Good afternoon. Welcome to Citi's AppsE conomy conference on the GC 1000A. I cover the media and internet sector here at Citi. We have disclosures available to the right of the video player or under the Citi Disclosures tab if you're viewing this via Velocity. I'm very pleased to have IPG CFO, CEO, excuse me, Philippe Krakowsky, join us today. Philippe, thank you for joining us. Oh, thank you, and thanks for having me to chat this afternoon. Of course. Of course. And I guess for investors that have dialed in, if you do have a question for Philippe, if you type it into the question box, it'll come to me and I'd be more than happy to relay it to Philippe. So maybe I can just start with a high-level question. I mean, you've been, I think, at IPG for two decades, but relatively new to the CEO role, about a year, I think. And I just wondered, as you sort of look at the landscape of ad agencies, where IPG sits within that broader ecosystem, what are your goals, let's say, over the next three to five years? That is a big question. So I guess I will take a bit of time with it just because it sort of frames up, I'm sure, what the rest of the discussion is. Sure. I think because I'd say three to five years, given the pace of change we're dealing with, is actually a pretty meaningful horizon. So yeah, two decades. And I think that the range of roles that I've played at the company probably informs the answer that I'll give you in terms of where we're headed. As you know, those roles include running strategy for the group, overseeing talent for the group, and we're clearly a professional services business that's in the midst of evolving. And so the talent piece is important in terms of my answer to you. But then also running the media operations, which I think are probably the most forward-leaning in terms of digital and technology and data. And that's both pre and post Acxiom acquisition because we were building out our own stack. And then lastly, I think one of the things I spent a lot of time doing was pulling together these integrated teams that we call Open Architecture, which I think are really vital because you're increasingly solving these very complex integrated business challenges. You said advertising agency sector. I think we've really kind of evolved beyond marketing services to now marketing services plus a data and tech component. And so I think there's a big opportunity for us to be more valuable kind of higher-order partners to our clients. And so those three to five years, I think, are informed as you do look carefully at what's going on in our business. We've been evolving the business probably over the last four to five years. I think that really lays plenty of breadcrumbs in terms of sort of you're not going to see a significant new strategic direction or some kind of a course correction. I think what you're going to see is the quickening of the pace as we become sort of a hybrid of data, tech, and marketing services. Then I think a heightened focus on execution and implementing the strategy that we've been pursuing, right? I think that in a nutshell, that strategy is to build and leverage the tech and data capabilities to elevate the value of our services, to combine those marketing and creative kinds of areas of expertise and those disciplines which reach across so many communications channels with these new skill sets that make the work more impactful and more accountable. Ultimately, I think the lean-in is towards helping clients adapt to and succeed in an increasingly digital economy, right? That makes sense. That makes sense. So I think at a macro level, that's really it, and so the client lens first and foremost, you've written about this in the past, but we embedded digital into all of our agencies for the past quite a few years. We didn't silo them, and so that'll continue. The data and tech component will continue. On the talent side, because we're a professional services business, I think that people would think that we focus on creative and strategic skill sets, which we do, but now we bring technology, e-commerce, data skill sets into the mix, and so in a funny way, 2020 was a paring back on some of the older skill sets, and 2021, where we've added a lot of people into the organization, was a quickening of the pace, like I said, in refreshing and building even more of that into the mix. And then I'm sure we'll talk about sort of the things we're leaning into, which are the forward-looking bits, which are addressability, I think, identity resolution, and the kinds of areas where you're thinking about putting data to work, really applying data into marketing in ways that are more sophisticated. And I think clients are excited about because they make the work that we do with them more efficient. They give them kind of more of a parity position in the digital ecosystem, which I think is important to them. And then, again, I'm sure we'll talk about some of the continuity in terms of our commitment to sound financial fundamentals. You promoted me or you added a role responsibility there. I mean, I'm sure. I've tried. I'd say that, like I said, it's this idea of focusing on the areas of marketing that are the most dynamic and are being driven by digital technology. So personalized interactions with consumers, an on-demand kind of economy. You're solving for sort of fragmentation as a marketer. And at the same time, there's been a lot of opacity in the digital ecosystem. So how do you become kind of more a master of your own destiny, or how do you take charge of your own destiny? So that I'm not using gendered language there. But I think we see a lot of opportunity that has been reflected in our performance in the last couple of years. And it's still us, the question of continuing along that path and, as I said, trying to kind of step on the gas in terms of some of those developments and just execution. So interesting because I would have to be, on the one hand, a little bit humble when I look at sort of the multiples that the buy side is describing the businesses. But then on the other hand, I have to sort of lean in and express a view when I just see sort of a disconnect between what the street is paying for a company and what I think it's worth. And for IPG, it just strikes me that the disconnect is profound in that when I look at sort of the performance of your firm, you've grown faster than a lot of peers. I think at least the agencies that I cover have low earnings every single year unless there's some sort of macroeconomic adverse effect like the great financial crisis or COVID. And yet the multiples are so low that I have to, I think, that piece that you talked about of sort of leaning into the tech side where the street maybe is thinking of you more as business services and less as someone that just traffics sort of in media buying is sort of the key to the puzzle. So I'm glad to hear you say or articulate your strategies the way you articulated them. So one question. I know that the buy side always tends to. It's a very complicated story, and they tend to distill any company down to one metric, right? And it sort of on the buy side sort of gets operating leverage, I guess, across the portfolio. But for a firm like yours, all they seem to care about is really organic growth. That organic growth number is the key sort of metric that everyone uses. And you guys have done a lot better than peers, but I'd love to just understand if you could unpack that and looking why you think you've outperformed your peers. Is it Open Architecture? Is it Acxiom? And how confident can investors be that your outperformance can continue vis-à-vis the industry over the next three to five years? Well, I mean, I think that if you look at it to your point, if you unpack what has happened in kind of the backward-looking piece of it, I'd say clearly our goal is continued outperformance, right? And obviously, the comps get tougher because we've had consistently strong results. But I think that there's been so much volatility because of the pandemic. And one of the things that's been interesting is that when people start focusing on that multi-year horizon and they look back at a two or a three-year growth stack for a company and you get a much clearer line of sight into sustainable performance or whether or not what you're seeing is, as you said, that the macro or the cyclical that's impacting the sector or whether it's something specific. And for us, I think it has been the decision to move away from a more traditional approach to it, to your point, where you're just a broker or a trader and where what you're clearly saying is the opportunity to take the services we provide, add this layer of intelligence, software, and now with Acxiom's data, and then have it mean that the value of the services clearly is heightened. And then also begin to create and unpack some new models and some new ways of generating growth that are more interesting from where we sit because we do see some new opportunities with the software component and with the data component of things. So I guess I'd say back to your first question, clearly some competitors have seen what we've done. They're going to look at that playbook. They're going to then follow, which makes sense. And so for us, the challenge is not to stand still, right? And so I think that we're coming out of the pandemic stronger when it comes to the relevance of our offerings because some of the bets we've made early have only been accelerated by the pandemic, the digital behavior among consumers, the need on the part of marketers to accelerate their business transformation and their adoption of ways to go to market that allow them to really engage directly with consumers and, as I said, to take control over their first-party data. And so all of those things we see as opportunities to keep pushing along on that growth. I think integration is, as you said, so Open Architecture for us. That's a 15-year journey where you're always kind of work in progress, but that's also being validated. And then certain areas, whether it's healthcare, whether it's media services, and then data and tech, those are places where we're strong and places where I think it continues to be sort of tailwinds. So to our mind, we understand the challenge, but we embrace it. And that continues to be the goal, is to keep showing that consistent multi-year outperformance. That's great. So a lot of investors know that IPG has a particular strength in healthcare. And there was an announcement you made maybe six months ago, I think it was, where you decided to combine or align FCB Health and McCann Health into one new entity called IPG Health. And I just wonder what prompted that change and how has it been received by clients? And if it succeeds, how should we on the outside sort of look at your results and see that whatever changes you've made have worked? I mean, I think that is sort of a vertical that has been a standout performer for us. And so we've been investing behind it for some time. And what you have there are clients who are pretty sophisticated when it comes to the need to have the investment decisions they made guided by as much information as possible, be as precise as possible in terms of how they reach consumers, and then also to do that in a really, really careful, thoughtful, privacy-compliant way. So I mean, we've seen in that space clients for whom some of the trend lines that we've been observing and then some of the bets we've been making for some time were in our favor. And then it shows up across our portfolio. So there's a significant inside of media. We do quite a bit with clients in the healthcare space. Inside of a Weber Shandwick, for example, in the PR space, there's a sizable and robust, quite healthy healthcare practice. Their sibling agency, Golin, is building something like that. But the two sizable specialist agencies, I think to my mind, so as you say, kind of a year plus into the job, a place where I wanted to be sure that we were putting really like assets into alignment was in this space, right? And so what we basically have is we've got these very strong brands that have a lot of sort of congruence or a lot there's a lot of complementarity to them, right? And so there's specialty services that are at one that might not be at the other. There's geographic fit where, again, we felt that there was real upside. We've generally wanted, we've looked at opportunity and we've wanted to solve for it organically. We've obviously gone external with M&A when and as necessary, but generally, it's been an organic fix to these sorts of things or an attempt to look at opportunity and realize it that way. I mean, I think what informed it was a sense that they're strong assets. They're a credit to us in terms of their growth and their margin. And by aligning them, in essence, I think they were originally incubated many years ago inside the ad agencies. And this had really gotten to the point where there was enough maturity that we wanted that, like I said, specialty services. You got 5,000+ people. You want them to proactively manage their careers. So we want to be sure that instead of having them leave us, we find new roles for them in this bigger sort of network. We get sort of shared investment in new capabilities and skill sets. So I think for us, that was what drove it. And clients have responded quite positively there. And they sort of see the benefits of some of what I just shared with you. So I think that you'll just see it be something that continues to. It'll be reflected in our overall growth. And then you'll see the percentage of our overall revenue picture that it represents. And I think we'll track progress pretty clearly over the next few years. Okay. Okay. What about supply chains? This is one of the more common questions we get sort of across our coverage universe: people are very nervous about these supply chain disruptions. Is that something that investors should be nervous about tackling over the next 12 months, or do you feel like your clients are sort of thinking about it’s navigable? There’s not really going to be any sort of material implication for a firm. Look, and it's a really fair question. And I think the sensitivity to answering it in this format at this time is obviously just that where we are on the calendar is a little awkward, right? And so ultimately, we talked about this on our third quarter call. At that point, we said we hadn't seen material impact. And I don't think we've seen anything that deviates from the observations that we made at that time. And then in terms of planning for 2022, we're just about complete on that process. It'll continue for, I'd say, the balance of this month. And then obviously, in February, we'll take you all through a pretty detailed look of how we see the year going forward. I mean, I think the key to remember is we have clients who skew to multinational or national in terms of scale, right? And so, as we said, they approach marketing in a very holistic way and in a very integrated way. And so I don't think that they're going to look at a moment in time. I think they're going to sort of understand that there's a disruption that's in the macro system. But for example, if we think about a big considered purchase, automotive being the one that clearly comes to mind, do you engage with an individual on their purchase journey and then decide that because of what's going on, you're going to drop them for a couple of months and somebody else might jump the line and begin a dialogue with that person? And then when they really are in market or when the inventory flow is there again, you've really lost out that opportunity. So I think that our clients are pretty smart about saying, "Hold on a minute. Is that a trade-off I'm willing to make when the payoff is what it is?" So I think that if there's an impact to supply chain, I think it would be sometime in 2022. Maybe it's a timing impact. Maybe it's a where do budgets flow in terms of certain kinds of activities impact. But as I said to you, relative to the last time that we were in a position where we could make the disclosure, nothing changed from that point to now that led us to think that we should raise our hand and share with all of you that something had changed. Okay. So this is maybe to be accused of talking my own book, but I mentioned earlier that you guys do the trade-off of organic growth. And I can't help but think that since we're entering this new sort of inflationary environment, there's still sort of a debate about whether it's transitory or not. It certainly feels like a good buy, at least in terms of nominal organic growth, even if it's nominal and doesn't really translate to a lot of real incremental earnings. Have we gotten to the point in the inflationary where you feel like that could, if inflation persists, be a benefit to your top line? Well, I mean, look, I think you're right. I think it's nominal, right? So people look at our space and go, "Okay, GDP, GDP+, is that nominal or real?" We've been the outlier that we've been the consistent exception to the rule that does outgrow that. So I'd say I don't know. It's been so long since inflation was a thing, and our industry has changed so much. And I don't think you look at history and go, "Hey, here's" but if you kind of go, "All right, it's been higher now since April, May last year," right? And so I guess what we've seen in that timeline kind of falls into the so far so good bucket, right? So if there's more economic activity, as you say, and if there's more macro growth, I think that is going to be constructive. I think, consumers clearly, there's wage growth, there's disposable income, and it has fueled demand. And so, barring some major disconnect, for the moment, I think we're navigating it. And I think that maybe a modest tailwind. That's my understanding. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. You mentioned one of your goals very early on was around talent retention, right, hanging on to folks. And it just seems like this is also a very strange labor market relative to history. We're watching labor force participation rates drop. We're watching sort of the velocity of consumers or employees sort of switch jobs going up during COVID. At the same time, we're seeing real record growth in terms of small business formation, right? A lot of new entrepreneurs, maybe gig economy or whatever. Is anything sort of noticeably different in the backward looking in terms of your ability to navigate the success rate of hanging on to folks, or do you feel like you're navigating it reasonably well in terms of employees? No, I think we're navigating it well. I mean, I think that in 2020, I think, again, because the headlines do go to parts of the economy that might not be directly analogous to us, right, in that we have a highly educated, highly trained, high—I mean, again, professional services. So the nature of the folks who are part of our world and technology is sort of an IPG business. So I think that that means that I don't think that the macro headlines are as relevant. But it's not to say that they're not. I'm just trying to contextualize it. So I guess I'd say that for me, what's interesting is the segment of the labor market that's been really competitive for the last couple of years has been that data and technology space, right? And I think for us, we incubated a big programmatic media business, which was a software-driven business that we organically built inside of our media businesses. We've got market specialization at a number of our digital agencies. And then, as I said, healthcare has a workforce that has specialized kind of higher-end expertise. And I think that we do run it like businesses that are analogous to the ones where we're competing for talent. So we talk about product roadmaps. We do cadence of product development and scrums and the kinds of things that, again, you would see in software. And the difference is that people are making a - if you're really going to buy the story about the startup or the truly distinctive and unique - there may be three or four massive players in the tech space - then maybe that's talent we don't compete as effectively for. But if you want to work on big projects that are interesting and varied at a big company that has stability but a lot of dynamism to it, I think we've shown that we can actually compete. And I think other things that are interesting are we source talent in unusual places. We've got a whole neurodiversity talent initiative to bring folks in with some of the tech skills. We've got a lot. We bring people who've been out of the workforce and help train them up so they can kind of get back on track. A lot of working moms in Europe, for example, for a lot of our more digitally and tech-advanced businesses. And then we do a lot of our own incubation work. So we have a program inside of KINESSO and Acxiom that they come up with 50 or 100 ideas. They curate them, and then they present them to our CFO, to the CEO of a media brand, and to me. And then we literally end up deciding which ones we're going to invest behind. So there are lots of ways in which I think we compete for talent pretty effectively. And it's a challenging labor market, which I think will also probably find some kind of level. Yeah. What about account reviews for leads? It seemed like there was this whole flurry of activity a couple of years ago, and then you can correct me if I'm wrong. I felt like during the COVID period, everything sort of died down. Do you think it's going to sort of pick up again and we'll go back to normal or above normal since we went through this lull? I'd say to you that I think 2020 was depressed, right? I think that 2021, I would say, was active. It was busy, but not an explosive level of busy, right? And so we started the year with a couple of big wins that were exciting for us, say, at T-Mobile, for example, or Morgan Stanley, E*TRADE, which was a really interesting media plus data combo for us. And then we kind of closed it in the middle. I think we had a couple of big Open Architecture opportunities. I'd say to you that the thing that I think may make it somewhat different is so 2021, I think, was, like I said, strong. I mean, I think it was consistent pipeline. I think 2022 will be the same. I don't know whether there is kind of the review-mageddon years or Halcyon years as people sort of refer to them, if only because some of the kind of activity that we do now isn't as, like in healthcare, we had a really sizable win in the middle of the year that would have never gotten the level of industry attention that some of the more old-line CPG brands get, right? And I think it's because there's a little rearview mirrorism to the business where people still think of things as they were. If a client's coming to you and saying to Acxiom and saying, "Can you redesign my entire unified data layer for my enterprise level?" and that's a multi-year contract, they don't really want to, they're not going to talk to the trades about it, and we're not going to, so I think we may see less of the really bonanza years, but I think at the moment, what I think is that we've got solid, healthy pipeline, and it's more so in the integrated Open Architecture type opportunities and definitely in media because that's where there's been the greatest uptake on data and tech. Okay. So one of the things in my sort of confusion as I look back to last year, and I think you raised your organic revenue guidance 3x, right? Yeah, and it was not normal. No, it was not normal. And it's also during the same tenure when you're sort of a new guy, right? And so I don't know whether to infer that it was just a very uncertain environment or if it's just you were sort of styled to be conservative. But what sort of color would you give us around the unusual sort of range of- I'd say that knock on wood, none of us get to go into and come out of a global pandemic again because the doubt will be around 100 years from now, right? So I think that it was more a function of that there was a cyclical piece to it, which was just the economy bounced back, I think, both sooner and stronger than anybody anticipated, right? I agree with that. Yeah. And we wanted, I think, is not to be conservative, but coming off of a 2020 that was so challenging and where we performed meaningfully better than peers. But I think we just wanted to be really transparent about what we were seeing when we saw it. But I think we will go back to a cadence in which we give you our view on the year, and then we track to that year. Now, that's not to say that when you ask a question about kind of our growth relative to peers, I think there is a component to our growth that has been not just about the cyclical. And so I think that still feels to me like it means there's opportunity for us, but you'll see that baked into our plan for the year when we walk you through it in February. Okay. Well, on the last couple of earnings calls, you highlighted media as the area of real strength, and can you just talk about what drove that, and are the sort of foundational elements in place for that to continue, or is that harkened back to the fact that the economy sort of came back a lot faster and sharper than everyone thought? Yeah, no. I mean, I would say that the performance in media has been there for us for, I'd say, four or five years, right? And so it goes back to the very first question you asked. Strategically, I think that very strategic, the place where now we're seeing it in more and more of the business, it was the first place where we were seeing massive data flows back and a lot of signal on which we could act, and clients who were keen to see what we could do to take all of that and increase the effectiveness of the work we do with them and give them a stronger foundation from which to be kind of self-reliant in the digital ecosystem. So I think for us, we've changed the model on media going back away now. And we walked away from what you said at the outset, which is being a broker trading or trading your own inventory, and decided that being agnostic to the outcomes, being focused on outcomes, and then going to clients with a more consultative model was where we wanted to go. And so one of our big agencies in that space was very early into that with their positioning: better science, better art, better outcomes for clients. That really resonated. And now Initiative has a whole way of taking kind of cultural velocity and then tying it into this data and tech stack. So for us, I think we see more and more opportunity there, right? And then at Reprise, which is also part of Mediab rands, we've been building a really strong intersection of e-commerce and media investment. So we see a lot of growth potential there. Dynamic content is another place where the media agencies are well positioned to do more. And then we've got this really strong kind of media independent in our space called Mediahub that grew up alongside MullenLowe. And as they've become more and more connected to the data and tech stack in the last couple of years, we've seen them perform really well. So to our mind, that's still a really dynamic part of the space. Okay. Okay. Now, Apple made some big changes regarding privacy during the course, really, of 2021, and I think it was a complexity of Apple had to follow suit. Is that something that is not relevant to your business? Is it incredibly relevant to your business? And if it is relevant, are you a net beneficiary of that? Very relevant. So I think top line, very relevant, and a significant opportunity, right? And so to my mind, think about, again, one of the key reasons why for us the Acxiom acquisition was so important. And instead of our, "Hey, we'll build it organically," the impetus to bring into the company a scaled asset with very deep first-party data management expertise and a lot of credibility in the space. There was a story actually in one of the industry papers today about clients being interested in data clean rooms, right? And so I think to my mind, clients are saying to us increasingly, "How do we get that 360 view of the individual consumer? How do we get more first-party data that is our own? And then how do we apply intelligence to that first-party data so that we can be making kind of the smartest decisions?" That isn't just about the ad tech world now. It's also about kind of which is paid, but it's about owned, and over time, it'll be about earned. It's about the martech side of things, right? I think if you handle data, you're held to a very high level of responsibility in terms of, "Are you complying from a regulatory point of view, and are you treating the data ethically, and are you respectful of privacy?" I think that there will be an onus on partners who bring expertise and who can help you navigate that as a company that's going to market. So any kind of, and then the kind of the cookies is funny because if you think about, for us, the trajectory was sort of evident a couple of years ago where you go their proxies to begin with, right? And they erode as a signal pretty quickly in terms of, "Do you really want to be making decisions on something that is at arm's length from the reality and starts to kind of become less and less relevant pretty quickly," right? So, I think we see this complicated world and this kind of higher standard of, "How are you going to live in a world where the nature of what you're solving for is more complex, and yet the rules are more demanding?" And so, I think that onboarding the first-party data in ways that are sort of respectful of privacy on the front end, organizing it and making it actionable, and then understanding the broad ecosystem, whether it's the publishers, whether it's the martech ecosystem. I think helping clients with build their proprietary ID graphs so that, as I said, at the outset, they can feel like they are more and more in control of their own destiny in this space. All of that, from where we sit with the skill sets that we have, is opportunity. Okay. I'm going to ask a question, and this is another one of these areas where I'm sort of gone out on a limb and might even be incorrect on this. But let me try and frame the debate that goes on on the buy side. So in 2021, we saw just massive amounts of growth in just aggregate advertising, right? And broad brush stroke, the non-digital stuff is going to flat. But man, the digital guys just printed huge numbers. And this narrative started as like, "We're in this new paradigm, right, of high and more advertising for dollars economic activity because people would say things like, 'It's the below the line dollars or moving above the line,' right? And advertising is the new rent." And I looked at it and said, "I think there's a far more prosaic explanation, which is personal consumption growth instead of being 3% or 4%, grew like 12% last year or 13%." And of course, marketers are going to spend more if consumers are spending more. So this is not a new paradigm. We're not in some new regime because the digitization of everything has been going on for two decades. And yes, we went through a little bit of a blip with COVID where it accelerated, but then it all sort of came back to trends and things like e-commerce or streaming. And so I'm sort of alone saying the ad intensity, right, the ad outlay for dollars economic activity is not really going to change. It's the same old, same old. Everybody else on the buy side is nowhere in this new paradigm. Does that make sense as a question of, "Do you have a view in terms of who might be right? Look, I like that you're a contrarian. I'm intrigued that as a guy who has the background you do, that you come into the space you're in with a consultant's mindset, you're sort of saying, "How about another way to try to do the analysis," right? I guess I'm not looking to cop out on you. I'm actually saying to you that I think the two can both be true. What I mean by that is, you look at this massive growth number for 2021, which is at least in part catch-up because 2020 was depressed. It is clearly an acceleration of a trend that we've been seeing for a long time where people should have been putting more budgets into digital channels. And so the interesting thing is it's sort of the disconnect for me is that that's like the revenue that goes to the media suppliers, right? It doesn't really speak to whether or not, and some of those other pieces about the new trend can still be true. So I guess what I would sort of say is I think it will probably find a level in that what you're pushing at is something that is worth our thinking about it, which is let's not get overly excited about it. And by the same token, for our business, whether it's business transformation work, whether it's data management work, data sales, the things we can do with these new products where we're licensing our IP or doing outcome-based models, and then the kind of work you do with an audience-first approach to consumer journey and consumer experience. I look at businesses that we've got in our portfolio that need further transformation, like the events and experiential business. So I think there is opportunity for greater intensity around marketing activity. I think there's opportunity for what we do. I think that if you just look at the expenditure on the media owner side or the media supplier side, you do get some distortion. So like I said, I think that both can be true. Okay. Okay. That's super helpful. Your EBITDA margins, right, have just been great, right, and continue to expand. And I wonder, without giving any sort of forward-looking commentary, at least in our seat, there's so many sort of puts and takes that have happened here where you get some T&E sort of tailwinds because people aren't traveling as much because of COVID. And then we are both back home, which is kind of a bummer. Yeah. That's right. Exactly. Exactly. We were elsewhere, but yeah. Yeah. And I think there's some structural things you guys have done with some of your rent expense, which is probably permanent, right? And so how would you just sort of frame on a backward-looking basis, is it fair to say that the margin expansion that's happened is durable? Or should investors sort of say, "Well, no, some of these things are indeed transitory"? Yeah. I mean, I think there are a lot of puts and takes, right? And so if you kind of go, "Okay, going into so in 2019, the last full year pre-COVID, that number is at 14. And if you look at our latest guidance for 2021, that number is 280 days north of that." And so what's in there? What's in there is the restructuring that we did as part of the fact that 2020 required that we look hard at the business, not that we don't always, but to our minds, it was a strategic restructuring. And there was $160 million of costs that we said come out and are permanent. So there's a step forward there. Then I think that there's a lot of growth. And that growth in 2021 has the benefit of you can't hire to fully keep up with that growth. So, benefit, temporary costs, labor costs go up. So little up, little down. T&E is very, very depressed. And when we are back at the point where we can, I think we'll learn lessons from, and we'll go to some permanent, flexible, hybrid model. And so when those costs come back in, I think it'll be a good thing because I think that it'll be when we're investing in travel that involves seeing clients, bringing people together to innovate or to do training or to do the kinds of things that help us continue to evolve the business model. And then when there is growth, we consistently have proven that, as Jerry Leshne, our IR, has said, there's a really strong algorithm that when there's growth, we can keep growing margins. So we've taken that meaningful step forward. We'll look at the ins and outs and then again in February tell you what we think the right number is for 2022. But we don't see that there is a cap here. We just see opportunity to keep building the margin sort of in that three-to-five-year horizon. Your first question. Okay. Here's my last question. So you guys said $500 million that came down in the fourth quarter of last year. I look at your debt metrics. They look really good. I don't think you have a leverage target, if I remember correctly. But it seems to me that 2022 could be the first year where we begin to augment the dividend with buybacks. Does that strike you as crazy? No. I would say to you that on capital returns, we've had a strong history. We have always said we want to be balanced in our approach. We've consistently increased the dividend over time, and we continued to do that through the pandemic, and the suspension of share repurchase was for a specific reason at a moment in time to deleverage after exit, right, so we've always said we look forward to resuming them and that we would kind of analyze the appropriate timing and that the fact that we've done, as you just said, which is that payback of the $500 million in October is an important milestone. So I would sort of shrink it down to, as we turn our focus to completing the planning process for 2022, which I mentioned to you on one of the earlier questions, is ongoing and will be completed. I'd say that returning to share repurchase is an important priority. And so it's a very timely question. Okay. Perfect. Well, Philippe, this has been fantastic. I'm sorry that I demoted you at the very beginning of the call as CFO, but. That's a great conversation. I have a super CFO partner, so that is very fortunate in that regard. Very good. Well, thank you so much for the time. We really appreciate it. All right. Good to see you. Thank you. Thank you. Be well. You too.