Daniel and Danyal Sattar

Danyal Sattar and Daniel Brewer discuss their involvement in impact investing, partially focusing on the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation's historical background, the need for community shares, and the importance of mobilizing support from the community.

The conversation highlights the importance of adapting to emerging needs and making informed decisions to drive meaningful change in the impact investing landscape.

Transcript

Resonance is an impact Property Fund manager. Founded in 2002. This is a 6th in a series of podcasts with people that have been instrumental in Resonance's growth.

Daniel Brewer: I'm Daniel Brewer, founder and chief Executive Resonance Impact Property Fund manager and one of the pioneers of impact investing in the UK. In this podcast series, I'm reflecting with twelve people who have been influential in residence's 1st 20 years and imagining what the next 20 years might look like. So with me today is Daniel Sattar, chief executive of Big Issue Invest. And alongside Resonance and others, Big Issue Invest, one of the pioneers in the impact investment space in the UK. It's actually one of the few impact investment firms to grow out of an operational social enterprise. And perhaps we can get into that, Daniel, in a second. Big Issue Investor, I think, is also one of the only other investment firms to be both a social enterprise, social enterprise mark holder and a B core, which, like Resonance, we're very proud of. But you have been significant in Resonance's story long before you joined Big Issue Invest. In fact, you're one of these rare people have had multiple roles across the impact investment space and I think in every single one of them, you've had a meaningful impact on Resonance journey. So, welcome. Thank you for joining me. I really appreciate your time and really looking forward to the next 40 minutes.

Danyal Sattar: Great, thank you.

Daniel Brewer: So why don't you just tell us a little bit about who you are, your story, and particularly Big Issue Invest, where you are right now.

Danyal Sattar: Yeah. So I'm Daniel Sattar. I'm the chief exec of Big Issue Invest. And I suppose I've been at this about 30 years, and it was 30 years ago, starting out in the early days, the New Economics Foundation. And we ran this thing called the Other Economics Summit. And it was in nicer times. You could book a conference venue inside the security perimeter of the G Seven Summit. So when the leading industrialized nations of the world would meet the top leaders of the world, you could get your delegates waved through, waving a little ticket through this security perimeter. And we would discuss things that nowadays are more mainstream alternative economic indicators and environmental economics and all kinds of things that have come into the mainstream but more but New Economics Foundation was trying to change the economic system. And after about five years of that, I thought, well, we need to move the money. We've got to move the money. And I followed a guy called Pat Connesey, who set up Aston Reinvestment Trust, one of the UK's first local community investors in Birmingham, and Tessa Talent and Pat, who were setting up the UK Sustainable Investment Forum, a network connecting the emerging kind of responsible finance network in the City, with people who are trying to do this stuff on the ground. And through various iterations, working in Brussels, the early days at Charity Bank back in the UK and then a stint with foundations, esme FERBAN, where I first came across Resonance a little bit at Big Site Capital, then at Joseph Roundtree Foundation, and now about four or five years here at Big Issue Invest. But the golden thread through that was always trying to move money to the social and environmental issues that need solving.

Daniel Brewer: Brilliant, brilliant. So casting your mind back to the first time that we met. I actually remember the room. I think we were sitting around the table at Esme Fairbands offices talking about one of the funds that actually never happened. I think Esme was just on the beginning trying to use think it's endowment for impact investing, not just for money and growth making. So one of the, again, big significant pioneers in using its endowment for impact as well as through investment. What do you remember back in those days, both in terms of the sector resonance as was, which wasn't much more than just me at the time, I think. Would you remember?

Danyal Sattar: It was an interesting time. Esme Thurburn Foundation itself came out of a financial innovation. Ian Thurburn started Mg in the 1930s and it was, I think, the first mutual fund in the UK. I think they had had them in the States, but it was the first in the UK and it was way of more ordinary net worth people being able to participate in the stock exchange. And that's really the basis for how a whole well, most of our pensions are now invested through these mutual collective forms in one way or another. So the history of Esme had some kind of connection to that finance. They were trustees at the time who was very independent minded and prepared to try and do things that were different. So I think Esme's journey on this kind of impact investing had really been from there, from Margaret Hyde. I overlap briefly with Margaret and she put money into investors in society. That was about a quarter of a million, I think. And in 2002, when it became Charity Bank, it turned into a shareholding in that. But this must have been late 1990s, margaret was doing that and Esme had invested in credit unions and a few other things there and I think with larger investments, then followed into Charity Bank and into Caf Venturesome, a small lender run by Charities Aid Foundation. There was a sense, I think we thought, oh great, we've done it. If you need secured finance, well, there's Charity Bank, and if you need the kind of unsecured risk finance, well, there's Caf Venture Summer and we've got some of these local CDFIs kind of coming along and we were probably about to sit back and put our feet up a little bit, metaphorically speaking. And then all these other people kept coming along going, oh, hang on, what about community shares? And what about those community share issues that kind of get. If they hit 40%, they almost always raise, but it takes a long time. What about finance to make that happen? It was one and hey there you were, a residents popping up with this, I remember Mustard Seed I think, was what you started with, raising money for small community. You will know the project way better than I.

Daniel Brewer: Yes, still going. So, yes, Mustard Seed property came out of an operational charity, but they wanted to buy a building but didn't have a balance sheet to do it, so couldn't borrow. So we did this community share issue. 25 people came in and actually it was one of the pioneering products for what Esme first backed with your support, which we then called the Committee Share Underwriting Fund. We got 25 people and they'd raised, let's say it was 100,000 pounds. And we had a loan from Triados on offer for 100,000 pounds, but we needed this last 100,000 pounds or so to come in and we in the end managed to persuade a foundation, a local foundation, to lend us that bridge. They said, look, we don't want to invest for the long term, but we don't want you to not succeed when you've gone so far. So have a loan for the short term and then keep trying to raise the community shares. And I think that experience at all. I wonder whether this is something that we could do again. And I think when you were Esme, you were having those conversations. People say, I need some help just.

Danyal Sattar: To plug the gap.

Daniel Brewer: When you've mobilized 25 or 100 or 200 people and still not quite enough, it's too good a success to have proved the point that people will back their communities. And so, yeah, that was our first fund and Esme were our first investor in our first fund before Big Sight Capital had arrived. So that was a really meaningful moment.

Danyal Sattar: Yeah. It's also Dawn Ostwick. My life seems to be littered with working for strong minded women and after Margaret Hyde and of course, I was working for Nicola Pollock, leading one of the programs there. But when Dawn Ostwick came in, she kind of made us pause and just really understand what was this emerging set of needs and issues out there. And I think that really took us to it's, why we backed resonance and we backed others. It was a sense that if you want to solve problems, you need institutions that solve them. And that's what resonance just kept on popping up with another new idea. I was never annoyed at seeing the new ideas just now. Got to put my feet up.

Daniel Brewer: It's interesting, because I remember what was so encouraging was esme making a very strategic decision, and it came again with big society capital, not to invest initially, directly, but to invest in these intermediaries that back in 2010 eleven. When I guess we're talking now. That was quite new to acknowledge that these intermediaries, these CDFIs investment fund managers, were just sort of emerging as organizations that could potentially mobilize money. Some kind of scale to kind of make that strategic choice has been interesting and I think since then we've seen Esme and others move towards making some direct investments, noting the balance of both. I just wonder what it must have felt like on that side and how you've seen particularly foundations using their endowments and picking the strategies. Have you kind of seen that ebb and flow a bit?

Danyal Sattar: The thing I found when I worked for foundations is obviously I had an incredible sense of humor. Everybody laughed at my jokes and and I was incredibly wise. Only I had this unique overview of the sector. So people kept telling me so when when you're, when you're sitting on top of a pile of money, people tend to be extremely kind to you. But I described our portfolio esme fairburn as strategic retrospectively. So what we did was we followed the market. We didn't decide where we thought the market was going, we just followed it. So we didn't decide to do community share, a community share underwriting fund. We knew about community shares. We saw how people were doing this. We hadn't identified a solution. You identified the solution, we invested it. And then as time passed, you go, wow, how amazing. You just made the right investment in a fund solution. I think why we wanted that fund solution was if we didn't, what would we have to do? Look at every single share issue underwrite every single one. So sanity alone would take us to a collective solution. But I think it was that sense of following the market was really important and maybe that is what kept us as an institution, maybe on the right side of hubris, that we were always following what other people did, backing it with our resource.

Daniel Brewer: Yeah, it's interesting, isn't it? I sometimes am asked by different types of investor, kind of what are the options out there? And I'm very careful. We don't provide advice, don't go anywhere near that. But one of the suggestions that I make to encourage people to start in the right place is to kind of recognize what they are already good at. So if you're already, like Esme, brilliant at making grants to frontline organizations in a particular sector, well, actually it's only one step away to make investments there. But you might want to go out and pioneer a whole new fund. And the work that we're predominantly, residents predominantly focus around homelessness, really. If you know all about homelessness yourself, then by all means go and pick the organizations. But until you can tell the difference between a good homelessness charity and they're not yet quite so good homelessness charity or whatever, then you need to back the manager. And actually if you're not sure whether you want to get into homelessness or into some other issues, then you actually need to potentially back a fund of funds and then you kind of go, okay, well, let's see what we can learn through all of these. And all of these are very acceptable strategies. So if you're back in a fund of funds, instead of choosing do I put money into Big Issue invest or residents, suddenly you're making a decision between do I put money into Snowball or the Schroeders BSE Impact Trust and another fund of funds that might emerge over time. So sort of knowing as soon as you have some money as a foundation or even as an individual, knowing what kind of place to engage with so that you don't have to manage lots of little things, you've only got a certain amount of bandwidth.

Danyal Sattar: You got to understand that bit as well.

Daniel Brewer: It's been really interesting. The sector evolve around that.

Danyal Sattar: Yeah, it's also in my spare time or my non work time, I do quite a lot of Tai Chi. And one of my Tai Chi colleagues was following this guru, a real live Indian guru called Sarguru. And Sarguru was coming along to speak at the Excel Center in London, this vast place, 4000 people in the audience. And Roberta said, do you want to come along? And I've never seen a real live Indian guru. So I went along and one of the people in the audience asked SAG guru spoke for a bit and then he took questions from the audience and somebody asked Saguru, Why have a guru? And Saguru said, well, look, if you're going to a strange country that you don't know, really helps have a guide. And there's something I think about us as intermediaries in this sector. If you're coming to social impact investing and you do maybe want to make direct investments, as many people do, for that most direct connection to the cause or mission they're backing, having a guide really helps. So I think back in those esme days we had this twin **** approach of going we'll invest in funds and learn and we'll also make a few direct investments. But with that kind of learning being a sense of and it wasn't just investing, we did feel we were part of a community of people trying to do the same thing. So coming along to those investor meetings and I did this not just at resonance with your later real lettings funds, but with bridges. I'd turn up and listen to Anthony Ross. Every six months a new idea would have come into him distilled from the last six months of grappling with his portfolio and it would gradually emerge and the same with real lettings. That kind of insight into I think I only say this about myself, my somewhat naive view that, well, we're going to have lots of kind of crusty guys about our age who would come into those flats and be housed there and then move on. And that realization of going, actually, we've got a bunch of single mothers here. And then that extraordinary impact of seeing a family where a young person's got a stable home and they can do their homework and they can settle and they can live profoundly good and just great to get these insights along the way that we got from the investing in Funds residents.

Daniel Brewer: Yeah, so one of the things that you were leading on significantly was, gosh, it must have been five years or so, was this thing we ended up calling The Gathering. And you had a sense that actually the social impact investments sector had grown to a point where there was a call for reflection, really and see what was working and what wasn't and what have we tried, what led you to that kind of moment? This is such an important thing to do, to reflect and so often neglected in our personal and professional lives to kind of just stop, gather and listen. What motivated that?

Danyal Sattar: A couple of things. There is a very direct trigger to it, but maybe one that more recently of our HR people here at the wider Big Issue Group, we asked her to do a little piece for a Big Issue Invest Way day where we're all getting together and she came up with this. She said, okay, fill out one of these things and you'll have done them, the kind of Myers Briggs or whatever they are. This particular one was a little online app and you answer the questions and it draws a little like a little spider graph and it has the opposites there for you. So like introvert, extrovert and all of those mapped out and then you can see where you sit on this. So I ended up 100% introverted and 100% extroverted and it absolutely there. And I think, Daniel, there's probably a bit of that in you where you think, no, I'm a very introverted person. I like to be here and I'm here, but you're out there and we're out there. So I think it was reflecting a bit of that and The Gathering was something of that, that thinking, well, let's do it in February when it's cold. Also, it's kind of maybe not the busiest time of year yet, so let's all get away somewhere cold and remote and sit there and think a little bit. But it was introverted and let's all gather up together, just us in this sector and try and problem solve. But extroverted in that the people counted, the people matter and without people we're nothing, really. The piles of money you sit in, well, small piles of money that we're making ever bigger, sit there in the bank account. So I think there was a bit of that. The actual trigger was something that I will not be very direct about to spare people's blushes. But somebody said to me, they were referring to a particular investor and they said, I'm afraid to pick up the phone to them because I just don't know what they're going to say and I don't know how they're going to react. And I thought, that's crazy. This person is such a self confident, strong willed person. I could never have imagined him saying that. And I knew on the other side of the table, the investor would be absolutely horrified if they thought that was that was that was the case. You know, if there's an issue, you really want your person to pick up the phone to you and talk to you about it. So it was a sense that we needed to reconnect in what was kind of a growing factor at the time.

Daniel Brewer: Looking back, obviously, with 20 years celebrating that, it's been horrific, but it causes you to do some of this reflection. And one of the things I've noticed is that there are sometimes moments in time where something is happening and you don't really know whether it's just a little blip or an instance or important to you, but to anyone else. And then time passes and you suddenly go, oh my gosh, that was actually an important moment. And I feel that about the gathering. I think the other event that was important, it certainly was to me, was the first Good Deals conference that the guys behind what is now Pioneers Post put on. It was the first time back in 2007 that I remember not feeling like the alien of trying to do good and make money at the same time. Suddenly there was a bunch of other people and we'd found our clan. That's what it felt like to me. And Gathering was also a sort of recognition that actually this was actually happening. So even though a lot of us had our heads down on various transactions or building particular funds, we were recognizing what was distinct here and what was different. But one of the criticisms of it is that, oh, this is just navel gazing, this is just inward looking. And also sometimes that's the criticism of impact investing generally, well, stop creating yourself as a side. Ultimately, if you're a third way between philanthropy and real investment, you'll never break into the objective of moving very large amounts of capital. We're seeing that kind of played out in different ways. But I wonder perhaps now how you look at that and think, are we right to have a bucket that we call precious about boundaries of social impact investing? Is it more universally useful to talk about spectrums where you can perhaps move a little bit between definitions? How do you respond to that challenge? Naval gazing?

Danyal Sattar: It's that maybe if people looked inwards a little bit more, the world would be a better place. That need for maybe a bit of inward looking, not a bad thing. We could all do with that and the world would probably be a better place for it. I think the inward looking nature of The Gathering was not to be exclusive, but it was to go, we need to sort some stuff out, we need to do some work. One of the people who was there that you brought along, Karen Shackleton, she was going, how do I crack the pension funds? These huge pools of money that of all entities are long term investors and concerned about their pensioners. Surely there must be a connection there. And she was going, I don't know what it is, I don't know how to do it. And she spent a few days working it out with a group of people workshopping. And out of that has come pensions for purpose. That's been such a key opener to communicating with that world both ways. So sometimes looking inward is really hard work. Think anyone who sat on a psychiatrist chair would say, yeah, that was pretty hard work. You don't get away with looking inward lightly. So it was about problem solving. But fundamentally, impact investment is very outward looking. We are, again, we're nothing without the people who we invest in. They deliver all the impact. We just hand over some money and get it back again to do the same thing again. The impact is theirs and it's very outward looking. The world out there is, I've sometimes thought, the only reason why we have to do what we do is because of a disconnection that's arisen between finance and society. If the gap was closer, maybe we wouldn't be there. There's never been a golden age of a bank manager on every street corner. Perhaps for you and I, but not if you were a woman, not if you were from more visible ethnic minority background. You may well have struggled to access finance. So there was, though, something about financial institutions being part of their community. As a bank manager was, I'm told that until 1970, bank of America's criteria for opening a bank branch was that they opened a new bank branch when the bank manager no longer personally knew every one of their customers. Now, I don't know whether that's true, whether it's just a nice story, but there was something there about profoundly knowing your customer base and being part of your community. So there's a very outward looking piece to what we're doing, I suppose, that also connects the history of it. And I really like our sense of history of this. 1542, Thomas White set up this Thomas White loan charity in Leicester to make loans to apprentices who were too poor to buy their own tools. If they couldn't buy their own tools, they couldn't become a master craftsman. And history recalls it as cross men rather than crafts women or wider. But without that loan, they couldn't get those tools and they couldn't increase their income. This Thomas White loan charity is still going in Leicester, still making micro loans. This day, 1775, the world's first building society. People saved money on a pint pot mug at the golden cross pub run by Richard Ketley in Birmingham. And I am told verbally by Pat Connitty, that the original founders of that building society were Irish canal diggers and they saved their pennies to buy building materials, to build their own homes, and thus was founded one of the world's first building societies. But they were the economic migrants of their time, probably as reviled as economic migrants can be today. But what extraordinary movements. So every hundred years or so you would find a new wave of these social purpose institutions being set up. So I think all we're really doing today is we are the next set of people going, hang on, we can use money to do something about some of these problems. And that's what we're doing. We're in a long tradition.

Daniel Brewer: It is interesting. I genuinely felt like I'd invented probably impact investing before the term existed. I thought it was a brand new idea and then I found other people who'd also had the idea and then you realize you need other people to have the same idea in order for it to take momentum. And then you do what you've just done, which is recognize there's nothing new under the sun. And actually a lot of this is just sensible approaches taking out some of the quite modern toxic thinking of let's pursue money for sake of money's sake, without a thought of what am I actually going to do with that money once I've got it? And it can be mobilized at the expense of everything else, including quality, customer satisfaction, environment, community, everything else is expendable just to pursue this single objective. And actually, once you've dismantled some of that kind of Milton Friedman 1970s thing, which I still struggle to understand how it really took hold, but you can actually go back to some common sense approaches that aren't necessarily theorized and otherwise and point to stuff that's hundreds of years old and go, look, this is.

Danyal Sattar: Actually good for me.

Daniel Brewer: If we keep people at the center of this rather than money at the center of this, then you can end up with some really good results.

Danyal Sattar: You did have a good idea and it is a good test of a good idea when you look around and go, oh yeah, there are four other people doing it, it must be a good idea. So it is actually the test of a very good idea when you see other people doing it. So don't do yourself down on that incredible setup of resonance.

Daniel Brewer: Well, there's a difference, isn't there, between what's a good idea and what's a unique idea. And actually, like you say, if it's a purely unique idea, that is an indication that it might not also be a good one. But when you've got it and it's yours and you're precious about it, you need to let uniqueness die. I mean, ideas come quickly to some of us. I invented the iPhone because I had a PDA. And I thought, wouldn't it be a good idea if you put these two things together? Actually, having the idea is not actually that the strength of an entrepreneur is to then package it, to create something that's useful and then find a way to route to market. And there's a whole bunch of stuff in there that we can throw our ideas around to a penny. But actually the implementation of the idea, the bringing of people along with you, is a journey and an adventure and a challenge. However good the idea is, there is.

Danyal Sattar: One innovation that's got your name on it's called the Daniel Brewer Clauses. And I put these it came from a conversation we were having. I think at the time, I might have been at Excited Capital. I was about to go on to Joseph Rantree foundation. But we were talking about the key person clause. This is a standard piece of legal documentation, and it basically says if your named person wants to leave. So if you were leaving residence, we would have certain rights. In that event, we might be able to spend the investment period or to have a say over the quality of the person coming in to replace it. And you looked at me at the time, you said, well, what about me? What about you? Because you're really important making an investment in us. I want to have a say over the person who replaces you so that I know I'm getting somebody good as my investor. So I thought, oh, actually, that's like a good idea. So I took that when I was at Joseph Roundtree foundation. We put these into our loan agreements, or rather we didn't because the lawyers went absolutely spare. But we put them into a letter. And the letter just said, every year I'll send you an Impact Report because what we ask people to do is to send us Impact Report. Okay, well, I'll send you our Impact Report and I'll send your annual accounts. God, that's easy because we produce them anyway. Then I said, you can always contact me on request. You can contact our finance director if you want to speak to our chief executive, I will seek to arrange that if you want to speak to a trustee of our organization, no guarantees, but I'll ask. And I wrote in this little list of things that was like the reverse. It was like a set of obligations back to you. Why the lawyers didn't like it, of course, is they said, well, look, if you don't send this stuff, you'd be in breach of loan agreement and then they wouldn't have to repay you. And I kind of said, well, yeah, that's kind of the idea of mutual obligation. So, yes, an invention.

Daniel Brewer: There's moments of arrogance that's come out but have fruit. I mean, I was interviewed recently as part of the is it called the Equality? Equality or equity and impact investing project. I think it might be, and a lot of it's around the equity of people within the system. But there's one particular project led by a couple of brilliant women at Bateswell's lawyers, who have been looking at equity and the power balance within the legal agreement. And so much of what I think we do as fund managers is prioritize the experience of social enterprises that take money from us. And sometimes it still feels like we are getting beaten overhead by some institutions that only understand power because they have it, because they have the money. But recognizing that actually what we're providing and what the entrepreneurs are providing to those holders of capital is an income stream. It's like, well, actually, we're both beneficiaries here, we're both getting something from this. So let's recognize the reality of that and not pretend that one of us is being purely philanthropic by providing capital and one of us is being purely beneficial by receiving capital. We're both getting something here, so let's recognize that there is a power dynamic. So it was really encouraged to hear that that is a movement which recognizes value rather than just financial control. But these things have to be balanced and you have to find pragmatic solutions within what's realistic. And ultimately it's about solutions rather than barriers, isn't it? But thank you.

Danyal Sattar: Live on.

Daniel Brewer: I love it. Well, look, before we go, let's cast our mind forward. We've gone back to the 15 hundreds we've considered the last 20 years, and we're now, as a sector, have got lots of interesting organizations that are doing quite a lot of good. Really, I think have proved the point that you can mobilize capital and deliver some financial returns. There's a whole spectrum of whether or.

Danyal Sattar: Not it's risk adjusted or not.

Daniel Brewer: But where do you think it's going to go? Now, this is a global movement, but what about 20 years time? What do you think the world of investing might look like?

Danyal Sattar: Well, from two places. One from John Bird, who's the founder of the Big Issue magazine, who just recognized how hard it was raising money to set up a social enterprise. He was fortunate enough to know a guy called Gordon Roddick, who was the husband of Anita Roddick, who set up a body shop. And the Body Shop Foundation was really pivotal in letting the big issue start up. But Nigel Kershaw really got the bug. He saw the likes of us and he really got fired up. And he was inspired by the Venetian merchant banks, those earlier Italian trade financiers, and just thought, can we get a merchant bank for our sector so that if you walked in the door, there'd be somebody who would try and solve your problem for you. So I would kind of like that vision to be true in 20 years time that instead of this more bespoke hunting out that you have to do to find a social investment organization like presidents or like us and figure invest or others and just find your right match that there is somewhere you can walk in the door and go yeah. The array that solutions to my financial problems are more findable. So maybe that's a bit of a pragmatic kind of 20 years forwards, but the other bit about the 20 years forwards is climate change has been financed, it's been business planned and financed. Climate change wasn't the objective, but there's really no excuse since the late 1980s in terms of scientific understanding of what is driving climate change and its impacts. So we need to be financing different things if we want a different kind of world. And I think that is becoming more accepted, even at the most surface level of the responsible investment. And I have a pension that's invested through one of these green ethical funds, but the growth of that space has been absolutely tremendous and I think that's the lightest echo of this shout to go, we have to invest in society. And maybe that's the thing from you were talking about the kind of earlier the economic thinking of Milton Friedman and others, but maybe it's also a lesson from Thatcherism that if you don't invest in it, you don't get it. So if we want we've got to invest in society or we won't get it. So if we want affordable housing, we've got to find ways of investing in it. If we want community, renewable energy got to invest in it. So I only see this as something that is growing and I think it's something that ordinary people really get. They have no great desire for their money to be doing destructive or negative things. I think they would so much prefer that it's doing positive ones. And the challenge, of course, is that there's a lot of money to be made in extractive investing, where if you pay your staff a very low wage, well, you are going to make more money. If you burn coal and don't have to pay the cost of the environmental pollution from it, you will make more money. So that's part of what we need to rebalance. I sometimes think I was lucky enough this last summer to take a train out from London to Innsbrook, where we were doing some tai chi up in a little village. So I got on this high speed German train, I'd made my way out to Clone and was changing and taking the train down to Stutgart and I thought, why does this train take two and a quarter hours to only go this short distance? I thought they were fast trained in Germany. And it's like I realized why when we went winding down the Rhine Valley. And it's like on every hilltop of every band, there's an extraordinary castle. And the castles, of course, were for the robber barons of their day, who would send out boats to charge tolls for people to go along the river. They were basically pirates with castles and we now look at them 150 years later and go, that's so quaint. Look at those beautiful castles there up on the outcrop. And I rather think that might be how we look at some of if we're lucky, our extractive industries of today will look at them and go, well, what a quaint corporate headquarters they had. Or the spoiled pit from the coal mine has now become quite picturesque and forested over and we will admire the industrial heritage of it all. If we're lucky, we will look at some of this stuff with some fondness so we have to do this stuff.

Daniel Brewer: I love it. Great. We'll look back at this and consider it for a great well, thank you for your time. It's great. Yeah. Continue to be working with Big Issue invest we're doing projects even as we speak together. Huge respect for you and the organization that you run. So thank you for you bring to it and you've meant to resonance over the years, one of the real movers and shakers outside of outside of our organization have been your generous leadership, which is a term I think you told me that came from dawn austwick and just seeing that perpetuant and practice.

Danyal Sattar: Thank you.

Daniel Brewer: Not at all. Not at all.