Who is J.P. Morgan?

Liam Heffernan: 00:00:17

This week, on the anniversary of the sinking of the titanic, which was 113 years ago today, we're shining a light on one of its biggest investors, a man who is as controversial as he was transformative to the future of America. The railroad, the steel industry, the treasury, all impacted greatly by his involvement and investment.

So in this episode, we're going to explore the rise of one of the wealthiest and most powerful individuals in American history. As I ask, who is JP Morgan? Welcome to America, a history Podcast.

I'm Niam Heffernan, and every week we answer a different question to understand the people, the places, and the events that make the USA what it is today. To discuss this, I am joined by one of the preeminent biographers of J.P.

morgan and author of Morgan American Financier, which we'll link to in the show notes. Her accomplished career includes being president of the Society of American Historians and a consultant to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

And not to mention everything else, it's a real honor to. Welcome to the podcast. Gene Strauss.

Jean Strouse: 00:01:43

Many thanks, Liam. It's a pleasure to be here. Thank you for having me.

Liam Heffernan: 00:01:46

Yeah, thank you so much for joining me for this one.

It's something that I've been wanting to do on the podcast for a while, because as someone who's spent a few years working in finance, it's a name that I hear an awful lot, and one that I'm sure everyone else that's ever worked in banking probably hears far too much. But I'm not sure if anyone really knows as much about JP Morgan as maybe they should.

So, Gene, I wonder if we could just start off with you giving us a bit of background about his. His upbringing and his early life.

Jean Strouse: 00:02:18

I will absolutely get to that in a second.

But first I would like to just interject something, responding to what you said about him, describing him saying that he was one of the wealthiest and most powerful individuals in American history. Definitely yes. About powerful, wealthiest, not really. He was a banker. He was not.

ller did. When Morgan died in: 1913

His estate was worth about $80 million, at least half of which was in his art collections, and that would be worth about over a billion dollars today. But there were other much wealthier men.

f, and John d. Rockefeller by: 1913

And supposedly when he read about Morgan's net worth, he said, and to think he wasn't even a rich man. So it's somewhat relative. So back to Morgan's upbringing and early life.

Unlike most of the other men who did earn phenomenal wealth in the middle of the 19th century, Morgan came from a rather distinguished background. His par. His family on both sides had been in America for 200 years. On his mother's side, they were Pierponts.

They were ecclesiastics and intellectuals. One was a founder of Yale, one was. Another was a president of Yale.

His grandfather on that side was a radical Unitarian preacher who was so dedicated to temperance and anti slavery that he got kicked out of his Boston Unitarian Church. You have to be pretty radical to get kicked out of a Boston Unitarian Church.

On the other, on the Morgan side, the they were very entrepreneurial, beginning in Springfield, Mass. And then ending up in Hartford. Very, very materially successful. So these are two strains that unite in Pierpont Morgan in an unusual way.

He, given this background, was extremely well educated. He went to schools in Hartford and.

Hartford, moved to London in: 1854

And Pierpont Morgan had finished high school in Boston and then went to university in Switzerland for two years where he became fluent in French. He was already pretty good at it. And then to the German university at Gottingen for two years where he became fluent in German.

So this was very unusual to a be that well educated and to have seen so much of the world before the age of 20. And Americans before the Civil War just did not travel to Europe that much.

So he, he did see the world and he learned about European art collectors and history and banking. Certainly he was completely fascinated by the bank of England. So it was an unusual background.

He was a very intelligent child and continued to follow his curiosities and instincts. He was not always a great student. He was very interested in having fun and hanging out with his friends. But he did very well in school nonetheless.

I think when he was. He was often sickly as a child, he had seizures as an infant and he got various ailments and I think suffered from depression throughout his life.

And he was sent off to the azores at age 15 for his health, all by himself and for almost a year. And no one in the family came with him. He was quite lonely. He was very, very interested in control. I don't think it's just because of that episode.

But his whole. All along, his character was very interested in order and control.

He Although his diaries listed the date, he would write down the dates and the number of days passed on a shipping journey. So he was ambitious, hard working, gifted in with intelligence and with wealth. I mean, he did not really have to work.

We'll get on to that in a minute. But many other men from that social class spent their lives yachting and traveling around the world and gambling.

He worked like a demon his whole life. He also traveled on a yacht and spent a great deal of time in Europe after his education there.

But he was a workaholic and with his depressions and sort of collapses periodically, he said, I could do a year's work in nine months, but not in 12. So he built in long European vacations during his active banking career. But it was a relentless career.

Liam Heffernan: 00:07:28

Well, you know, I was actually going to touch on what you were saying about his. His, you know, enormous privilege by the sounds of it.

You know, when you look at the sort of the affluence of his family, and I wonder if you think he still would have carved out a path of success for himself had he not been afforded the opportunities that come with that privilege.

Jean Strouse: 00:07:50

It's very, very hard to know. I mean, in retrospect, we could spin out anything. But he certainly had a very entrepreneurial spirit, more than his father did.

He was willing to take more risks.

His father was very conservative, very proper, very interested in what they were doing in the earlier year, in the early years of Morgan's life and in his father's early years in England. The whole family moved to England, by the way, and Morgan himself ended up having houses in London and in the country.

His father was much more conservative than he was, and Pierpont was pushing boundaries all the time. So he really wanted a career in finance. He wanted to do what his father was doing.

What they were doing was raising capital in Europe for America's industrial development. There was simply not enough capital here to do what they were planning, trying to do.

Building railroads was the economic engine of the United States in the last half of the 19th century. And the money to build these railroads had to be raised abroad.

And it had to be what they call patient capital, because once the money was here, it took a long time before you were actually. You would see any return on your investment. They had to lay down tracks. They had to get rights to land.

They had to find what they called the rolling stock, the actual cars that would transport freight and people to and from their destinations. So it was the Morgans and the partner that the father had in London were basically funneling European capital to the explosively growing U.S. economy.

And it was Wild west capitalism at its best and worst. It was chaotic, the development of the railroads, because there seemed to be a lot of money to be made there. Many crooks entered the marketplace.

So if there was a road, say from Hartford to Boston, somebody, that road was being laid down, or let's say New York to Chicago, somebody else, another railroad firm might try to build another set of tracks parallel to the one that was already there, simply in order to force the first one to buy them out, or if that didn't work, to just compete with them and try to undercut the market. There were panics and crashes almost every 10 years, sometimes more frequently than that.

John Kenneth Galbraith has said that the 19th century panics came as often as it took people to forget the last disaster.

t to say, came to New York in: 1857

And every time there was a panic or a crash, Europeans, the money lost value, their investments lost value, and they would pull their money out, which made things even worse. So it was really a chaotic time for several decades of market turmoil, uncertainty, many, many crooks entering the marketplace.

And the Morgans were trying to discipline that huge railroad enterprise. And unbelievable as it sounds, slowly, over three decades, JP Morgan in America did manage to impose some control on that.

And if a road that the Morgan in England, it was Junius Morgan in America, it was not yet JP Morgan, he was working with other bankers.

But if a road for which they had raised funds went bankrupt, or the managers turned out to be cheating, or in other ways doing illegal things, Pierpont Morgan personally would fire the managers, hire new ones, put his own. He had quite a team of able lieutenants in his banks.

He would put his own people on the board of directors and watch over the finances like a hawk for sometimes 10 or 15 years until the road was established and beginning to pay investors back. So it was a huge job which, you know, he just sort of assumed responsibility for it, which is extremely surprising and interesting.

Liam Heffernan: 00:12:31

Yeah. Do you think, though, that. So I think there's two ways to look at this.

You know, some people might look at characters like JP Morgan and think that, you know, how he kind of took charge was. Was, you know, quite ruthless, but other people might see it as quite opportunistic. Where do you think he kind of fits on that spectrum?

Jean Strouse: 00:12:51

Well, ruthless in terms of. Of taking control, you mean, or for. Or.

Liam Heffernan: 00:12:59

Yeah, in kind of, I guess, sort of spot in that opportunity, as you said, this sort of Wild west environment that.

That was proliferating in America and, you know, in how industries like the railroad kind of were being built and then for characters like Morgan to come in and really kind of see that. That chance to take control and. And establish some order and actually arguably get. Get some real progress done with that.

Jean Strouse: 00:13:24

Yes, I think that. I think the latter. I mean, certainly they were. They were interested in their investors money, so. And some of their own, but it was really more.

The people they were representing, they had sold. It wasn't actually stock at this point, it was bonds in these railroads to European investors and took what they.

He and his father called, quote, moral responsibility for watching over those investments.

So, I mean, imagine if you were sending money into some newfangled opportunity and you had a banker who was trying to protect your investment and doing everything he could to make sure it stayed product, that the enterprise stayed productive and you got a return on your money. I'm not trying to say he was a saint by any means.

I just think it was a huge, chaotic, wildly developing marketplace and he was trying to manage it, which is kind of impossible to imagine now. So I'm not sure that answered your question.

Liam Heffernan: 00:14:26

No, it kind of did. And I think kind of following on from that, obviously, JP Morgan has been.

Is considered one of the early leaders of the, I would say, the global financial industry. But, you know, banking itself hasn't exactly been through the best journey reputationally.

And therefore characters like Morgan get perhaps painted as quite, you know, this sort of typical kind of greedy banker caricature, you know, someone that's only really in it for the. For the profit.

When you look at his involvement in industries like the railroads, you know, the steel industry and all of his other investments, I guess to just ask the blunt question, did he really care about American progress or was he in it for the money?

Jean Strouse: 00:15:15

I think both. As I said, he wasn't as wealthy at the end as everyone thought he was. He was not taking, for the most part, stock in the companies he was organizing.

He had some at the end of his life, but it really was. I mean, he had watched the bank of England try to keep the British economy on track.

He grew up watching that and was fascinated by it, and there was nothing like that here. So the idea that one man could in some ways impose enough discipline on the markets and it was not pretty. I mean it was.

p for a minute to say that in: 1878

He backed Thomas Edison before anyone else would and indeed his own father would not take the Edison business in England. He thought it was too risky, it was too far out of an idea. So it wasn't only railroads.

He was looking for what we now call the new, new thing when he thought it had promise, both financially, of course, because that's what they were doing, but also, I mean, electric lights, railroads, they changed the way the world works. So I don't think we can say it was just greed or just patriotic altruism. It was some mix of those.

Liam Heffernan: 00:16:52

And I, and I guess actually, you know, you can't have one or the other. Right.

Because if you just, you know, if you were just, you know, about the, the innovation and the, and, and the invention actually you wouldn't potentially have the sort of the commercial now that, that Morgan had to, to translate that into anything sort of meaningful.

And, and likewise if you were just about the money and the profit, well, you perhaps wouldn't really have the energy or the, or the, or the drive to back individuals like Edison or projects like the railroad.

Jean Strouse: 00:17:25

Right, right.

And there were a number of other banks trying to control railroads and there were some government functions trying to do it as well, but they were hopeless.

here was a big meeting in the: 1880

And after this meeting he wrote in his diary saying somebody has to take control of this wildly competitive marketplace that's in railroads. And I wonder, he says, if J.P. morgan has the strength or the ability to do that. And within 10 years he did.

I mean he did it by building huge monopolies which we don't necessarily love. So there were big integrated systems so that there, there would be, you know, the, the to building west and building east.

By: 1869

He tried to keep a single or not a single, but a mainline system that would go from point A to point B and then to point C and to sort of close out the wildcat competitors.

And he did that by sewing up monopolies which for the railroad industry because there was so much chaos and so much costliness, not just for the rich people who were investing in it, but for the entire country when there were these collapses and panics. Everybody lost out the working people worse than the rich people. So trying. I'm not saying that he had his eye on the working man, but it.

for everyone as we saw in the: 1920

And over by the: 1890

Liam Heffernan: 00:19:30

Morganized you, you know that you've sort of made it when you've got a verb named after your own. Yes, just. So before we move on more to sort of talking about, you know, the, the man behind the.

The myth as it were, I wonder if you could give us a bit of a whistle stop tour of some of his other sort of career accomplishments and you know, investments and maybe some of the things that, that don't get the headlines normally.

Jean Strouse: 00:19:59

Yes, well, he and his father early on this was even pre Edison were involved in funding the building of the transatlantic cable that certainly enabled communication between Europe and the US to speed up by a matter of weeks.

were built as I said, by the: 1890

And he stayed with that for two decades putting together a huge electrical system. Andrew Carnegie was running the Carnegie Steel Company which was enormous and extremely successful and really building the infrastructure of America.

And Morgan decided that need the steel industry needed Morganization as well.

So he sent a lieutenant to meet with Carnegie who was not eager to sell at first, but then was read getting, getting ready to retire and spend all of his money on philanthropy, mainly libraries and travel and other things. And Morgan's lieutenant went with, met Carnegie on the golf course and they talked and this man said well, how much would you want to buy you out?

And he wrote down on a piece of paper in pencil $480 million. The lieutenant took that to Morgan who took one look and said I accept. It was not Morgan's own $480 million.

He put together a Syndicate of people who would. And companies who would put that up. So he, they put together US Steel and it was capitalized at well over a billion dollars.

And people thought it was, the stock was full of water, that it was not ever going to be worth what they had capitalized it for. But within a year it turned out that it was. So that had worked very well too.

And as I said, he was being the Federal Reserve when there wasn't such a thing. And there, because there as there, as I said, there were panics and crashes every few years.

And he would, he, I don't mean to idealize him, but he was paying very, very close attention to the bloodstream of the banking industry. It's like he was a doctor who could kind of read the pressure in the arteries and he usually could tell when there was a panic coming.

And he would corral resources from the other people who had access to a lot of money. Sometimes it was the insurance industry, sometimes it was other bankers.

imes he was. Most famously in: 1907

And over three weeks he called the heads of all the major banks and the major industries to his library. And it was like putting your finger in the dike. They were trying to sort of stop the panic at every place that it showed up.

, many episodes like that. By: 1913

That his opponents thought he was doing it simply to line his own pockets and those of his rich friends. He saw himself, and we don't have to subscribe to completely his view of himself, but he, he saw himself.

He sort of appointed himself a one man Federal Reserve.

And even his opponents, such as Teddy Roosevelt and a few other people said he never knowing he did not abuse his really incredible power that he really was. I could give you a quote, but I will give you a quote in a little bit.

deral Reserve came through in: 1913

So it went really from one private banker, which that horrified a great many Americans that one private banker had that much power and control to actually having the government function.

of his lieutenants during the: 1907

d at Morgan's knee during the: 1907

But Friedman says it had been Strong still been alive when the 29 panic started. He might have been able to head it off having watched what Morgan did. So who knows? That's completely hypothetical, but it's an interesting parallel.

Liam Heffernan: 00:25:29

So I think one of the things that strikes me when you reel off all of those achievements in JP Morgan's career is that we often don't talk about the kind of soft skills that someone like Morgan needs to possess.

To be such a successful businessman and to sort of do what he does, I mean, surely requires an awful, you know, amount of, you know, diplomacy skills and influence and, you know, some real strong character traits that we maybe don't give people like that enough credit for.

Jean Strouse: 00:26:02

I think that's probably right. Although he did not think of himself as a very skilled person in. I mean, he. He was quite shy.

He had a quite ugly, big red, bulbous nose that did not develop until he was in his 50s. But he made him even more shy than. Than he had been. He hated being photographed.

He said at one point, he said, my first choice of a man to do a certain job is often right. My second never is. So he was not. He did not have a great deal of self confidence in his people skills, as we might say today.

But obviously the evidence given what he was able to do is that people were really ready and eager to follow him when he was leading the way. And some of that has to do, I think, with his certainty that he was right and that he knew these markets.

As I said, he could feel the oncoming panics in the arteries of the financial system, the way a doctor would feel them in a person.

He was examining, I think that his track record of being successful with organizing the railroads and backing Edison, doing the transatlantic cable and a number of. He organized the modern form of AT&T and helped support the creation of International Harvester.

That track record helped other people to trust him and work with him.

nto his office in. During the: 1907

But he said, we need $20 million in the next 10 minutes to plug up this hole where a bank is about to fail. And people gave it to him because they knew that he was not.

I mean, this is very inside, they're wealthy people and big players in the market, but they knew he was not doing this to line his own pockets. He was trying to stabilize a very, very unstable situation.

So I think people trusted him because of his track record, not necessarily because of his personal interpersonal skills. Although he had good friends, he was very much interested in women.

Not in a rapacious, relentless way, but there was a very soft, feminine side to him, surprisingly enough, that loved his gardens and loved shopping for his family and female friends in Paris for fabulous clothing. That we don't think of Morgan as being as that side of Morgan, but it was there.

Liam Heffernan: 00:28:52

And actually, on talking about his personal life, you mentioned earlier in the episode about his art collection. Tell me more about that.

Jean Strouse: 00:29:01

Even as a boy, he had a very sensuous, tactile appreciation for beautiful things. I mean, when he moved to Boston, he had a cousin who was still in Hartford, and he collected covers of the Illustrated London Nudes.

And he wrote to this cousin saying, you should get a set of these there. And he went on and on about how remarkable and wonderful they were. He was interested in amassing interesting, beautiful things.

And his travels in Europe, he bought, you know, beautiful leather gloves and silk shawls for his. The female members of his family. And he would travel to art galleries and museums.

And at age 15, when he was on his own in Europe, he was on his own a lot during his early years, and that's what he wanted to do. He was not sophisticated early on. And America was. The critic Robert Hughes has said something about how America was in a state of grin.

Thin, thin, aesthetic nudity. There were just not collections of art here. And he went to the Vatican and to the British Museum and the Louvre and many small galleries.

Actually, I'm not sure about the British Museum. It might not have been done by the time he was 15, but he was looking at art and looking at national collections. And as his.

At first he was buying sort of academic paintings from French and Italian. Early. I mean, not early, just sort of contemporary painters. But his taste got more sophisticated as he got older and wealthier.

And he had very good advisors. Not just one. He relied on a great many advisors.

One of the principal ones was his nephew, a banker named Junius Spencer Morgan, who was especially interested in rare books and manuscripts. So that was what Morgan ended up collecting voraciously for what became the Pierpont Morgan Library.

And like many other Americans who were collecting at that time, they learned more and more as they went along.

Real old master paintings were extremely expensive during this period, or they were becoming expensive because there was now a new demand for them by what Bernard Berenson called American squillionaires. They wanted to fill their houses and new American museums with what Europe had.

And European aristocrats were often losing altitude, especially in England, losing status, power, and certainly income.

And the Americans had no famous ancestry and no heirloom collections, but they wanted to acquire what European wealthy people, no longer so wealthy, had. So Morgan. There's a cartoon of Morgan rising over the globe with a big dollar sign. That's a magnet.

And you see all the art of the world sort of being drawn into his magnet. His taste grew, he got. It got better and more sophisticated as he collected more. And he.

When his father died in: 1892

He had several Rembrandts, he had a Vermeer. And he became president of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.

And it was often hard for them to tell whether he was collecting for himself or for the museum. But he left. He did not have time, he said, to dispose of his collections before he died.

But he hoped that they would go into public collections for the instruction and pleasure of the American people. That was what he said in his will. And his son, after he died, did distribute most of the art. A great deal of it is at the Metropolitan Museum.

Some of it is in Hartford at the Wadsworth Athenaeum, since he grew up in Hartford. And then there is the Morgan Library, which, among other things, has three Gutenberg Bibles, and there are only, I think, 35 in the whole world.

A lot of what Morgan collected ended up in the Frick collection, because Frick and then his estate bought a great deal as Morgan's estate was being sorted out. So they. These people, Isabella Stuart Gardner as well Frick, the Havemeyers, Morgan, they were putting America on the world's cultural map.

And by the ends of their lives, Europeans had to come here to see many of those great works of art. Europe wasn't very happy about it, but they did Build great collections here.

Liam Heffernan: 00:33:45

Yeah. Well, I guess, you know, in terms of legacy, then. Tell us a bit about when and how J.P.

morgan died and, you know, the legacy that he then went on to leave behind.

Jean Strouse: 00:33:58

Sure. He died in. He went to Egypt every year in the early winter. He loved Egypt.

ft on that trip at the end of: 1912

Really had a stranglehold on the US Capital flow. And they thought it was for no good reason, that no private banker should have that much power, which was right.

But Morgan was not using his control of American finance to get himself and other people very rich. He was really trying to control, as I said, the extremes of the American business cycle. So he thought he was doing a good thing.

They thought he was really up to no good.

So the transcript of his appearance before this committee is quite hilarious, even though not intentionally so, because they were speaking two different languages. The. The inter. The interviewer said something like, why did you do this? Or this? And Morgan said, I thought it was the thing to do. And he said.

The interviewer said something about, well, you only loan money to these people and those to the people you know. And Morgan said something like, I only lend. I will raise or lend money to people I trust.

He said, and a man I do not trust could not get money from me on all the bonds in Christendom. So he was not a great communicator. That was not an answer that satisfied the interlocutor. But he came out of that whole.

It was like several days of testimony. He came out of it sort pretty well. They didn't score huge points against him, but it was quite dramatic.

I mean, here he thought, whether or not we agree with him, that he was doing great patriotic service in being America's central banker. And the country in many ways rose up and said, no, this is not okay. And he, as I said, too, he had very depressive episodes. And after.

He was very thrown by having to expl. He hated to explain himself and have been called up before Congress. To have to explain himself was anathema to him.

He left for Egypt and had kind of a nervous breakdown on the trip across the Atlantic. It was worse than his usual depressive episodes. And it went on and on. And they.

He and his daughter was traveling with him and they went to Egypt and they were going down the Nile and. Or up the Nile, I can't remember which way you say it.

And the episode got worse and they took him to Rome where he saw specialists and he had supported the building of the American Academy in Rome. He was one of the first people who put up funding for that and secured a fabulous house at the top of the Tuniculum for the Academy.

dying. And he died in Rome in: 1913

And the death certificate in. From.

From a Roman doctor said that the cause was dyspepsia psychologica, which is psychological psychic dyspepsia, which I think is a pretty good diagnosis of what he experienced after that hearing in Washington. But he probably had heart problems. It was never diagnosed Exactly. He was 76, which was pretty old for those days. And he'd lived a very active.

I mean, he wasn't physically active, but a very energetic life before.

Liam Heffernan: 00:38:06

We just bring this particular conversation to a close and I know it feels like we've only really just. Just started talking about J.P. morgan. I, I do wonder if you could summariz the.

The legacy that he has left behind for people and, and how his reputation might have changed over the years.

Jean Strouse: 00:38:24

It's a very complicated reputation and he was. When I started this book, I was looking to write about a bad guy and I was sort of prosecuting him in the first years of my work on this project.

The left really has always seen him as a rapacious robber baron. Over the course of the many years it took me to write this book, I changed my mind, or rather he changed my mind.

I really did come to see him as trying to. For all his faults and all his. He made a lot of mistakes, but he was actually trying to act in the best interests of this emerging American economy.

But many, many people still see him as, and have all along as a rapacious robber baron. A to only to line his own pockets, which again, since he was, as Rockefeller said, he wasn't even a rich man. That doesn't quite compute. But his.

I think that people in the banking world who have read about him know that not all people obviously, but many people have see what role he was trying to play and how effectively he did it for almost 40 years. But you know, this country, as we know too well, is very, very divided on many subjects and one of them not in the current situation.

But JP Morgan is one of them. 1.

You either see him as a member of the kleptocracy or the oligarchy or as somebody who, in a very unlikely way, was trying to steer the US economy toward what became the American 20th century, which he effectively did.

Liam Heffernan: 00:40:06

Yeah. And, you know, quite a. Quite a way to be remembered.

Love, love him or hate him, he was responsible for extraordinary amount of change through a pivotal moment in American history. And I guess that however you think about him as a person should. Should be celebrated, right?

Jean Strouse: 00:40:23

To some extent. I mean, you know, there, as I said, there are plenty you can criticize him for still and during his lifetime.

But overall, I would say the career and the things he started, the cultural institutions he supported, the art collections he amassed and the industries he built. You know, now we're talking about US Steel being sold to Japan, which was vetoed, but.

But it lasted a good 100 years, and Edison lasted still around Akan Edison, after many iterations. And the Metropolitan Museum of Art is filled with objects and paintings that Morgan collected and left to the museum.

So there's plenty of his imprint on American culture and the American economy is still very much felt.

Liam Heffernan: 00:41:15

Yeah, absolutely. And that feels like a nice place to wrap up this particular conversation.

And of course, for anyone listening to this episode, that feels like we've only just scratched the surface. Yes, we have, but we'll leave links to everything that we've touched on in the show notes, so if you do want to find out more, you can do indeed.

And that includes Gene's book as well, which you can buy, and we'll link you to that. But Gene, thank you so much for joining me for this episode. And if anyone does want to connect with you after this, where can they do that?

Jean Strouse: 00:41:50

My website's probably the best. Jeanne strauss.com it's J-E-A-N s t r o u s e dot com.

Liam Heffernan: 00:41:57

Wonderful. Thank you so much. And you can find me on Blue Sky, LinkedIn and other places. Just search for my name.

And if you enjoy listening to the podcast, please leave us a rating and a review wherever you're listening to this and give us a follow so that all future episodes appear in your feed and additionally do follow the links in the show notes to support the show from as little as One simple dollar. And all the info will be there for you to click through. Thank you so much for listening and goodbye.