SEASON 2 - EPISODE 113 - JUNE 12, 2024

Founder-led Marketing

REWORK’s host Kimberly Rhodes discusses the unique marketing approach of 37signals with its co-founders, Jason Fried and David Heinemeier Hansson. They talk about how their process is simply sharing their perspectives and products, instead of traditional advertising. They champion genuine interaction over transactional posts and content.

Watch the full video episode on YouTube

Key Takeaways

00:37 - What Founder-Led Marketing means for 37signals
02:43 - The journey to finding the authentic voice of the brand
09:24 - Why paid advertising doesn’t always work as intended
16:50 - The love/hate relationship of posting content
27:19 - There are different decorums for different platforms

Links & Resources

Transcript

Kimberly (00:00): Welcome to Rework, a podcast by 37signals about the better way to work and run your business. I’m your host, Kimberly Rhodes, and as always, I’m joined by the co-founders of 37signals, Jason Fried and David Heinemeier Hansson. Well, if you Google the term founder-led marketing, all kinds of articles will pop up as this new buzzword, but Jason and David have been marketing as the founders for decades, so I thought we would talk a little bit about the 37signals philosophy around this. So Jason, David, you guys are constantly marketing the company, have huge followings on Twitter and LinkedIn. Kind of talk me through the history of marketing at 37signals.

Jason (00:37): I mean, I’ve never thought about what we do as marketing really, right? So I think David and I share. We share our point of view, we share our opinion, we share our products, we share differences between how we do things compared to other companies. We write books. Now, this is all nowadays I guess considered founder-led marketing or content marketing or whatever. For us, it’s just working. This is sort of what we do. We make stuff and we talk about the stuff we make and primarily because we don’t spend a lot of money on traditional marketing. So if we didn’t say anything, no one would know anything. We don’t have any other major outlet really that reaches hundreds of thousands of people reliably than the following that David and I have built together independently. We each have our own, but collectively we can reach a few hundred thousand people in a matter of a few seconds on Twitter, LinkedIn, whatever it might be.

(01:30): So we use those platforms to do that stuff, but the stuff we do is what we’ve always done when no one was listening at all. We’re just going to share, teach, show, talk, sell, that stuff. So that’s how we’ve thought about it historically. Over the past few years we’ve experimented with other things, so we’ve experimented with, we have a head of marketing, we had someone before that. We’ve experimented with traditional billboards, we’ve experimented with digital ad buys, we’ve experimented with podcast sponsorships and conference sponsorships. We’ve experimented with, we’re now doing some TikTok stuff and some short clips and skit based stuff. We did some really interesting stuff, a previous person, Andy did this. We built a dumpster that lit emails on fire, which was a real interesting exploration into taking email out of the digital realm and making it physical. And there’s a lot of stuff we played with there, but collectively over the last 25 years, I would say that marketing is not a thing we’ve thought about, and the stuff we’re doing today is experimenting to see if we can find something else besides what David and I can do to attract people and to pull them into our orbit basically.

David (02:44): What’s interesting with the timeline is that as you say now, and in the last few years, the idea of founder-led marketing and content marketing in general really has gotten quite buzzy that that’s the way to go. This is how we started literally 20 years ago and now we are doing, hey, let’s dabble in and see what can more traditional, brand-based, company-based sources of marketing add to that equation. But I do think that there’s something to the concept of founder-led marketing, which actually when you just mentioned it here at the top of the show, that was the first time I’ve ever heard that term, but it resonates with me in the same way that I see the kind of work that Jason and I do on social media and our newsletters and elsewhere. It does resonate that when a brand tries to be funny or tries to talk to you in a way that you can relate to, it’s actually quite difficult and you have to be either really, really good as a brand to be able to do that at a level that kind of moves something.

(03:43): I mean, if you’re a Nike or whatever, you could say, just do it. Not that that was easy to come up with that necessarily, but that has that cache to it. A lot of other companies, especially smaller companies, they don’t have that. That brand, that company identity is just too weak. It’s not far reaching enough. It can’t do those kinds of things, but individuals can. Individuals can have a sense of credibility because they also have something on the line. It’s your name out there. This is one of the reasons why some of the experiments we’ve tried over the years, I’ve had a very delicate relationship to, especially when it comes to writing, because I kind of feel like almost anything we put out, I substitute my name for whatever the company says, and I feel like it’s my credibility on the line, which really helps drive, where are we going, what are we engaging with, how are we saying things?

(04:38): Does it feel like it’s our voice? And the best way to feel like it’s our voice is to use your own damn voice. This is why for me, HEY World was such a breakthrough. We used to have Signal versus Noise, a blog that ran for I think 19 years or 21 years, a long time. Great place. We have some wonderful pieces up there, but if you look at the volume of writing and sharing with it on Signal versus Noise, it was quite uneven. I would really think about, is this a kind of thing I would put on Signal versus Noise, because that’s kind of like a company outlet, even if though it’s also my name versus now that Jason and I write more directly under our own name, whether it’s on social media or on HEY world, it feels like I could just use my own voice, and it’s actually a lot easier to do that to some weird extent than it is to try to do this puppet thing.

(05:27): I’m going to talk as me through this mask of a brand. That is an awkward way of addressing people in a way that feels authentic. Now, that also has downsides, of course. The fact that both Jason and I, we write about a lot of different things, and it’s not always, actually, the majority of it is not directly in service of let’s sell some more Basecamp, let’s sell some more HEY because that doesn’t work either. Then you could burn out really quick, and this is one of the things seen with some people who try it as a strategy. Let’s say they, oh, founder-led marketing. Let me look up at that. I got to do some of that because, why? Because I want some more traffic. I want some more signups. Do you know what people can smell that? They can smell that instrumentalism, they can smell like you’re not sharing because you feel like you have something to say.

(06:17): You’re sharing because you want something. And that level of transactionalness is actually one of the things I really don’t like about any of these terms. Before founder-led marketing, we talked about content marketing, which is a little bit broader term on it, but it was the same thing. It was writing up articles where you didn’t necessarily mean what you were saying. You were just like, this is a good keyword. We should be ranking on this keyword. Let me write about some shit that I have no special insight or position on. I just know that this is what people are searching for. I’m highly allergic to that kind of engagement, and the only way that I know how to do it well is to write about things I really believe. And it’s so funny because the audience, and I mean broadly, have become so skeptical of the fact that most or lots of founders use these as tactics that when they actually see someone saying something they truly believe, they often don’t believe it. Oh, you’re just saying that because you want to whatever, juice up excitement for a new thing. And I’m like, no, I am saying this stuff because I can’t keep it in my goddamn fingers. It’s got to fucking come out of that.

(07:33): And I think that’s why it’s worked. And some of it’s also just like, all right, well, so how do you do that? Well, you’ve got to develop a voice, you’ve got to practice. And how long does that take? Well, 20 years in our case. Not that it has to take that long before you begin, but you don’t get it just because you read an article about founder-led marketing or oh, I want the content marketing. You have to start from, do I know something that’d be interesting to share? Can I share something? And the good news is everything is interesting if you scratch hard enough, everything. We’ve talked about this guy before, I think on the podcast, this guy that makes saddlebags or handbag, do you remember what’s his name Jason?

Jason (08:14): Dave from Saddleback Leather.

David (08:17): That’s right. And that to me was just such an illustration of I didn’t know I cared anything about how a buckle is stitched to a thingy. And you look at those videos and go like, this is fascinating. Now I care about how buckles work. And that’s the power that to me is if I was going to take one shot of what is founder-led marketing, he is just a pinnacle example of that because it’s not in our category. I could look at that and go like, yeah, I want to know from Dave. Can Dave tell me some more? If he had just stuck in a higher puppet thing that we’re talking from a brand perspective, first of all, it wouldn’t be entertaining, right? Because David’s entertaining because he gives it to you raw. He’s not afraid of saying why he thinks the competition kind of sucks on buckles, because they don’t do the buckles right. And you can feel that and you can connect to that.

Kimberly (09:11): Okay, Jason, I want to go back to something you said. You mentioned that we don’t do paid advertising here at 37signals. Kind of tell me why. Tell our audience why we don’t do that, which is not typical for most companies.

Jason (09:22): This is really David’s topic, but I’ll, David has some good rants on this. We have, so we have experimented with this, traditionally Google AdWords for example, and then we bought some other branded keywords, which is through Google and all other platforms as too other search engines as well, plus buying billboards and whatever. David has some philosophical points I’m sure he’ll bring up. I’ll just tell you, it doesn’t work for us because the economics don’t work for us. There’s also some philosophical points of view that are maybe against the kinds of things we want to spend our money on. But our economics, our products are very, very affordable. They’re very low priced, all things considered, especially compared to the people we compete with in our field. So a lot of companies we compete with are selling 8,000 seats and 6, 5, 10, 20, whatever, thousand dollars a month accounts.

(10:16): They can afford to spend $3,000 attracting a customer or $600, whatever they can do. We don’t play in that realm intentionally. And so the keyword mix in that whole world is just, it doesn’t really pay for us. And even if it did, it’s like I don’t really want to lose a year and a half. I know we’ll break even after a year and a half. I don’t want customers where it takes me a year and a half to break even on them in that way. It’s just not worth the pull and the spend and the effort and the tracking and all the stuff and the salaries and the spend and all the stuff just to, I think there’s other ways to do it. Economically it doesn’t work for us philosophically. David will probably touch on that. And also frankly, it’s not that fun and interesting to try to, at least for us to rank for a keyword or to grab a customer that way.

(11:08): We have had fun with it though. There’s this thing that I put this ad up, I dunno when this was a couple of years ago. Basically brands were bidding on our keywords on our brand, sorry, other brands were bidding on our brand. So if you search for Basecamp, Asana would come up or Monday or whatever, and it kind of just frankly pissed me off. It feels like a cheap shot. I don’t like that. And so basically we bought a series of ads. They basically called that out saying We’re being held ransom by Google essentially because Google’s willing to sell our brand to to the highest bidder and this isn’t cool, whatever it was. And that ad, which was not about Basecamp, which was not about HEY, I don’t think HEY was even out at the time, was not about any of our products. It was about a point of view, ended up getting me on CNBC and millions of views on the ad and on Twitter, and we parlay that into a million different ways. So it turns out that that worked in a sense, but it was sort of in many ways like a revelation that just advertising on your product is not really anywhere near as interesting for us, at least in advertising on an idea. But anyway, I’ll hand this off. I’ll hand the baton off to David so we can rant on the philosophical side of this.

Kimberly (12:20): Yeah I didn’t know there was philosophical reasons for not spending on ads.

David (12:24): Yeah, I’ll start with the, it’s not even ads as a broad category. I don’t have anything about against ads. Lots of the most beautiful short films ever recorded in human history have been ads of some kind. If you’re going to do 30 seconds, ad makers can do some incredible things, not often, but at the peak it can be true, it can be moving. Really moving

Jason (12:47): It’s an art form. Great advertising is an art form. It definitely is.

David (12:50): It really is. I remember we talked about the Volvo ad a few years ago. Volvo had this ad. You showed this whole life of I think a little girl who was about to get run over and didn’t because the driver was driving a Volvo with all these safety systems and so on. I remember watching that whole thing and going, do you know what, after that I kind of want a Volvo. I didn’t have anything to Volvo is not necessarily the thing I resonate with. But after that I was like, wow, this is incredible. That’s just truly moving stuff. So I don’t have a problem with that. Where I have a problem is advertising on the internet, and it’s usually advertising on the internet as it pertains to tracking, that in order for this whole machine to work as well as it does for the Facebooks and Metas and whatever of the world, they have to build these incredibly detailed profiles on everyone.

(13:43): And now you advertise against profiles, not against the content. And I thought, do you know what? That’s just a deep perversion of privacy of what the internet is supposed to be. Suddenly the worst slob of the internet in terms of content, it’s just as valuable as the most highly produced stuff because you’re not targeting the content, you’re targeting the reader. And I just don’t like that. I never did. And that meant in part that we were competing with one hand tied behind our back. Everyone else who’s advertising in this game, they’re using that stuff. They’re using the hyper targeting, they’re cutting everything down into a tiny slice of they’re only reaching exactly the kind of profiles that are most likely to buy their product. It’s just like, do you know what? I don’t feel like doing that. But more than that, we’ve talked a lot about that philosophy of being against tracking and targeted advertising, so on.

(14:35): I also just have an aesthetic business position to this. And that is the fact that a lot of those kinds of programs are all evaluated under marginal dollar. So someone goes like, if I can spend a hundred dollars and make back a hundred dollars and 1.50, that’s worth it. I get 1.50 back. I look at that and go like, wait a minute, you’re telling me to make $101.50 cents, I have to give Mark Zuckerberg a hundred dollars? That’s not proportionate. You get a hundred dollars, I get a buck 50. What the fuck? That’s not a fair trade and I don’t care if I’m better off. That’s some sort of homos economicos argument that I’m not that person. I’m not going to give you a hundred dollars if I get a buck fifty back. There’s actually a really interesting line of studies on this where they do these, what is the trade off?

(15:30): When does someone feel like, well, I’m okay with you getting more if I also get something back. And there are these, I think it’s like 70/30 or something if you run these experiments, if someone is going to get less than 30 cents on the dollar, they’d rather forego the 20 cents than to see you get 80. And clearly that experiment doesn’t apply to companies because a lot of companies are run on just the marginal buck fifty. I’ll go, I spent that one, I get a buck fifty. And we don’t run that way because in some sense, both directly and at least philosophically it’s my a hundred dollars. I’m opening my fucking wallet, taking out a hundred dollars bill, giving it to Mark, and he goes, here’s the buck fifty back. Like, fuck you, Mark. No, we’re not that. No, I’d rather be worse off.

Kimberly (16:21): Okay, well…

Jason (16:22): There’s a clip. That’s going to be winner.

Kimberly (16:27): So when it comes to you guys marketing yourselves, I’m curious where the line is between feeling like you’re always having to hawk your wares, if you will, to just being out on Twitter and just being yourselves on Twitter. Do you feel like you’re balancing between those two?

Jason (16:47): I can tell you that there’s days when I really don’t like myself because I have to do some of those things. And whenever I start to feel that way, I just stop for a little bit because there’s times when I go on LinkedIn and I write something up and I’m like, you know what? This advice, it’s good advice, but it’s also stupid. Why am I writing this? What am I doing? Why am I falling into this trap? Or I’m getting in some argument on Twitter about something with someone. It’s like, why am I doing this? Who is this benefiting? And so when I find myself at that place, I do stop. I step back and take some days away. I don’t want to spend my time feeling that way. And you also, you can’t keep hitting people over the head with the same stuff. I mean you kind of do for a little bit because if you want to soak in, but then there’s a point where it’s over saturated and then people start to push back from you and don’t pay attention.

(17:40): And then I also just feel kind of cheap just selling my wares all. I just don’t like it. So it has to be the right mix and I don’t always get it right. And occasionally I’ll throw in a product pitch because actually something happened today where I used the product and I was really happy with the fact that our product does this and so I want to share that, but I don’t have a calendar saying every day I need to post something about this or post something about that or two days a week I need to say something about none of that. It has to be very natural. And also the pushback has to be natural. My sense of my respect for myself basically is what dictates whether I’ve gone overboard or not. That’s kind of how I look at it.

David (18:19): Yeah, I think it’s a great point, and I think I have such a hate love relationship with social media in general. Mostly I’m like, do you know what? I wish it didn’t exist because I remember when it didn’t. I remember when we were writing on Signal versus Noise prior to Twitter, prior to Facebook, prior to all these other things. And there’s a certain, not just nostalgia because that sounds like just rose-colored glasses, but do you know what? That was a better way. But you also have to accept the world you live in to some extent. And that is a sense of obligation as Jason says, that sometimes feels just like, do you know what this sucks? And I have the exact same emotional response that Jason does, and then sometimes I go like, all right, fuck it. I’m just not going to do it for three weeks.

(19:08): And other times I have the other response that like, do you know what? Most people don’t fucking like their job. Look at 7 billion people on earth. Do they all get up in the morning? Yes, time for work. Let me go crush it. And no, they don’t. And sometimes I go, do you know what? This is part of my job. Part of our job is to do this kind of awareness, be top of mind. We’re not buying all these ads. There’s not a thing that automatically pushes things out. If Jason and I just go as we actually did for a while, just go like, you know what? We’re just not going to engage at all. We’re not going to spend any time here. The moving average of top of mindness just starts dipping. And you can go like, okay, whatever. You don’t need to. But I also feel like I have some obligation to literally the rest of the company at do you know what, Jason and I have a differential advantage here that we have large followings.

(20:04): I can’t hand this off to someone else. I can’t go like, hey, other person at the company with a thousand followers, can you do some of this stuff for a month? It’s not going to work. It’s not going to have that kind of impact. So there’s some obligation in it, and I oscillate between those things. Sometimes going, especially for me, LinkedIn, LinkedIn to me has just such a odd, uncanny, everyone has this tight rubber mask on their fucking face and sometimes I go, that’s really nice because people mostly are very polite, but it also just feels fake a lot of times. I can’t actually, I don’t read any LinkedIn stuff, which to some extent makes it a good platform for me because I just go in there, I just post my own stuff and then I come up and I read very little of the feed.

(20:54): Versus Twitter for me has a little bit of, or not a little bit, a large degree of addictive properties where I can get addicted to Twitter, especially when I post. That’s the hard part of it. If I don’t post for five days, I can have a very healthy relationship with Twitter. I’ll check it once a day for 10 minutes, whatever. If I get into the rhythm of posting the fucking thing, just the claws go in and I got to now check it 10 times a day and I got to follow up and I got to direct outreach. And that’s also the magic of it. It’s the retail politics. I’m directly talking to individuals. Usually we’re talking about interesting stuff I actually care about, but it’s also just there’s some deep pit of self-loathing that’s available in that whole domain where you just go like, what the fuck is this? And you got to constantly calibrate, am I me here or am I playing a character or what the fuck is going on? And say, the best way is just to occasionally just go reset, reset three days away, five days away. I think the longest I took was two months. One time that was me. I should really do that again.

Jason (22:07): To David’s point about sometimes you just got to do your job because it is part of your job. One of the things I’ve been thinking about recently as a bit of a truth serum basically or whatever is if I didn’t work here, would I ever spend another second on LinkedIn? The answer is no. So that means I really don’t like that, but I do it. I need to do it. Twitter, I would spend some time on but a whole lot less and I would change who I follow. So I would not follow any web businessy, whatevers. I don’t actually enjoy talking business on Twitter, but I need to do it, but I wouldn’t do it if I didn’t have this job. And so I think that’s the real truth of the matter is that it’s part of the job. It’s part of, I enjoy it to some degree, but I also wouldn’t do it in my spare time if I didn’t have to. And so I think that’s the real honest answer.

David (23:05): Yeah, my Achilles heel is I would. I fucking love arguing.

(23:11): And it’s such a funny thing where I’m like, do you know what? I enjoy the sport of debate and that is a really dangerous thing to enjoy when you go on Twitter because so often I’ll look at someone else who does have a large following and I’ll look at them reply indignantly to some fucking rando dude 905 in a pissy tone. I’m like, dude, what the fuck? What are you doing? What are you doing? Why are you arguing with this literal nobody about some stupid shit? And I’ll have that thought in my head, and literally five seconds later I’m replying to Rando smo 506 going like, no, TypeScript does suck. And I’m like, what? And I think this is why Twitter for me is more dangerous even though I enjoy it more. Actually that’s the danger. LinkedIn to a much greater extent, I can treat it like a job.

(24:03): As Jason said, I’m just like, do you know what? I wouldn’t come here unless I was getting literally paid to do it. But that also makes it easier to have that distance and that separation. Twitter especially, I actually say the freaking for you page has gotten annoyingly good. I never used to use the algorithmic sorted beat. I just follow a number of people and I just follow that. That was a much better way of doing it. This is one of the ways where the product gets worse the better it is, and Twitter’s algorithm have gotten substantially better, not perfect, and that just makes it more addictive and it’s just like, yeah, again, half the days I wish I didn’t have to do it, and the other half I go, what are we going to debate this morning? Let’s bring it on. Let’s do three different threats at the same time.

(24:50): I’m going to tweet 200 times. I mean, I actually just had that over the weekend. This whole, I’ve been getting into Linux and a bunch of Linux tools. That’s actually, to me, that’s the best part of it. I like arguing with nerds about nerdy things because there’s sort of, in soccer, we talk about you got to go for the ball, not the man. A lot of other domains, even some businessy domains, certainly everything that touches culture, it feels like you do a play and instantly it’s just full contact sport. People are insulting each other left and right and when it comes to technology, there’s a greater percentage of the time where we’re playing for the ball. Is this technology better than that? Here’s the thing that’s good about it. Here’s the thing that’s bad about it. And I do think that you know what? On its best days, it does move the discussion forward. It does illuminate. It does lead me to discover things I wouldn’t have found otherwise. There’s not quite enough great days.

Jason (25:50): Lemme add one more thing. I know this isn’t a session on Twitter necessarily, but I used to think the for you feed was like a funhouse mirror where it sort of distorted what I liked. It actually is a very, very clear mirror and I don’t like what I see, which is when I go there, I see all these recommendations for growth hacks and growth tactics and business this and business that and do these 10 things, and I bought this domain for this amount of money and look at how rich I am and all this shit. I’m like, this is reflecting back what it thinks I want based on my clear intentions clearly. So it’s actually a crystal clear mirror and I don’t like that, and it reminds me why I don’t really like being there, even though I don’t like being there most of the time. There are moments when I really do and it is a fantastic product, but I’ve realized it’s not a fun house mirror. It’s a clear mirror, and that’s maybe where my disgust is coming from to some like, wow, is this how I’m reflected to others? It may be a little bit too much truth in that.

Kimberly (26:52): That’s interesting. I also think it’s funny that you say David, LinkedIn feels like everyone’s putting on a mask. I know even with the podcast internally, David, I remember sending you a ping. Okay, so we’re not going to say fuck on LinkedIn, but it’s okay on Twitter, right? So it’s like we’re making those decisions on how we’re presenting ourselves and this podcast and the two of you, which clips we’re going to put on which channel, which is probably why it doesn’t feel as authentic.

David (27:19): But it’s also, this is why I’m so conflicted about it, because I also think there’s something good to that, right? I’ve really come around to the idea that it was not free that we all went like, oh, just I’ve talked about it endlessly. Be yourself all the time. Just like wear whatever’s comfortable, swear as much as you like in all contexts, at all times. Just be like your raw, unfiltered self. I was more into that idea in the past than I am today, even though I’m still that person, right? I am still prone to swearing and I don’t wear a suit to work and whatever, but to some degree, there’s some parts of me that wish I liked LinkedIn more because there actually is a decorum. There’s like, that’s not appropriate to say here, sir. This is a context of business and would the internet be better if we had a little more decorum?

(28:10): I mean, Twitter is the complete opposite, right? You’re literally talking to some random and in a split second, you’re just hurling insults at each other. Interesting. But also good, not so sure, but this is directed to Jason’s point. It is a straight mirror. If I’m still there, even though I recognize all these things. Do I like that? Is it just bringing out all these sort of just, I was about to say violent, that’s not what it is, but contentious formed. I like the wrestling. Why do I like the wrestling? Why do I like wrestling with strangers over shit? I mean, literally meme insert touch grass. But that’s why it’s interesting. If it was just like, this is just bad and this is just good. We could just choose the good and not have any of the bad. Twitter is just like, what if you just took a huge glass of good and a huge glass of bat and shook it up? You’re not going to separate those two things again. Now they’re just in there all mixed.

Kimberly (29:18): Okay, last question before we wrap it up. Do you guys imagine a world in which you cannot do what you’re doing where the company can build and grow without you having to be the boots on the ground marketers, if you will?

Jason (29:33): I mean, this is the ego stroke question, but I’ll say we have seen that when we haven’t done this stuff, as David alluded to earlier, mindshare went down, traffic went down. I mean, for better or for worse, this is the company we’ve built doing it the way we’ve done it, and we have a reputation that is about this. So at the same time, I’m absolutely certain that there is someone and some team and some other CEO who could pull that off, but we couldn’t be around it, I would say. I’d have to exit myself from the situation in a sense to let someone else run it that way because I’d have a really hard time I think watching that, even though there’s no question in my mind that someone could run it better if they really knew that playbook and they did it their way and they weren’t opposed to all the things we’re opposed to, and they were willing to give it the time and the money and the whatever, because many companies have done it just fine. So it can be done. I’m not here to say we are the geniuses because we’re not, but if we’re going to continue to run the company the way we’ve run it and how we’ve been running it and why we’ve been running it the way we’ve been running it, we have to continue to do this. I think it’s pretty clear that that’s the outcome, unless we again run into some surprise breakthrough on the marketing experiments we’re doing, but as of yet, nothing would replace this that we’ve tried so far.

Kimberly (31:00): David, anything to add before we wrap it up? You can say no.

David (31:03): No, I think that was a great place to,

Kimberly (31:05): Okay. Well, Rework is a production 37signals. You can find show notes and transcripts on our website at 37signals.com/podcast. Full video episodes are on YouTube and Twitter, and if you have a question for Jason or David about a better way to work and run your business, leave us a voicemail at 708-6 2 8 7 8 5 0. You can also text that number. We just might answer your question on an upcoming show.