Thinks 1903

Mint: “The corner offices of India Inc. are increasingly occupied by a new breed of executives: the strategic consultant. Veterans from McKinsey & Co., Bain & Co., BCG, and Kearney are swapping advisory roles for the driver’s seat, as top companies seek out executives capable of navigating a leadership depth crisis in a volatile world…“Clients are demanding and experiencing true business partnership, and as a result, many organizations are actively finding senior consulting talent as good fitment,” says Rahul Jain, India head at BCG. According to Jain, this is a strong recognition of the evolving consulting model and its talent, particularly in an environment where leadership depth remains scarce and fiercely contested.”

WSJ: “After a three-year love affair with anything related to artificial intelligence, U.S. investors are flocking to the factory owners, fast-food restaurants and commodity companies that have seemingly strong odds of surviving the technological revolution intact. Call it the AI immunity trade, HALO—for “heavy assets, low obsolescence”—or just another iteration of the jitters that have periodically rippled through markets since the AI investing boom began.”

Ruchir Sharma: “After surging for years, the price of gold has entered the realm where storytelling drives its price. Breaking free of the fundamental forces that long explained its ups and downs, it is now rising on tales of global risk and uncertainty — which make this era feel to some observers like the gold rush of the 1970s. Gold has long been seen as a safe haven because its price has kept pace with the rate of inflation for centuries, albeit punctuated by busts and booms. The booms tended to come in periods when real interest rates declined. As returns fell on money held in savings accounts or bonds, people tended to move their wealth into gold, which offers no yield but at least can rise in price.”

Andy Kessler: “Productivity is a job creator, not destroyer. Desktop publishing meant everyone could create magazines. Spreadsheets meant everyone could be an analyst. Anthropic’s Claude now allows everyone to create code. Technology may kill old jobs but then, voilà, it creates millions of new ones. Sure, generative AI will fundamentally change how businesses operate. So what? We need to embrace AI in education rather than ban it. So many problems not yet solved will match with tons of untapped human potential just begging to be unleashed, creating things not yet thought of. Like what? Most guess cancer treatments, longevity discoveries and inhabiting Mars, but no one really knows…New stuff is unimaginable, except by its risk-taking creators. So ignore the AI hysterics. And mass-unemployment claims. They’re ignorant nearsighted snapshots. The world is much more dynamic. I promise you won’t be anyone’s pet.”

NeoMails: The Attention and Monetisation Surface Brands Already Own (Part 10)

A B2C Product in B2B Clothes

There is a mindset trap that catches most teams when they first build NeoMails. It goes like this: NeoMails are sold to brands, brands are our customers, therefore we should optimise for what brands want. What brands want is engagement that drives commercial outcomes. Therefore, NeoMails should be designed to drive commercial outcomes.

This logic is internally consistent and entirely wrong.

NeoMails are sold to brands (a B2B motion), but they succeed only if customers experience them as a consumer product (a B2C reality). The brand is the distribution channel. The customer is the user. And you cannot design a consumer product by optimising for the distribution channel’s preferences. You have to design it for the user’s experience.

The test is brutally simple: would customers miss this email if it stopped? Would they notice its absence the way they notice when a daily game disappears, or a morning digest they liked goes dark? That is the standard NeoMails must meet.

This standard is higher than anything email marketing has previously attempted, because it requires the brand to temporarily step back from its commercial agenda and ask a different question: what does this person genuinely want to experience in their inbox today? Not what do we want them to buy, not what offer will move the needle, not what subject line will improve open rates — but what is worth 60 seconds of their genuine, voluntary attention?

The closest analogies are not marketing products. They are habit-forming consumer experiences: Duolingo, for its daily streak and micro-lesson format. Wordle, for its single daily puzzle that creates the right amount of scarcity. The best morning digests, for making information feel like a daily ritual rather than a duty. What these products share is the quality of being anticipated — the customer wants to engage before the product has asked them to.

Anticipation is the outcome NeoMails are designed to create. It is the opposite of the current state, in which most brand emails are tolerated at best and ignored at worst. Anticipation requires consistency (the email arrives at the same time, in the same format, with the same structural cues), quality (the Magnet is genuinely interesting, the content is genuinely relevant), and progress (the Mu balance grows, the streak extends, the story continues).

The Implications for Build Decisions

The B2C mindset has practical implications for every build decision. Magnet formats must be designed by people who think about consumer entertainment, not marketing copy. Mu mechanics must be designed by people who understand habit formation, not loyalty programme economics. The BrandBlock approval workflow must be fast enough that the brand can respond to real-world events and maintain relevance — not slow enough that it functions like a campaign approval process.

And the metrics that matter are consumer metrics, not campaign metrics. Not open rate — but repeat open rate. Not click rate — but interaction completion rate. Not list growth — but CRR improvement. Not impressions — but Mu earned per user over 90 days. These are the metrics of a product that customers have chosen to make part of their daily routine, not a campaign that was pushed at them once.

The brands that will adopt NeoMails fastest are the ones whose teams are willing to make this shift: from thinking of themselves as senders of messages to thinking of themselves as publishers of a daily consumer product. The inbox is the distribution surface. NeoMails are the content. The customer is the audience. Build for the audience, and the commercial outcomes will follow.

Thinks 1902

WSJ; “On paper, India packs a powerful punch. The International Institute for Strategic Studies in London estimated last year that India’s security forces total about 5.3 million people—1.5 million active-duty military personnel, 1.2 million military reserves and about 2.6 million total active and reserve paramilitary forces. This is larger than the entire population of many nations. With 721 combat-capable aircraft, the Indian air force is the fourth largest in the world. The Indian navy is the world’s fifth largest by tonnage and is one of only eight navies to operate aircraft carriers. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that between 2019 and 2023 India was the world’s top arms importer, accounting for nearly 10% of global arms imports…As a percentage of gross domestic product, India’s military budget hovers around 2%, or $86.32 billion this year. Only about a quarter of this goes toward capital outlay for weapons. Salaries and pensions swallow more than half the budget.”

FT: “Contrived dissent is better than nothing, especially if the contrivance itself is taken seriously. But the most valuable form of dissent is authentic, even stubborn and brave. There is no substitute for finding one of those people who feel a duty to call things as they see them.”

SaaStr: “For most of the past decade-plus, B2B software had a beautiful, almost boring stability to it. You’d build a product. You’d get it to $1M ARR. Then $10M. Then $100M. And the product you were selling at $100M ARR looked … pretty much the same as what you were selling at $1M. Better, sure. More features, more integrations, more enterprise bells and whistles. But fundamentally the same core product, solving the same core problem, the same core way. Salesforce in 2025 looked a lot like Salesforce in 2015. HubSpot in 2025 looked a lot like HubSpot in 2017. Zendesk, ServiceNow, Workday — same story. You could plan product roadmaps in 3-year increments and not be wildly wrong. That era is over. So, so, so over. And it ended so quickly.”

Tyler Cowen: “If AI produces a lot more stuff, income is generated from that and the economy keeps going, whether or not the resulting distribution pleases your sense of morality.  Along the way, prices adjust as need be.  If unemployment rises significantly, prices fall too, all the more.  I am not saying everyone ends up happy here, but you cannot have a) a flood of goods and services, b) billions accruing to the AI owners, without also c) prices are at a level where most people can afford to buy a whole bunch of things.  Otherwise, where do you think all the AI revenue is coming from?  The new output has to go somewhere, and sorry people it is simply not all trapped in currency hoards.”

NeoMails: The Attention and Monetisation Surface Brands Already Own (Part 9)

The Email as Product — Header, Body, Footer

Most innovation in email has obsessed over the body. Better images. More personalisation. Dynamic content blocks. AMP interactivity. These are meaningful improvements, but they miss a larger truth: a NeoMail is not a message with a good body. It is an end-to-end product experience that treats every pixel — from the preview pane to the final line — as intentional design surface.

This requires thinking about three zones of the email that most marketers treat as afterthoughts.

The Header: From Line, Subject Line, and Mu Signal

The header is the first experience the customer has — and in many cases, it is the entire experience, because the email is seen in a preview pane without being opened. This means the from-line, subject line, and preheader are not merely labels. They are the product’s opening move.

The from-line must feel like a product the customer recognises and has chosen, not a campaign they are being subjected to. ‘YourBrand NeoMails’ is better than ‘YourBrand Marketing’. The distinction signals that this is a different kind of email — one with a different purpose from the promotional send that arrived yesterday.

The subject line carries the Magnet preview — the hint of today’s quiz or prediction or story — rather than a marketing headline. ‘Which country produces the most coffee? + earn 20 Mu today’ is a fundamentally different promise from ‘40% off this weekend only’. It is curiosity-led rather than urgency-led, and curiosity compounds over time in a way that urgency never can.

The Mu signal in the subject or preheader is a subtle but powerful cue: ‘+20 Mu available today’ functions the way a Duolingo streak notification functions — as a gentle, non-threatening prompt that today’s engagement is a step in a continuing story.

The Body: BrandBlock, Magnet, ActionAd in Sequence

The sequence matters as much as the content. BrandBlock first — speaking to an already-engaged customer. Magnet second — deepening the engagement. ActionAd third — offering a utility to a customer who is present and active. This is the only sequence that respects the customer’s attention hierarchy. Any other order inverts the value exchange and turns NeoMails back into a promotional email with extra components.

All interactions happen via AMP — inside the email, without navigating to a browser. This removes the click-through friction that causes most email engagement to evaporate at the transition point. When the Magnet is answered inside the email, the engagement is real. When the ActionAd action is completed inside the email, the conversion is real. Nothing is lost to the gap between intent and execution.

The Footer: Status, Ledger, and the Right to Leave

The footer of a NeoMail is not legal small print. It is a trust mechanism and a continuity signal. The status bar shows the customer where they are — ‘Day 14 streak’, current Mu balance — and makes the ongoing nature of the relationship visible. The Mu Ledger shows the history transparently: what was earned, when, and why. This accountability is not just reassuring; it is part of the product.

The unsubscribe option in a NeoMail footer is different from a standard unsubscribe: it allows the customer to exit the NeoMails programme specifically, without opting out of all brand communications. This is one of the most important design decisions in the entire system. NeoMails must be optional without being punitive. A customer who finds the Magnet format not to their taste should be able to step back from NeoMails without destroying the broader CRM relationship. The exit must be clean, simple, and without consequence — because a product that traps its users is not a product people trust.

Thinks 1901

David Friedman: “Within the firm coordination is by central control, executives figuring out what workers should do and workers doing it as instructed. If that form of coordination was always and inevitably inferior to coordination by market transactions the result would be an agoric economy, each individual buying inputs and selling outputs, coordinating their activities by market transactions. Why does that not happen? How is it possible for a firm coordinated from above by its owner-manager to compete with the market alternative? Coase’s answer was that while centralized coordination indeed has costs, so does market coordination.” [via Arnold Kling]

TheMaxSource: “Forty-two percent of startups fail because nobody wants what they built. This number comes from CB Insights analysis of 110+ failed companies. They didn’t run out of money first. They didn’t lose to competitors. They built something and discovered the market didn’t care. The median time to learn this lesson: eighteen months and six figures in wasted capital…Fast-moving companies test three things in sequence: problem intensity, solution appeal, willingness to pay. Each layer requires harder evidence than the last.”

Economist: ” A recent study by Ivan Yotzov of the Bank of England and co-authors found that executives spend only about 1.5 hours a week using AI. Nine out of ten senior managers see no measurable improvement in labour productivity. The organisational rewiring, in other words, has barely begun. Something big may indeed be happening with AI itself. For now, it remains largely invisible in the macroeconomic data.”

ET on the National Monetisation Pipeline (NMP 2.0) : “At the heart of the NMP framework is a distinction that policymakers have repeatedly stressed that asset monetisation is not outright privatisation. The government retains ownership of the underlying assets. What is transferred is the right to operate, maintain and earn revenue from brownfield infrastructure for a fixed concession period, typically under transparent bidding frameworks such as toll-operate-transfer models, infrastructure investment trusts, long-term leases or public-private partnerships. The economic logic of NMP 2.0 is straightforward. India has invested heavily in creating physical infrastructure such as highways, transmission lines, ports, airports, pipelines and railway freight corridors. These are capital-intensive assets with long gestation periods. Once operational and revenue-generating, they can be leased to private operators who are often better placed to extract efficiency gains and bear operational risks. The upfront proceeds realised by the government can then be recycled into new greenfield projects, creating a virtuous investment cycle. In effect, the state converts illiquid public assets into liquid financial resources, without relinquishing ultimate ownership. This recycling of capital is the core principle of NMP 2.0.”

NeoMails: The Attention and Monetisation Surface Brands Already Own (Part 8)

ActionAds — Monetisation That Earns Its Place

The most common objection to NeoMails, when the concept is pitched to CMOs, is about the ActionAd. Will the brand allow third-party content inside its email? Will it feel like a betrayal of trust — the brand commoditising the relationship it spent years building?

The objection is legitimate. And the answer is not ‘trust us’. The answer is architecture.

One ActionAd per NeoMail, maximum. This is the foundational constraint. It is not a preference or a guideline; it is a hard limit built into the platform. Everything else in the ActionAd model is built on top of this constraint, because without it, NeoMails become an ad vehicle — and an ad vehicle will not earn the daily open that makes the whole system work.

Traditional email advertising fails for predictable reasons. Newsletter sponsorships ask the reader to shift context from the publication’s voice to a partner’s voice. Banner ads inside emails signal ‘this is transactional, not relational’. List swaps expose customer data to third parties without meaningful consent. All of these formats extract attention rather than earn it, and all of them degrade the quality of the inbox experience over time.

ActionAds are designed around a single organising principle: monetisation must be action-first, not click-first. The goal is not to take the customer somewhere else. The goal is to enable something useful, right here, in one step.

The formats that work best in this model are those that feel less like advertisements and more like featured utilities. One tap to save your details for a service you might use. One tap to book a discovery call. One tap to get a personalised quote. One tap to register for an event. One tap to subscribe. The ActionAd is not asking for your attention in exchange for nothing. It is offering a shortcut to something you might genuinely want to do — and making it frictionless.

The reason this matters economically is that ActionAd effectiveness is measured in actions completed, not impressions delivered. This is a meaningfully better metric for partners, because it is a direct measure of intent rather than an estimate of attention. An email database with a high-engagement NeoMails programme — where customers are opening daily, interacting with Magnets, and actively present in their inbox — is a meaningfully more valuable surface than a high-volume, low-engagement blast programme. The partner is not buying reach. They are buying access to real, demonstrated attention.

The Constraints That Make It Work

Beyond the one-ActionAd-per-email cap, the remaining constraints are equally non-negotiable. Category exclusions prevent competitors from appearing. Every partner category is whitelisted by the brand before any ad runs. An automatic pause triggers if complaint rates exceed a threshold.

Each constraint addresses a specific failure mode. The cap prevents the email from feeling like an ad vehicle. The category exclusions protect competitive positioning. The whitelist process keeps the brand in control of its associations. The complaint-rate trigger ensures the system is responsive to customer signals.

The result is a monetisation layer that earns its place — not by forcing itself onto the customer, but by offering something genuinely useful at a moment when the customer is already present and already engaged.

Thinks 1900

Andy Hall: “We are getting much better at predicting the future. AI forecasting systems are climbing leaderboards that were once the exclusive domain of elite human “superforecasters”—and they may soon surpass us at divining the trajectory of our messy, contingent world. Developments in AI dangle the tantalizing prospect that, some day, we might actually be able to see what’s coming next with increasing precision. Prediction markets are the coordinating layer; they attract information by offering monetary rewards to those with useful information about the future. They promise to be platforms where millions of people—and increasingly, AI agents—put real money behind their beliefs about what’s going to happen, generating live probability estimates on everything from Federal Reserve decisions to legislative outcomes. The vision is powerful. Kalshi CEO Tarek Mansour calls his platform a “truth machine,” arguing that “people don’t lie with their money” and that prediction markets are “replacing debate and subjectivity with markets and accuracy.””

Andy Kessler: “Everyone wants to be a rebel. So here’s a modern paradox: Many who rebel against the status quo don’t realize it when they become the status quo. Non-nonconformists! So out they’re in.”

WSJ: “Right now, workers are potentially training AI how to make them obsolete. And they often don’t realize it. The kind of AI used by companies, called an enterprise AI system, can capture everything you do at work and use that information to train itself. These systems can record your interactions within the platform—the prompts you write, the documents you create, the queries you run. In other words, the company can potentially track—and claim ownership of—every keystroke you make within the system, every idea you document there, every tool you build using that platform. It can identify what approaches worked best, what email language got responses and how you approached those clients. And all that knowledge can become part of the company AI, so it may eventually know, down to increasingly fine details, how you do your job.”

Mint: “AI is already delivering value across sectors—improving productivity, democratizing access and aiding livelihoods. In healthcare, AI-assisted diagnostics improve early detection and clinical decision-making. In agriculture, precision advisories and crop intelligence tools help farmers increase incomes and manage risk. In education, adaptive systems personalize learning at scale. Even ‘small AI’—narrowly designed, task-specific systems—is demonstrating measurable impact, reducing delays, errors and manual workload in daily operations. These are important gains. But India’s long-term economic shift cannot be determined solely by digital-native businesses. It will eventually be shaped by whether AI can modernize legacy industries like textiles, food processing, leather, auto components, light engineering and chemicals—sectors where depth of capacity exists, but production processes are often uneven, partly digitized or manually monitored.”

NeoMails: The Attention and Monetisation Surface Brands Already Own (Part 7)

Mu — The Currency of Attention

Every habit product that has ever worked at scale has had the same structural feature: a visible, growing record of progress. Duolingo shows you a streak. Fitness apps show you a run history. Chess apps show you a rating. The record matters not because of what it unlocks, but because of what it represents: evidence that you have been showing up.

Mu is NeoMails’ version of that record. It is the attention currency — earned through opens, Magnet interactions, streak maintenance, and meaningful actions inside the email. It accumulates in a Ledger visible in every NeoMail’s footer, updating with every send, creating a persistent history of engagement that grows more meaningful with time.

Mu doesn’t buy attention; it records it — and makes continuity visible. That visibility is what changes behaviour.

The distinction from loyalty points is important enough to state plainly. Loyalty points are spend-linked and redemption-driven: the customer earns them by giving the brand money, and redeems them for a reduction in future spending. The entire incentive structure orbits the transaction. Mu is attention-linked and continuity-driven: you earn it by engaging — by opening, by participating in the Magnet, by maintaining a streak — regardless of whether you have bought anything. It is a measure of the relationship itself, not of the commercial outcome of the relationship.

The psychological mechanism Mu exploits is not sophisticated: it is the basic human preference for progress over stasis. We are wired to find accumulated progress meaningful, even when the individual steps are small. A Mu balance of 3,761 with a 14-day streak feels like something. It represents a history of engagement, a pattern of attention, a record of showing up. Losing that — by missing days, by disengaging, by unsubscribing — feels like a cost. This is precisely the friction that reduces attention churn.

Mu also serves a function that is easy to miss: it gives the customer a vocabulary for their relationship with the email. Most people cannot describe what they feel about a brand’s communications beyond ‘I open it sometimes’ or ‘I ignore it’. Mu gives them something concrete. A Mu balance is a number. Numbers are tangible. Tangible things are easier to value, and therefore easier to maintain.

Mu Use: Burn, Not Just Earn

The earn side of Mu is straightforward. The burn side — what customers can do with accumulated Mu — is where the design gets interesting and where the ‘bribing attention’ critique is answered. Mu should not be redeemable primarily for discounts. That converts it into loyalty points, which is exactly what it is not trying to be. Mu is better spent on experiences that enhance the NeoMails product itself: unlocking a premium Magnet format, getting early access to a WePredict question before the community does, seeing the outcome of last week’s predictions before they are revealed in email. The redemption experience should feel like an upgrade to the relationship, not a coupon at the checkout.

The initial activation matters too. Gifting Mu on registration — enough to make the Ledger feel non-trivial from day one — is a small design decision with outsized psychological impact. A Ledger that starts at zero has nothing to lose. A Ledger that starts with a meaningful balance has something to protect. That sunk cost, however small, creates the first layer of retention.

Thinks 1899

Chris Roth: “If software moats are eroding, what still holds? Compute — physical infrastructure that’s hard to replicate. Human relationships — partnerships, contracts, brand recognition. Capital — cash in the bank to weather competition. Proprietary data — data that can’t be scraped or synthesized. Team — rare talent that competitors can’t easily poach. Exclusive rights — patents, trademarks, copyrights, regulatory licenses. Network effects — value that scales with users.”

NYTimes: “Companies are realizing they can no longer simply promote themselves to potential customers. They have to win over the robots, too…“There is a new influencer you need to reach, and it’s this A.I. model,” said Brian Stempeck, a co-founder of Evertune.”

Nicolas Bustamante: “The real threat isn’t the LLM itself. It’s a pincer movement that vertical software incumbents didn’t see coming. From below, hundreds of AI-native startups are entering every vertical. When building a credible financial data product required 200 engineers and $50M in data licensing, markets naturally consolidated to 3-4 players. When it requires 10 engineers and frontier model APIs, the market fragments violently. Competition goes from 3 to 300.”

SaaStr: “You Must Be AI Infrastructure — Not “AI-Enhanced SaaS”. The market is ruthlessly punishing companies that “added AI” to existing products. Salesforce (Agentforce), HubSpot (Breeze), Adobe (Firefly), Monday.com (AI blocks) — all down 30-50%+ even though these are real products with real adoption. The market doesn’t care. The winners — Palantir, Cloudflare, Snowflake — are AI infrastructure. They don’t add AI to a workflow tool. They are the infrastructure layer that AI runs on. Palantir is the operational AI decision layer. Snowflake is where the data that feeds AI lives. Cloudflare is the edge where AI inference executes. As SaaStr has been saying: Don’t build SaaS and add AI. Build AI and add SaaS economics.”

NeoMails: The Attention and Monetisation Surface Brands Already Own (Part 6)

The Magnet — Engineering the Reason to Open

If there is a single point of failure in NeoMails, it is the Magnet. Get it right, and everything else follows: the open, the habit, the engagement, the monetisation. Get it wrong — make it dull, repetitive, effortful, or irrelevant — and the entire architecture collapses, because the customer has no reason to open tomorrow.

This is worth sitting with. The Magnet does not represent the brand. It does not sell anything. It does not directly generate revenue. Its sole purpose is to make the email worth opening — independent of the brand’s agenda, independent of any offer, independent of any commercial event. The brand has to be comfortable building something that serves the customer first and speaks to them second.

That comfort is hard-won, because it requires a relinquishing of control that marketing culture is not accustomed to. A NeoMail with a great Magnet might be opened primarily because of a cricket prediction, or a word puzzle, or a piece of micro-fiction — not because of the brand. And that is precisely the point. The open is the first step. The relationship is what compounds over time.

The Magnet’s job is to make the email worth opening on days when the customer is not in the market for the brand’s product. Most days are those days. The Magnet is the bridge across the gap.

 Active Magnets

The interactive format — quiz, prediction, choice — is the most immediately engaging. It asks the customer to participate, and participation creates investment. When you answer a question, you are curious about whether you got it right. When you make a prediction, you want to see the outcome. This is basic human psychology: we pay more attention to things we are involved in than to things we merely observe. Active Magnets leverage this by making the customer a participant rather than a passive recipient.

The variety of active Magnet formats needs to grow continuously. Quiz and WePredict and ‘Hot or Not’ are a starting point. Mini-games, micro-surveys, community challenges, personalised recommendations that require a choice — each adds a different texture of engagement and prevents the staleness that kills any daily habit.

Passive Magnets

There is a version of the Magnet that demands nothing — and this category may prove equally important. A curated one-paragraph ‘today I learned’. A single line of striking poetry. A micro-story serial where each NeoMail advances the plot by a paragraph. A chart that tells a story. A fact that recalibrates your understanding of something familiar.

Passive Magnets matter for a reason that the interactive format can miss: habit requires low friction. If every NeoMail demands a tap, a choice, a moment of active engagement, the habit becomes effortful. Some days, the customer wants to receive rather than participate. Passive Magnets make the email worth opening on those days — and they open up the Magnet format to literary, journalistic, and cultural territory that interactive formats cannot easily occupy.

Continuity Across Magnets

The single most underexplored dimension of Magnet design is continuity. A Magnet designed as a standalone experience resets every day. A Magnet designed as part of a series creates anticipation. A prediction market where results are revealed three days later. A story that advances by one paragraph per email. A weekly trivia thread where the final score is revealed on Friday. These serial structures create the most powerful reason to open: not just curiosity about today’s content, but unresolved anticipation from a previous interaction.

The WePredict format already has this built in: you make a prediction, and you wait to see if you were right. That waiting creates a reason to return. The best Magnet designs will lean into this — using the passage of time, the accumulation of Mu, and the rhythm of daily delivery to make each NeoMail feel like the next chapter in a longer story the customer is genuinely invested in.