Theresa Conti: Industry Consolidation & Fiduciary Conflicts

[0:00] JD: Grass all day, every day as I'm cruising around Minnesota, I'm like a California guy. I'm like, oh, my God. The amount of time people spend in that state cutting grass is out of control. That weird. Awesome. No, it is awesome, but that's a lot of work, bro. [0:18] Chad: Especially if you got a zero turn like Chad. Jesus. [0:21] Justin: You should see how much fun Justin has mowing, mowing grass here. [0:25] Chad: Good. [0:26] Justin: You're about to get a much bigger yard to mow soon, Justin. [0:31] JD: Let it grow. [0:37] Theresa Conti: Let me up, let me up or you're gonna have a real bet. You're gonna have a really, really bad time, sir. [0:45] JD: This. [0:47] Theresa Conti: Let me up, let me up. You're gonna have a real bad time. [0:52] JD: Did Chad disappear right as I'm about to do my intro? Oh, I needed to go get a smear like that. We've been doing this for 20 years. There's a flow to this. You can't just disappear when the show starts. Hello and welcome to Retire Hogs. My name is jd. Good to see you find people. On this beautiful Thursday, I am joined by Sarah silent J, Justin McNeil, nerdy Chad, Chad Johansen, and of course, the Robinator, aka the Count of Comfort, aka the Lord of Cotton, Roblicious Roby, the Red Nosed Reindeer, the symbol formerly known as Robe Guy. You. You, many of you may know him as everybody's favorite Retire. Hi, Justin. Intro or guess? Let's get on with this. [2:03] Chad: Your voice was so loud, the mic didn't even pick up the last part of that. At least on my end. So anyways, joining us from the land of Hayden's Ferry in what is a very long overdue appearance, she's an icon of the industry, practically a stranger to none. When you look at the long list of her accomplishments, accomplishments, Jesus designations, the board she sits on, and the time given to charities for children and churches, one may start to question what the hell they've really been doing with their life. She was a founder of the Sunwest Pensions before selling it off for Las Ebitda Aldrin and now serves as the executive director for one of the secret societies, one of the chat Rogs and our beloved friend. Ladies and gents, please welcome Teresa Conti. [2:46] Theresa Conti: Hey, thank you guys for having me. I'm so excited to be here and I can't believe it's the first time. I mean, you've never invited me before. [2:54] JD: I feel that was a dig and I feel like it was appropriate. That's fine. Yes, long overdue. Should have been here before. Clearly a industry thought leader and stud. And so I know a lot of people are excited that you're here with us today, as are we, Brandon. Let's, let's get in some headlines. All right, everybody. The first one I want to get to is from the national association of Plan Advisors hyphen stock something something dot organization and it's titled Pantera Partners with Manulife John Hancock. By the way, they need to get that right. That's not the appropriate name. Pantera Partners with Manulife John Hancock Retirement. God, that rolls off the tongue so sweet. On held away 401k accounts. We had talked about Pantera on this show before. Theresa, I'm going to go straight to you. You self admitted that you weren't really aware of this company. But, but that doesn't matter because what I want to ask you is here we are many decades into our industry and Manulife John Hancock Retirement has decided to pull the trigger on outside accounts in a big way. So allowing I guess what participants and, but more specifically advisors to look at a participant within the, the, within the Manulife John Hancock retirement product and see, oh, they've got a what E trade account or you know, another individual retirement account over here or there. So do you think, Theresa, this is something necessary and something good, like a good move forward for. [4:56] Theresa Conti: Well, I admitted to you I didn't even know who Pantera was. I hadn't heard of them before. So I actually went and looked them up when I saw this headline. I don't know, like I've, you know, being an old timer been around for a long time in this business, right? We never wanted participants to have kind of their own account and their own thing going on. So is this now a good thing? Is this where we're going? Is this what we want to happen? I'm not sure. I'm not sure I, I like that idea because I have to wonder too, isn't it really the highly comms to have their own advisors? I mean what, what happens to the participants who don't have their own advisor? Do we still have a retirement plan advisor or do they go away? [5:40] JD: That's a good point, Chad. Most 401k participants probably don't have other accounts. The ones that do, to Teresa's point are probably the, the higher ups, you know, the bigger ups, the deep pockets and they probably have their own advisor. But okay, so, so talk about that for a second if you care to. But I'm more interested in like will this be sexy to financial advisors to do more business with manulife John Hancock retirement. Because I think that's what they want to have happen here, right? Is oh, let's send plans to them because they've got this cool, slick little tool that allows us to look at all these omnibus accounts. [6:27] Justin: Theresa, I know you want to comment. I'm watching you. I'll go afterwards. [6:31] Theresa Conti: And I can see your head going too, Chad, so. I know, but. Right. Don't you think though that if they do that. Well, I think that's what they're hoping. But I guess my question becomes is that what will really happen? Will the, you know, will those advisors really do more business with, with John Hancock just because of that? I'm doubtful that that's really going to happen. I don't know. That's what my thought is. [6:57] JD: Well then why would they even do this, Chad? Isn't that that's the only reason they want to do it? Is there another reason I'm missing? [7:03] Justin: Well, from. You're specifically asking from John Hancock's perspective and I think if I, if I try to think logically, what we're in right now is a phase of asset retention from these record keepers and they're looking and saying maybe do I have a better chance at keeping dollars either in the plan when the outside advisor can still get comped on those dollars now or creating a relationship with the outside advisor that when that participant leaves and has a rollover, they want to keep some of the proprietary funds, some of the John Hancock investments in the portfolio itself. I think that's Hancock's play. Their play here is not. We're going to get advisors to sell more K plans just because we're giving them access on an individual level now. JD that does scare me. If you recall when we chatted about this in the past, it was we chatted when 401 go got them on the platform and integrated. And when you, if you go back to that conversation, 401go's pitch at that point was we're going to allow advisors a deeper level within our book of business, a deeper level of asset management for their clients that they are already the K plan advisor on essentially double dipping in many ways. And that's my, that's my, my fear here. [8:19] JD: I'm going to, I'm going to take Samson's lead here. Teresa. Sometimes it's good to read. The chat bar can drive the direction of this show and Sampson says I'll forget this exists as soon as we move on. [8:33] Theresa Conti: So I'm going to actually agree with that. I was reading it And I was laughing at that because I absolutely agree with that because we've all seen the fads come and go. Like this comes out, and everybody. Everybody thinks it's the new shiny thing and nothing ever really happens with it. [8:48] JD: Okay? So can I say it? Wayne Park. Wayne Park. Come on, Wayne. You're over two now. Shitty name change. And apparently this sucks too. So we got to step it up, Wayne. Step it up. What? [9:01] Chad: Chad, you're not going to a conference with them next week, are you? [9:05] Justin: I am not. I will not be sitting with Wayne and don't need [9:10] JD: respond. It's not a fun episode of Retireholics unless we get calls from the record keepers on Friday morning. Let's go to the next one. The next one is there's this thing called the Wheel of Ice, and we spin it. Yes, Katie. Yes. [9:27] Justin: Thanks, Katie. [9:28] Mark: Wow. Cool, Katie. [9:33] Justin: Oh, a Pink one tonight, J.D. oh, look at how heavy Mark it is. [9:44] JD: I feel like I asked Brandon to bring it to be Mark, and I feel like Brandon's going against me and he's making it look like. But it's never going to be Mark again. It's never. [9:55] Mark: Dude, I. I heart you, buddy. [9:59] JD: Well, well, Justin drinks that Smirnoff Ice. Let's go to our. Our next article. This comes from Freddie B. I'll drink@wealthmanagement.com Title Guideline for that Purchased by Gusto Reveals Titanic shift in the 400k industry. I. This article came as a shock to me because without him talking to me, he decided to throw my name into this mix. And I was curious about that. [10:32] Mark: I was wondering, like, did. Was it like this little thing where he called you to get you? Wow. [10:38] JD: Nope. Just. [10:38] Chad: He seems to do it to all the record keepers, so he just thought it was fair game. [10:43] Mark: What we're saying is anything said on the show can just end up in an article. That's. [10:49] JD: Yeah, yeah, we're journalists, bro. That happens. I. I did a text. [10:56] Mark: JD I did get a text from somebody who said, wow, JD Got quoted in an article, and my response back was, yeah, man, when you got a platform and you say stuff, people notice. And then he said, really? [11:11] JD: He likes to poke the bear. And that's gotten him in trouble a lot. But I think it's what's great about him is he's willing to just kind of roll the dice and go for stuff. So, yeah, he was kind of asking his readers did they agree with my concept that this acquisition was a failure for guidelines. Um, so for anyone who watched, we did a quick and we're going to do more of these. We did a quick kind of breaking news, five minute segment on this, and so we're going to try to do more of that. When something's big news, we'll try to pop on real quick and throw it out on LinkedIn. So we had a small discussion. I'd like to expand on that discussion today with you guys. So Guideline sold to Gusto for an undisclosed amount. And just to give everyone some of the stats, which are in this article, Guideline has had about 300, just south of $350 million invested in their company over the past nine years. Somewhat recently that we found that they're doing about 150 million in annual revenue. And Kevin, who the founder of Guideline and a past guest on this show within the last year and a half or two years, mentioned that they were profitable for the first time since they started nine years ago. And now here's the big news. Sold to Gusto. Oh, wait, I like Sampson's ad there, too. A ton of their business. I don't know if we know 90%, but a lot of it, big chunk was driven from Gusto and that relationship. Oh, and now they've got about 60,000 plans. I believe these are smaller plans, but yeah, that was. You're right, Chad. That was successful. Okay, why did I say it was a failure? And then we can get any of your thoughts, especially if you disagree with me. I said it was a failure because I'm under the impression that when you're venture capital or private equity and you invest money, two things I know to be true. One, you're looking for a massive return on your money. You know you want to. Even for me to say 10 exit would be small. Like, they want to go far beyond that. They want a 20 exit, 50 exit. The other thing I know to be true is that they typically want their money back somewhere in this, like, six to ten year period. So when you get to year six, seven, eight, nine, ten, they start knocking on the door, you know, sending those emails, making those phone calls about, hey, what's the status? Are we gonna. What kind of return are we gonna get on our money? So I believe that this was a gun tooth guidelines head moment of like, look, you're not gonna get us back the money we want to get, but if you can do a deal with Gusto because they're in the mix here and least get us the money we invested and maybe a little something, something on top of that, then it could kind of save face for a Lot of people involved. I consider that to be a big flop, but because that is not the original strategy they had. So that's why I call it a failure. Do I think they sold for more than they owe? I do. I don't think they sold for a billion dollars, though. I think it's far less than that. I think it's probably half that or maybe somewhere between 500 and 600,000. And by the way, maybe I look like a long haired dirty surfer to you, but I know some people, okay, everybody. I know some people. They write me, direct messages. I learned some. I'm a journalist. Okay, so thoughts? Am I crazy? Because a lot of people reading Freddie B's article I'll drink, think I am. [14:57] Mark: What are you drinking for? [15:00] Justin: He's saying Fred Barnstein, but he's shortening it. So he's drinking for it. [15:05] Chad: Doesn't care. [15:06] JD: That's an initialism. [15:07] Chad: I'm not ringing you. [15:08] Mark: No, it's not. [15:10] Justin: J.D. one of the issues I have with the way Fred positions the article is that he's positioning it whether or not it was a success for Gusto. [15:22] JD: Yeah. [15:23] Justin: And then at the end saying, is JD Right or am I right? We're not debating whether or not this was a successful move for Gusto. I think it most certainly was. [15:31] Mark: Fully agree. [15:32] Justin: We're debating whether the push into the K industry by guidelines, bringing on 60,000 plans, which is a massive, a massive hand clapping there in terms of the Runway that they did that on, but at teeny tiny minimal margins with massive investment into the company, means that they were still, to his point in that article, talking about Veswell continuing to take on money. They were still shedding cash. They hadn't gotten to that point where they were going to show this is a long term success. And so to your, to your comment, I think they looked and said there's no time better than now, we're not going to be able to turn this ship. And so now let's create a little bit of profit for our investors. [16:13] JD: Teresa? [16:14] Theresa Conti: Yeah, well, and I agree with Chad, right? Gusto, like that was a good move for them because they were the ones feeding guidelines. So like, let's just start there. Right? So that's definitely true. I have to wonder though, and I'm watching the chat, you know, guideline was not that good. So how many of those plans are we going to have to fix? Yes, they. [16:35] Justin: All of them. [16:36] Theresa Conti: Right? All of them. Right. They definitely brought new plans into the marketplace, which is great. But there's a lot. And the two big payroll companies out there that also have four 1k divisions haven't been too successful like in, you know, I mean, they have a lot of plans, but do they keep them? I mean, the, the statistic I've always seen is they lose as many plans as they bring on each year. So you know what, what's the overall success of that? [17:04] JD: You know, that's an interesting side. That's an interesting side question. I don't know about the. Lose as many as they bring on, but do, do we really feel like automatic data processing and paychecks don't run successful 401k business? Because you can talk all about the quality of their work all you want, but they, they're number one and two every year in new production. And I got to imagine that they're making profits and doing pretty well over there. Am I being too kind to them? [17:37] Theresa Conti: No, I don't think you're wrong about that. But I have to wonder if they're doing what's really right for the plan sponsors that are. [17:44] JD: Yeah, different. Different story. [17:46] Theresa Conti: That's a different conversation for sure. I'm sure you're right. They bring in the most plans and they're profitable, I'm pretty sure. But is that what's really best? [17:55] Justin: Let's, let's, let's. I mean, we don't need to go down this path. But I would argue with both of you on that. I think that this is a loss leader for those two payroll companies you're referencing. They're making their margins on other lines of business. Their profitability line on the K side is a build expense and a float, like float revenue that they're getting from holding onto deferrals before they deposit. Right. They don't have proprietary investments. Very few of their plans have an asset based fee. Some, but not a whole lot depending on what time period you engage with them. So most of what they're going to get in revenue is going to come from other lines of business. Which is why again, I think that this is a wise move from Gusto's perspective, saying we got a shit ton of people, why are we shedding a little bit of revenue on the 401k side? We don't want to compete. And Fred made a really good point. We're not necessarily looking to just compete with Paylocity and QuickBooks, these payroll companies. We want to be a full benefit. We want to compete with automatic data processing capacity. [18:56] JD: To Teresa's earlier point, you were saying, well, is it this guideline had not so great like Plans or a business model as an administrator and a record keeper. But now that Gusto purchases them, Gusto is just another little mini auto freaking. What do they call it? I got it earlier. Automatic data processing Paychecks competitor now looking to grow and they'll follow that same little model. So I think Chad probably hit the nail on the head with a lot of you. [19:27] Chad: They have better tech though to guideline. [19:30] JD: Yeah, maybe. [19:30] Chad: I mean think about that implementation process. That is sexy. It's attractive to business owners. Not a lot of involvement on their end. Right. [19:39] Justin: Well, I'm sorry payroll. [19:41] JD: So long as you say you're built on a tech stack and not one of the legacy providers, then that just means you're better. You have to be. [19:49] Justin: Which is just like with, with automatic data processing and paychecks, you have a very captive audience. They're already using you, especially in guidelines. Not only are they already using you for payroll, they believe in what you're bringing to the table, which is a disruptor tech based online low cost. So when you partner with a pay with a 401k provider that says the same things, it's a very easy sell for them. J.D. before you move on though, I have to say Fred's article, and I'm going to quote it. He says that there are three ways legacy record keepers thrive. He's even survive. [20:27] JD: He's obsessed with convergence, but go on. [20:29] Justin: Yeah, Scale, distribution and wealth services. Right. [20:33] JD: Is that really happening? [20:36] Justin: Let me transition that and let me put a different word in that quote and see if you guys have a different feeling to what I say. He says this is the way legacy record keepers are thriving. If that's the way legacy record keepers are thriving, how are fintech record keepers thriving? If I were to say there are three ways fintech record keepers are thriving or even surviving scale, distribution and wealth services. Would you agree? [21:03] JD: Sorry, I'm reading Nate Moody's thing. [21:05] Justin: Yeah, Nate wrote a novel, but I'll answer for you. I don't think so. Right. They're not. They're getting scale distribution. Yes, but their margins are so fricking tiny and there's no access to the growth in assets that they've. They've set a pattern structurally to where the upside potential is very minimal. Unless they get into wealth services or unless they get into another line of business that they can capitalize on all those relationships. Which is where I see guideline 401 go potentially veswell. Although their model is very different, I see them struggling in the future in comparison to the legacy record Keepers. [21:47] JD: Okay. Okay. So your statement ties to Nate Moody's chat. [21:54] Justin: I didn't read what Nate wrote. [21:55] JD: And we have talked about this before and Teresa and I talked about this briefly before this show. You're just saying that at a certain point because let's be honest, you were talking about ADP and paychecks not being very profitable, that they, it's more a [22:11] Justin: loss leader in the 401k side of things. [22:15] JD: Yeah, I think the same is true of, I think guideline proved that out with their numbers. You know, 60,000 plans and 150 million in revenue. Like that's not good. If you do the math on that to be the all in record keeper, most legacy record keepers would turn that away. They wouldn't even want that business. But if, if you're saying that because of their, their tech stack so dope that they can run it at a cheaper price, which is what they told us all along, I don't think that's actually been proven to be true. They're still struggling to get any kind of real profits. And so to Chad's point, and we've talked about this before, will they pull the trigger on trying to monetize the participant in some way or sell more services to those 60,000 plans? Because I believe. Yeah, go ahead. [23:07] Justin: What kind of for profit business are you if you don't find a way to become profitable? [23:13] JD: Well, they were nine years in and they never made that move. We had Kevin on and he did say that he did not rule that out. Right. He said something like, something like that could be in the works, but we haven't seen it from human interest, we haven't seen it from Guideline and they've been around for a little while. So I hate to keep saying that that's their move when I just see no evidence of it yet. So. [23:39] Justin: But do you see evidence of profitability yet either? I think this was stable company. [23:44] JD: I think the push was, this was the pitch to the venture capital was we think in five to six years time we could do something in the 401k space that took legacy providers like Fidelity, Empower and Voya three decades and they kind of did it. And so I think that if as a venture capital person who's got money to burn, if I can get a new Silicon Valley disruptor to get their foot into financial services, into Wall street in some kind of significant way, because let's be honest, all those Wall street names, those are old school companies that have been around for 100 plus years and so they actually did kind of succeed in that. But now I'm coming full circle to the question. Not able to answer it is, but they're not profitable. So I don't know if that's a win or not. You know, like, it's kind of not. [24:37] Justin: It's, it's. And we can, we can table it with this. But if, if I'm looking and I have a bunch of money to invest or I'm trying to create, create profitability for my own venture capital group and I look at a, an opportunity that we're seeing here, I say, what is the upside? Because if you're charging $750 and $14 per participant, like, there's no upside there. You're going to have to dominate 65% of the available 401k plans to create margin. So if I'm giving you money, I need to see that there's upside to create a profitable business that's going to make us money. They had to have pitched something that showed dollars in the pocket. [25:18] JD: I know it's not your style, Teresa. Just interrupt him or me. [25:21] Justin: Yeah, you can at any point. [25:25] Theresa Conti: Well, you know, like from Gusto's standpoint. Right. Like, like it's just extra revenue because they're making probably a ton of revenue on the payroll stuff. Like if you. [25:34] JD: Especially if they got a good deal. Right, Especially if they got a good deal on it. [25:38] Theresa Conti: Correct, correct. So that's where it's going to show and that's where it totally makes sense for Gusto for sure. I don't think any of us are arguing about that. [25:48] Justin: What if, what if Guideline bought Gusto? How would that change our thoughts? What would you call that a success then? JD If Guideline came back and like it. We got, we got seed money. We just bought Gusto. [26:02] JD: If the. That's hard to imagine that because Gusto's worth like $9 billion. [26:07] Justin: I know, but we would call that a success. I would call that a success for Guideline. I would. [26:13] JD: Guideline bought a very well known payroll provider that was doing pretty well. And on the up. Yeah. You'd be like, wow, that's a strategic move for sure. I would be like, pretty impressive. So, Theresa, let me ask you before we move on and Katie, boy, you're, you're not here enough to make comments about how long headlines go. That's what we do these days. [26:36] Mark: It's the entire show. [26:38] JD: It's what we do. [26:39] Justin: You just talk headlines. [26:41] JD: You're just showing proof that you're never here enough. Katie Boyer, get your Shit together and spend more time with us. I am a peacock. [26:49] Justin: You gotta let me fly. [26:55] JD: Let me ask you this last question, Teresa. When Byline and Human Interest first came out, did you think they were going to be a huge success or not? [27:05] Theresa Conti: No, because I thought they were going to be similar to, you know, the 401 go and some of those others that have already went by the wayside, you know, and back in the day, that article talked about, you know, expert plan and some of those that we've all known about. Right. Like. [27:21] JD: Yeah. In the Internet. Boom. [27:23] Theresa Conti: Right. I never really thought that they would really be around for that long. At least that's my thought. [27:28] JD: Oh, that. I forgot about that. Good job. Bill shores. They were Captain 401. Huh? [27:36] Justin: I just typed it in there. Captain the online 401k. Yeah. One of them converted in. I didn't know which one it was. [27:42] JD: No, it was human interest. But by the way, I just want to be clear. 401 go is still alive and thriving. I think they're. [27:50] Justin: They're doing fairly well. [27:51] JD: Pretty good. And. And ubiquity is still alive and thriving. And we've had. [27:57] Justin: Thanks to principal infusing them with opportunity. [27:59] Theresa Conti: Yes. [28:00] Justin: Good job. Katie did it before. Katie was. [28:02] Mark: Dumb question. Dumb question, though now that guidelines been acquired, are they still gonna go by guys, is Gusto going to offer guideline or do you think Gusto's gonna like, rebrand or just make it its own thing? [28:17] JD: Mark's. Mark's married to. To a Hispanic woman, so he calls it Gusto. Gusto es muy bien. [28:29] Mark: First off, why does that matter who I married? [28:36] JD: He's influencing you. First did. [28:39] Mark: I was like. That didn't sound right. Coming. [28:43] JD: It was a great question, though. I'm assuming, Brandon, can we get a. [28:49] Chad: On. [28:49] JD: On chat? Yeah, like. [28:51] Mark: Nate, stop. Dude, stop. [28:54] JD: I'm. I'm assuming it's gonna eventually be Gusto all in, you know, but that's. I have no. I have no evidence to back that. I like the. I like the chat bar. I like the chat bar. Yeah. So look, did we confirm it? It was Captain 401. It wasn't even Captain 401K. It was just Captain 401, I believe. Like, there was that. That was almost as stupid as Manulife John Hancock retirement. Almost, but not quite. You still get the trophy. Wayne park, you still get the trophy. Okay, less. Let's play a game, shall we? It's the. I'm a very forward thinker, Teresa and I. Sometimes I come up with great ideas and one Day I came up with the best game on the planet. It's called the no for dope game. Yeah, Chad, Aiden's got some good thoughts in that chat. [30:07] Justin: I didn't, I did not even think about that. I wish we'd covered that. [30:11] JD: Sorry. [30:11] Justin: Go ahead. [30:12] JD: Yeah, Aiden's got some good thoughts in there. Okay, Teresa, the no game looks like this. I'm gonna give you like a pop culture type of thing and I'm gonna ask you if you think it's dope or. Nope. You know, are you thumbs up or thumbs down on it? And then I want you to tell me why you feel that way. We're always going to start with you because that was my genius idea. Let's start with a guest. You know, let's start with a guest. Are you Nope. Or dope on anklets for men. Little anklet. It could be, could be string, could be silver, gold. An anklet on a man. [30:51] Theresa Conti: I'm a nope on that now. [30:53] JD: Why, why is that not a good look? [30:56] Theresa Conti: I mean, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know that I like them on women, honestly. So I think that's my whole, my whole note. [31:03] JD: Great point, great point. Oh, is that. I did not, I did not notice that Devin Windell, our Southern California sales consultant, is in the chat bar tonight. Interesting. Justin, how do you feel about anklets for men? [31:20] Chad: Can I plead the fifth? [31:23] Justin: Wait, are you wearing in or is Devin. Devin is. [31:28] Chad: And I've always wondered and I've always wanted to ask, like, is that a. Is it a memento to a loved one who passed or something? [31:34] Justin: Why do you wear that? [31:36] JD: It's a family member of his passed away and he wears it in remembrance. No, I don't know. I played golf with him. [31:41] Chad: One is for suicide awareness, big guy. Okay, well, other is for troops. [31:49] JD: I'm just. [31:49] Chad: On your wrist. [31:51] Mark: Yeah, Wear it on your wrist, dude. [31:53] JD: I would, I would, I would put people, men who wear anklets on suicide awareness if I was smart. Roby, how do you feel about men wearing anklets? Because Devin was rocking one on the golf course the other day. [32:06] Mark: Yeah, I know. I now, I. Now you said like, yeah, I've seen him wear that. And I, I, it's not for me. I would never do it. [32:13] JD: I would. [32:13] Mark: Do you know what? Every. [32:14] Justin: Just do you. [32:15] Mark: I don't care. I'm not gonna wear one, but if you like it, go for it. [32:19] Chad: Very PC response. We'll see how you feel on Monday. [32:22] JD: Sales ring Justin up. Okay, we'll move on to the next one. Teresa. This actually happened in my house, and it wasn't me. I was sitting on the couch and I watched this go down. Washing down your prescription meds with alcohol. So you got some meds to take and you're going to swig it down with an alcohol of your choice? [32:51] Theresa Conti: I don't usually think that's the best. I think that's a note because I think probably if you read the bottle, it would tell you not to do that. I guess it depends what it is, but I think most would tell you no. [33:01] Chad: Has anyone ever had a negative reaction from that? [33:06] JD: I'm sure there. Well, there are definitely Mads, to Teresa's point, that tell you not to drink while you have them. This was my wife taking some of her cancer meds to get better, and I watched her pull out, like, a bottle of wine out of the fridge and to chug it down. And I was. And it's not as though she was drinking while taking her meds. She literally just reached for something to drink, and apparently instead of water, she thought she'd go to the white wine right there. [33:36] Justin: Tracy Carson. [33:37] Theresa Conti: I'm pretty responsible. So. So, you know, I mean, I think that comes into play for sure. [33:42] Justin: So are we. Theresa. Clearly. [33:44] JD: Justin, if. [33:45] Theresa Conti: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. [33:46] JD: If you were hanging out, you know, me and you in a hotel room, and I had to take my meds and I slugged them down with a beer, how would you feel about me? [33:56] Chad: Gangster. Let's do it. Let's have a fun night. [33:58] JD: You're in. Robey. Have you ever done this? [34:02] Mark: Yeah, usually, like, when you wake up hungover, you need to take a few Advil. Oh, you. [34:08] JD: Yeah. [34:08] Mark: You grabbed four Advil and you drink [34:10] Chad: a beer with them. [34:11] Justin: So. [34:11] Mark: Yeah. I mean, first off, here's my thought, my only thought. And don't take this wrong way. In order to take the pills, you have to have some sort of liquid. So whatever you got is fine. [34:22] JD: That's the. That'll be the next no for dope. Raw dogging your meds. That's. You just. Just swallow them, suck them down. I. I may have done this one before, but I would like to talk about Teresa. No, Bert, dope on. It's not. Not cilantro. Because I think I've done cilantro, and I'm. I'm very dope on cilantro, but I have now ran into three people in my life that hate cilantro and tell me that it tastes like soap. And apparently this is a thing. So no, for dope. People who don't like cilantro. [35:04] Theresa Conti: So I love cilantro too. So I think it's dope. But I have heard, and I think it's scientific that, like, to some people, it does taste like soap. I know people do that too. It's so odd. I love it. But, you know, that's. But I think it teaches out. [35:21] JD: Aiden says. Yep. Genetic thing 1 in the chat bar that it tastes like soap, because that just trips me out. I will put that shit on my eggs. My burrito. Just think it's phenomenal. Justin, do you know anyone in your life that is. Is apparently just taste allergic to cilantro? [35:42] Chad: No, just the opposite. My dad piles that on whatever he can. [35:47] JD: Roby your Hispanic wife. No, no. [35:50] Mark: Hates. Hates cilantro. She really does. She absolutely hates it. [35:55] JD: He hates it. Does she say it tastes like soap? [35:58] Mark: I don't feel like she's ever said that. I think it's just like. I don't know. I can go ask her. I'm not sure. [36:05] JD: Ask her and say te gusto. I don't know why I feel like [36:13] Justin: you have to say gusto with your hands like it's Italian gusto. [36:17] JD: But cilantro, mi hermosa. Okay. [36:21] Mark: With the Disney movie, the Pixar movies, is it gusto? That's right. [36:27] JD: Okay, everyone, put on your best tinfoil hat. We got an email from Nate Moody recently, one of my favorite chat bar peeps. And he brought to our attention this company that had crossed my radar before called Madison Dearborn. And he said, quote, sorry, Nate, your. Your emails are not private to us, to everyone. We will share it with the world. So Madison Dearborn, a private equity firm, now owns one, a four 1K advisory firm in fiduciant number two, a 401K practice management firm in retirement plan advisory group, and three, a 401K focused collective investment trust provider. In great gray, we had the great gray guy, Rob Barnett, I believe is his name on the show. I thought he was phenomenal. Very kind of deadpan, but. But very smart guy. And I also believe, in addition to that, Moody, am I wrong? But do they also. Kind of. In that whole bundle, do they get the flex Path funds as well? Someone checked that for me. Yes. Mark, I've got. [37:45] Mark: I've got a suggestion for our show. [37:49] JD: Okay. [37:49] Mark: You know how. And I'm gonna. I'm gonna say it, that it so [37:53] JD: used to be an acro sin. [37:55] Justin: I'm calling it right now. [37:58] JD: Yeah. Everyone who. Everyone who agrees with that say, I cannot Happen. [38:02] Justin: Hi. [38:03] JD: Hi. [38:04] Mark: All right, I'll have a drink for the other one last time. So the other one's now Done. [38:10] JD: Okay. [38:10] Chad: Wow. [38:12] JD: Teresa, are you. Have you. Are you aware of, or were you aware of before the show of Madison Dearborn, this private equity firm? And then on a general kind of high level scale, how do you feel about this mysterious large firm with a lot of money purchasing these very successful firms in our industry? [38:35] Theresa Conti: Well, so, no, I did not know who they were. So again, that's something you have to go look at. It's interesting to me that they are buying different types of firms, all in the industry. So I guess the question is usually when these, you know, PE type firms or whatever you want to call them, buy, you know, these. They usually buy them to sell them. Are this is going to be so big? This is already a monster. Are they just. Aon's business was $2.7 billion. Right. So what's going to. What's going to ultimately happen to them? I mean, maybe they're going to. Maybe they're going to end up buying, you know, the whole guideline gusto thing and have their own. Their own whole thing. [39:23] JD: Okay, let's. Let's. Let's make sure we get to Nate's. If I refer to his first name, is that still. [39:32] Mark: That's fine. [39:33] Justin: Okay. [39:34] Mark: I was going to say we have to call the rules. [39:35] JD: Just for right now. [39:36] Mark: It's just his last name. [39:37] JD: All right. [39:37] Chad: For right now. [39:38] JD: Okay. Now I'm going to refer to him as the guy with a hot sister. If the. We'll get to the guy with a hot sisters chat about these kind of sister. [39:48] Chad: Mr. [39:49] JD: Potential. Nice. This potential conflict. But Teresa brought up a good point. We had slotted this conversation earlier, before this news hit of Aon selling back National Financial Partners, the wealth side, to Madison Dearborn for. What was that, like, almost $3 billion. That just happened, like, yesterday. So here's a whole nother move, by the way. I think they also own nuveen, which is like. That's a fund. [40:20] Chad: I didn't see that. [40:21] JD: Yeah. And so. And great Gray, by the way, just in itself is a great gray bot Retirement plan Advisor group. Right? And then obviously now Madison owns all of them. But. But those guys are, you know, collective investment trusts are taking over in a big way and getting major market share. And there's just a lot of interesting things happening in that space with that company. Things that are probably beyond my pay grade. What I would like us to focus on, though, is the. Is the guy with the Hot Sister's comment about. Is this conflict of interest. If, if I want to be in the hamburger business and I buy a bunch of retail hamburger locations and I buy a, those are different. A cow farm that makes the meat and I buy a, I don't know, distribution truck company. Tell me how that's different. [41:21] Justin: That's different. Your job at that point is not to, to make recommendations to the people who are choosing to buy your hamburgers. Okay, If I'm a doctor and my job is to relieve pain and I go buy a company that installs a little mechanical device in your spine to tell your brain you're not in pain, and now I have a conflicted interest to recommend my own product versus therapy to get through and loosen your spinal cord. That to me is a conflict. That is a, a similar example now. So I think your example is off there. [41:55] JD: Now we do know, though, in a very similar way and very related to this. Vince Giovanni Giovanno Giovanna of Retirement Plan Advisor Group and Flex Path was sued by the Boogeyman Schlichter and prevailed in that the. Because the Flex Path funds were found to be run prudently. This is in the court's opinion, like, you couldn't really, you couldn't really point out anything that was being run improperly from these funds. If you compare them to their peers, they, they considered this not to be in a legal act or whatever. Don't quote me on my legal terms. But he got away with it. He didn't go down for it. So clearly Madison Dearborn knows that this is not a illegal act. They're allowed to do this. Chad's just saying. Yeah, but from a fiduciary perspective, huge conflict of interest. Is he right, Teresa? [42:55] Theresa Conti: Well, I mean, I guess it depends how they, how they function, right. If they continue to run each of the companies they buy individually, it could be viewed that it's not a conflict. But if they really try to pull everybody together with all of the things they're buying, that, I mean, that's where it could come up in my mind. [43:16] JD: But that's exactly what the Retirement Plan Advisor Group Advisors did all across the country was they pitched the Flex Path funds and got a huge number of assets in there. So, so they. And the court said that it's. I'm not saying just because the court said it's okay, that it's okay, but. [43:33] Justin: Yeah, but the same thing exists in our daily life, right? As third party administrators, you're using record keepers that have proprietary products. And while the Record keepers are not making the recommendations. The advisors are in that scenario, they are still being compensated for pushing their own solutions. Now we've been asked this on this show a million times, do we feel conflicted when record keepers are offering their own products? Will we use their stable value? Will we use their fixed account? Will we use their target dates? And the answer has always been the same for me. If they're prudent, meeting requirements, passing screening. Yeah. Why the fuck wouldn't I help a client get a discount on their asset based charge if the proprietary products are meeting all those requirements? So that's why RPAG got around it, right? J.D. their funds were doing well, their funds had proper screening, their funds were diversified. All of those things were true. I think what Nate's worried on is that we're not talking about a diversified portfolio. We're talking about individual investments and perhaps confliction. There is, and I don't know if this holds true at the advisor level, Nate, I think that they're going to be more willing to do what's right for their client. I think where we are conflicted, as if top down, is these parent companies are pushing and saying this is what you have to do. You no longer get the flexibility. [44:59] JD: I have to think that this is exactly what they're trying to do. So everything we think is kind of skates towards being potentially wrong. It has to be their game plan. That is why you purchase all these different entities is because you're trying to get them to kind of flow business to each other and create efficiencies and create profits. [45:19] Theresa Conti: Because otherwise why would they do it? I think you're, I think you're right on. Why would they buy all these? I mean, and why would they. And why do they want this huge footprint in this entire industry if it weren't to do some of that? [45:31] JD: Yeah, here we go again, Here we go again. Little lowly third party administrators talking about these big shots. Can we all close our eyes for a moment and just imagine the fancy pants people at, at Madison Dearborn. I mean, my God, the conference room, they must have in there the fancy cufflinks they're wearing. And they go in and talk about these big deals and we're just like little pawns on the chessboard, man. Like we're nothing. We're not even on the chessboard. These guys are ballers. Guys, girls, whatever. They are ballers. [46:09] Justin: Can I try to connect our two categories here, J.D. theresa, when you were owning Sunwest Pension and figuring out what's next for you Guys, did you ever look at acquiring or building your own payroll solution? [46:24] Theresa Conti: No, I never did. But, you know, did I think about it at one point, like in the back of my mind, but never went forward with it because, yeah, you could see how that could be. You could tie the client in with everything. And there's others out there who clearly did it. I mean, and we know probably who some of those are. So. Yeah. [46:44] JD: Have they succeeded? Did. Did they succeed? [46:49] Theresa Conti: I guess that depends who you ask. [46:51] JD: Yeah. [46:51] Justin: And it depends on the level of, of that you're trying to quantify there. [46:56] Theresa Conti: Yeah, they probably think they did. Do we think they're. They were really successful? I don't know. [47:01] JD: Not in any massive way. Right? [47:02] Justin: Like, not in any massive way. Yeah, no, but it's the same concept, right? It's a. It's a third party administrator, much smaller role, but saying, how can I create profitability? A captive audience. Sell another product. I'm gonna go out and build or buy a. A payroll firm and push it that way. [47:19] Theresa Conti: Services. I'll do your gpa. [47:22] JD: Ring her up. Is that her second? [47:27] Mark: Yeah. [47:28] JD: Teresa, do you got booze there? Are you drinking for these penalies? [47:31] Theresa Conti: Yes. [47:32] JD: You just. You just got rung up. [47:35] Theresa Conti: All right. [47:37] JD: Right. As Samson was saying, there's not enough. We're just getting too good at this. Samson, we're just getting too good at this. I think it gets worse if you get more drunk. I'll work on that. Let's. Let's move on. Even though I could. I could do a four hour special on. On Madison Dearborn, man. Like, I. I want to go deeper there, but let's. Let's move on. We've got Teresa here. These. What did you call them in your intro, Justin? This. These secret society. [48:07] Chad: Secret societies, yes. [48:08] JD: Yes. There's a new one with a really fancy name. You'll have to tell me what it is, Teresa, but I know the Cilantro Group. [48:21] Theresa Conti: Oh, yeah, we'll change her name. That'd be great. [48:24] Mark: No, Teresa's stealing jokes. Justin. [48:26] JD: Teresa's the executive director. Is that right? Is that the title at the Serato Group? There's another one that's out that came out, I feel like fairly recently a little. Is it? I don't. And I don't want to get you in trouble. We don't have to talk about your competitors because I think there's like a little spin off there or something from someone in your group. Yes, but they just had a really interesting name, but that's all. Someone find it for me and let Me know what that is but I'm perplexed. So we've talked about this before. I believe we had Jordan on Jordan Cross of Cross plans who I love. Great guy. [49:00] Theresa Conti: And Shannon and Amanda have been on which are also. [49:03] JD: Okay. Yeah, sure. Shannon are part of this. So I just want to start again at square. At square one because as a third party administrator and for any everyone listening in the. This is a group of third party administrators. I'll let you, you're the executive director, tell everyone like what the Serato Group is first. [49:23] Theresa Conti: So the Serato Group is a group of independent third party administrators that have formed together. We're actually a trade association. A true 501c6 trade association. Yep. [49:35] JD: And the purpose is to share best practices, learn from each other which and now I, I tend to be an on this show so I apologize up front but I'm kind of like don't we all know how to run a third party administration firm? I'm sure you do, Teresa. I'm pretty damn sure I do. Do I need to hear from my peers to run it Better call me cocky. Call me an. I'm not so certain I need need to. But there's got to be more to it than that. So are you reaching? Go ahead, speak to that. [50:06] Theresa Conti: Yeah. No. So there's a couple things, right? It's, it's, it's true, right. We all still, they all still run their own independent TPA firms and do what they're going to do. But let's say, you know, we have this coming up thing coming up, Right. The security 2.0. Right. We're going to have to do all the restatements. How are you going to handle them? What are you going to do for it? And they can at least discuss it and you know, talk to what the others are going to do to kind of give them some best practices, kind [50:37] JD: of share best practice, rough catch up mandates. How do you want to deal with [50:42] Theresa Conti: that kind of right. Those kind of like that kind of mentality. [50:48] JD: Okay. God, I'm such an asshole. I feel like I can make that decision on my own. I don't really need someone to teach me how to do that. [50:54] Theresa Conti: Your decision to make and our document [50:57] Justin: providers and our attorneys and like they're all weighing in on those. [51:01] JD: Okay. But let's go further. You also I believe on your website have. Good point, Chad. Thanks for backing me there. You have. [51:08] Justin: I'm gonna disagree with you on the next point, but go ahead. [51:11] JD: You have. I know where you, I know where you think this Works and we'll get to that. But you got all these vendor kind of partners on the website. Is there a move here to say, like, hey, we're, we're 18 strong with, you know, this many plans and this many assets, and so we want special services, special pricing. No, you don't. You can't get special pricing. [51:35] Theresa Conti: Like, well, I don't think they'd be willing to give us a special pricing in that. And that's not really what we're looking for. I think what we're looking for is the recognition of being a national presence when we roll ourselves together. Right. So, you know, meaning they're gonna, they're [51:52] JD: gonna answer your call quicker than they're gonna answer mine. [51:56] Theresa Conti: I don't know about that either. I don't know that they necessarily are. But when somebody comes out with something that shows that bundled is cheaper than unbundled and we can go to them and say, why did you come out with this? This hurts the whole TPA industry. So I also don't view Serato Group as only helping the people who are members. I think part of our role is to help the whole industry if we can. [52:23] JD: God bless you for that. We love that. Okay. I'm still struggling, though. Teresa, come on. She just. [52:32] Justin: Hold on. She mentioned something that I think needs a good point there, which is you've aggregated regional t. Third party administrators. That was definitely a check swing. You've aggregated regional third party administrators to create a national presence. And JD, maybe you begin, maybe you're ready to go there, but I think the pitch to a new group trying to join that's out of Ohio, that's not currently part of the Serato Group is we're trying to get referrals to the Serato Group. And if we can show that Serato Group has presence in all of these areas and we now have a third party administrator in Ohio, John Hancock's willing. John Hancock's more willing to push business there because we have a massive footprint for them around the country. [53:19] JD: Let's break that into two areas for Teresa to talk about, because I thought, Chad, you actually. This one seems really smart. I thought you were going to go the, like, Edward Jones dig there. [53:32] Justin: JD this one actually seems pretty smart. I didn't expect. [53:36] JD: I thought you were going to go. I thought you were going to go like the wirehouse route. Like really hard for an independent third party administrator from any town, usa, to get a deal with some national broker dealer or wirehouse where they'll actually kind of think of you. And send you business and, and could the Serrata Group walk in there and say, hey, we're a bigger firm. So the people, they listen to them, they talk to them, they do that deal. You took it a step further. I'm a podunk little TPA out of California that actually does business in other states all across the country. And I'm making Chad's point now, and maybe it's yours, Teresa. And then I'll shut up. I promise everyone in the chat. But I'm about to shut up. And I definitely feel like it's only the wholesalers in California that look at me like I'm their tpa. I'll drink. Even though we're trying to sell plans all across the country and so take it away. [54:31] Theresa Conti: I think a few things you said are absolutely right on that. We, when I owned Sunwest Pensions, right. I have a lot more being part of the Serato Group, I have a lot more presence in that. I can go to those national broker dealers. We have thousands of plans Instead of the 1000 plans I had as part of Sunwest Pension. So I have a lot more scale when you look at us that way. So I think that's absolutely true, that that's part of what we're looking towards. You know, the other piece of it is that you're, you're absolutely right in that we all know that to sell, it's all about the wholesaler that's in your area. It's not. We can talk to, you know, whoever. [55:21] JD: I might, I might, I might have a different opinion than that, but go on. [55:24] Theresa Conti: Okay, well, you know, we can talk to Manulife John Hancock and say that, you know, we, we want them to sell with us, but if that local wholesaler still doesn't have a relationship with the third party administrator that's in that region, it may still not go anywhere. It's not like they will, you know. [55:44] Justin: Very true. [55:44] Theresa Conti: To do business. [55:45] JD: Yes, that is fair. The, the boss of a regional wholesaler could put their foot down and say, look, you need to be doing more business with this firm because they're part of the Serato Group and they do a lot of business with us nationally. So get to it. [56:01] Theresa Conti: You know, okay, they could, but, but we all know that they still. [56:06] JD: Yeah. And would that really happen? Like, is a wholesaler really going to follow those marching orders? I think that could be debated. And the only thing I took, I went against you on, is I just, sometimes I get a little tired of the third party administrators need for local wholesalers. I Feel like you all can go out and sell your own stuff. You don't need to leverage these wholesalers as much as you think you do. And anyway, but that's my own ax to grind. [56:37] Theresa Conti: No, and, and you know, and, and that's true financial advisors, we all go to them directly. We don't wait just waiting for the wholesalers to introduce us to them. I mean if somebody's doing that, that's, you know, that's kind of very old school. It's like sitting there waiting for that phone to ring. But I think we're making our own relationships too and we can also do some recommending I think to Chad's point, you know, at times of places for them to go if they're looking for an option and that's where we can, you know, work that around too. [57:12] JD: I mean not to beat a dead horse here Chad, but if a third party administrator in a region of said wholesaler does a lot of business, that's the third party administrator that that regional wholesaler is going to work with. I don't care what marching orders come down from anywhere. And so if they're not part of the Serato group, I don't think it's going to matter. [57:33] Justin: But there is still a fair amount of especially in the way, let's not forget how record keepers are structuring, structuring sales. Now startups are almost exclusively done by the internal look at American funds, look at Empower, look at Hancock. So when you talk about that JD and third party administration has built off startups, let's be honest, you're talking about getting those referrals. Those internal wholesalers are located somewhere else and are less inclined to work locally if it's coming from top down. [58:07] JD: In your example now you've made two smart points tonight. [58:10] Justin: What the one of the pieces Teresa, that or points that I made to JD in the past when we've talked through Serato and the other group that JD doesn't know the name of is that we don't get the seat at the table that I would like plan design consultants to get. We get it often as retireholics like we get invited to things as retireaholics that we don't get to as plan design consultants. I wish with as much business as we do and even our small but national footprint that I would get the inside information, the access to the third party administrator leadership council at all these different record keepers that nova's on and TRA is on and all these other ones and future plan isn't Everywhere. I think that maybe Serato Group is getting that access. Even though it's 10 regional TPAs. You're getting that access that I would like. [59:10] Theresa Conti: Yeah. And I. And I think that's what we are really trying to do, right? To. To have, to have that recognition of the national tpa, even though we are independent third party administrators. [59:25] JD: You got a drink? Is it working? [59:29] Theresa Conti: We think it's working. We're still working on a few early. [59:34] Justin: Well, let me ask Theresa, what is working? What would you. Because we're talking about these tech companies stepping into our space and saying they're successful when we're qualifying. What is successful differently? What is working for Srotomy? [59:47] Theresa Conti: I feel like we're starting to get the seat at the table, that we're starting to get recognized for that with the record keepers, and that's important. And the other way that we are really working on is, like you mentioned before, some of those broker dealers, we want to start talking to some of them and we've already started some conversations with some of them that maybe we can be their resource. Right? We can be their approved broker dealer, third party administration. You go to Serato Group, here's their map. Here's. Here's who works with them. Here's who you go to in your area. We haven't gotten there yet, but that's what we're working towards. [1:00:29] JD: Fair enough. Fair enough. I'll keep my eye on it and next time I'll figure out what that other name is. It was some really groovy name, but we'll see what's going on there. I. Oh, that was the question I want to ask you. And shame on me if I don't. It's. Can we play conspiracy theory with you and the Serato Group? You sure it's not about someday packaging all those TPAs? Damn it. I'll drink together to sell at a higher price to some firm. So better to buy a bunch of them with a bunch of plans on a higher premium than one little old, old third party administrator. [1:01:09] Theresa Conti: So I will answer that somewhat cryptically. So, no, that is not the goal of the Serato Group. [1:01:17] JD: But if it happened, you'd be like, [1:01:18] Theresa Conti: okay, the other group may have that goal. [1:01:22] JD: Oh, the other. [1:01:24] Theresa Conti: Wow. [1:01:25] JD: This. Tune in next time on Retire when we talk about these two battling third party administrator consortiums. [1:01:34] Justin: So, jd, I had a. A really funny moment at that American Funds conference I was at in Texas last week where that other consortium got together for a picture and the members of the Serato Group that were there you know, I do, but I'm not saying it. It started laughing and everybody pointing. Like, this is really interesting. But Everybody. There's probably 30 other third party administrators who are just like, pointing and kind of laughing because they got together as a group to take their group picture. It was. It was comical. It was really fun. [1:02:10] JD: Let's end on a before Chat Bar Champion with a little public service announcement. I've made it before. I just want to make it again. If you're a record keeper and we talk about something you're doing and give our honest opinion, please, please do what you're doing. Contact us on Friday. Let your regional wholesalers know to contact my sales team and let us know how upset you are with what we said. Have little discussions about it at your corporate office. Please do. Because you fuel my fire. I fucking love that. I was getting bored doing this show, and the only thing that gives me life and gets me fired up is when you start fucking complaining about it. So please keep doing it. I love it. [1:02:56] Mark: We should have a. We should have, like a hotline for that, you know? [1:03:00] JD: Yes. Good idea. [1:03:02] Chad: We used to have a disclaimer for the sales team. [1:03:05] JD: What? [1:03:07] Chad: But also a disclaimer for the sales team. These views do not represent the sales team about this. [1:03:16] JD: We talked about this. Your views represent. Or my views represent you. And back and forth. That's how this works. What did I. What? We're gonna go to Chat Chat Bar Champion and we're gonna do it different. Tonight. The winner of Chap Our Champion is. Drum roll. It's Bill Shore's. Bill Sch is the winner of Chat Bar Champion tonight because. Because I say so. [1:03:49] Chad: And yes, Samson was just. It was good to have. [1:03:53] Justin: I mean, Bill had a reasonable night, but he was crushed by some of the original gangsters there. [1:04:01] Mark: Kevin was on fire. [1:04:03] Chad: There was a lot of guys on fire. But Sam's. [1:04:05] Justin: There was some really inappropriate content tonight in the chat bar, too. [1:04:10] JD: The chat bar definitely brun. They brung it tonight. They brung it. They brung it big time. Thank you, Chat Bar, for tuning in to a another episode of Retireholics. We love and appreciate you next show. Next show's guest will be none other than Josh Ito. [1:04:36] Justin: I was just saying I miss me [1:04:38] JD: some Ito and Mark and I won't show up. [1:04:42] Chad: We're not gonna be able to say anything anyways. [1:04:44] Justin: Yeah, [1:04:46] Mark: we have to amend that. Moody's out. It's so still an actress soon. Done. [1:04:53] JD: And if you're watching recorded on YouTube, LinkedIn, Twitter, thanks for tuning in. And watching. We appreciate you, too. Join us live on a Thursday night for the chat bar. It's a lot more fun. And most importantly, I apologize to you, Teresa, for not having you on sooner. You are an absolute rock star of our industry, but thank God we finally got you here. Thank you for being our guest tonight and sharing your insights. We very much appreciate it. [1:05:27] Theresa Conti: Thank you. Happy to be on and happy to come back if you want me at some point. So thank you all so much. Appreciate it. [1:05:32] JD: Okay, we'll bring her back. And that is the another episode of the very best podcast in 401k, the Retire Alex. We're changing the retirement plan industry one beer at a time. See you next time. Brandon, play some music. [1:05:45] Justin: Thank you, Teresa.