just think there could be technology causing trouble in the background, because returns aren't as simple as they look. First, you've made a purchase, you want to cancel it. That means you've received a product or will receive one. You want to cancel that. But in some flows, as soon as you place an order, it's sent to an external picking and packing operation.

[01:01:50] Mm. It's already been printed on a machine. It'll be picked and packed. Whether you cancel your order or not, it'll be picked and packed. But you can't stop the shipment going to the customer.

[01:02:03] No, but then perhaps the customer just doesn't collect it and it gets returned. Yes, partly there's the environmental impact when it's returned, and then you become [unclear in the Swedish source: liable to repay as a customer].

[01:02:14] Mm. Nobody is saying returning this will be free. They're only saying there should be a simplified return flow, and different e-commerce retailers have different flows, obviously. So it's good to review your return flows. It's good to review the wording for these. It could be good to see whether there's an easy app to use, or contact Fredrik, who's offering to build the solution for you. I mean, do you understand how crazy that is?

[01:02:43] Am I a little out of my mind today? Then perhaps I won't succeed, but it's worth trying, anyway. You said free, but you should charge a little.

[01:02:51] One krona, symbolically. No, I don't know. [laughter] But there I actually want to add, speaking of contracts and things, there's another law. It's not that new, but it's the Data Act. The article is angled towards business-to-business SaaS and is about discount clawbacks. Now I'll try to explain this, which is complicated. Previously you could sign up for a two-year subscription to something. But now this new EU law lets you terminate the contract even if you're only three months in. What you do become liable to repay is, for example, if you've received, say, a 30% discount for committing to two or more years.

[01:03:39] Then you have to repay the discount. But you have a legal right to terminate long contracts. What's defined as long in this case? I interpret it as meaning you shouldn't really need to be tied into anything. Here I'm thinking …

[01:03:57] Is it about services or apps? This is only business-to-business SaaS. Business-to-business SaaS. Yes. So business-to-business service companies, like a consultancy. No, I actually don't know; it's really about ‘data processing service,’ it says here. I can link this article in the show notes.

[01:04:18] This is a very interesting article. Many of us are surely in long contracts with apps or companies we've bought services from. Mm. I don't know, a dashboard company we signed with a year or two ago, thinking this will be phenomenal, and then a new dashboard arrives that replaces it entirely for a fraction of the money. Then you can cancel the old one. Sweet.

[01:04:45] Yes. And you can read the exact rules in the article itself, which I have in the show notes. I'll read about it too. I have to admit I haven't read up on this. I didn't know about it, but it's an incredibly good thing for entrepreneurs, entrepreneurs especially.

[01:05:01] But how do you think this will affect SaaS companies, then? We talked earlier about annual revenue, but if that can now be undermined by losing contracts you thought were long-term?

[01:05:14] Yes, if this were only in Sweden, it'd be a very small thing. But what you're talking about is the EU? Yes, I interpret it as the EU. Yes, if it's throughout the EU it'll have a big impact in an industry already being hugely affected by AI and automation and a Claude where you build apps yourself.

[01:05:33] Mm. And now canceling apps is going to become easier. It goes without saying it'll be tough. I read that McKinsey has now published a report saying, well, junior analysts don't seem to be needed right now, so to speak. We have 25,000 employees too many. Mm.

[01:05:51] We're still selling, but we're tying our partners into longer contracts, and so a lot is being turned upside down because of AI. SaaS is what I think will particularly have it like this, [unclear in the Swedish source: old skoläggas i SAS]. Mm.

[01:06:07] Companies that do one thing or make things easier for companies will have a very tough time when companies build more of their own tech stack themselves and maintain it themselves using these MCPs we're talking about.

[01:06:20] Yes. And that's what I'm very passionate about myself. To have an AI-native company, as it's called, AI has to have access to all the data you have, and if it's spread everywhere in lots of different places, one of the first tasks is: How can we bring everything together? Yes …

[01:06:38] I know. Something fairly interesting is that the hierarchy and structures we use in companies today to coordinate information actually come from the Roman Empire, right? When they had big wars, they divided things up so there was a tent. How many people can be in this tent that you coordinate for food and such. Then you had someone who was, not an instructor, what's it called? A leader.

[01:07:09] Okay. For a certain number of tents. Then you have a leader of the leaders of the leaders. And that's how the structure and hierarchy we've built today was essentially founded in the Roman Empire.

[01:07:21] Yes. When you see it that way it's logical. Think, I don't remember how many thousands of people they had out in the field. But if you don't have someone who …

[01:07:29] … some hierarchy like they had, then it becomes [unclear in the Swedish source: become clear]. Yes, exactly. But our problem today is that the way we work now, that isn't needed anymore, because information can be gathered in other ways, so we're working somewhat from old hierarchies.

[01:07:49] Yes, actually. One other final thing. I read about this. Did you read about Air Force One taking off from the US with basically all the tech billionaires on board?

[01:08:04] No. Together with Trump to China for the first time ever, to discuss loads of details and enter partnerships between the US and China, but also these tech companies. We're talking Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, [unclear in the Swedish source: Juang] from Nvidia, and many more on the plane, whose total net worth was something like 20 trillion dollars or something crazy like that.

[01:08:36] Mm. Yes, but what I saw a discussion about was that it's interesting they choose, because the discussion I saw was: If you'd just gathered a bunch of politicians, what would the discussion have been like then?

[01:08:50] Yes, in this case they've gathered entrepreneurs, and what do the partnerships look like? I mean, what will they arrive at compared with politicians meeting? Trump is fundamentally a businessman, so I have no idea, but I can only assume some of these conversations will structure a large part of the present and future …

[01:09:19] … we'll experience soon. I have no idea about that. But every one of these tech entrepreneurs and billionaires was there for their own gain. Mm. But there's no getting away from Trump being cunning.

[01:09:36] Yes, he's a special person. Yes, we'll see. It'll be fun to come back later, perhaps in just one or a few episodes, to see where the discussions went. What did they lead to? Or perhaps nothing.

[01:09:55] Don't you feel quite small, though? I mean, I'm thinking: How much impact can you really have? Yes. Yes, absolutely. They can send each other a text and make more changes to millions or billions of people's lives than we can …

[01:10:10] … ever. Yes, absolutely. You have to look at [unclear in the Swedish source: vad de som någonting annat]. At the same time we have an impact somehow, I can tell myself, anyway. Yes, but we're a small cog in a big machine.

[01:10:22] Mm. That said, we'll draw a line under this week's episode. If you found the episode interesting, share it with a colleague or friend you think would enjoy Zero to a Hundred and entrepreneurship, health, discussions between two real nerds. From e-commerce retailers to you e-commerce retailers, we say thanks for this week and bye …

[01:10:50] Bye. Yeah.