Up next in 10
Are AI cyber threats about to trigger catastrophic banking freezes and nationwide power cuts across the City of London? And can Presidents Trump and Xi forge an unlikely alliance to put the brakes on the technology?
In this episode of Business as Usual, we'll also take a look at some good news (FINALLY) for London's IPO market, with a major $9bn fintech float being mooted.
Plus: the devastating £50bn stealth tax squeeze quietly wiping out City salaries through decade-long frozen tax thresholds.
Get more of City AM 👇
🌐 http://www.cityam.com
X(formerly Twitter): http://twitter.com/CityAM
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cityam
Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/city_am
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/company/cityam
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
Hello and welcome to Business as Usual
0:02
brought to you by Workday. I'm Matt
0:04
Kenyon. Today we're going to be talking
0:06
about two men with a combined age of 153
0:09
years old who between them have the
0:11
power to stop AI from killing us all.
0:13
Or not. To do so, we'll be talking to
0:16
Alice Denby,
0:17
our opinion meister, our opinion
0:19
features editor, who joins me in the hot
0:21
seat today.
0:22
>> Oh, I think if anyone's going to kill us
0:23
all, it's these two. I'd throw Putin in
0:25
the mix. And that's the that's the real
0:27
threat to humanity, isn't it? Well, we
0:28
can get it stuck into this anyway.
0:29
>> Luckily, I think Russia's a bit further
0:31
behind on its own sovereign AI.
0:33
>> True.
0:33
>> I think it's right unless unless they're
0:34
doing some very
0:36
>> on nuclear weapons.
0:37
>> Oh, of course.
0:38
>> Yeah.
0:38
>> Well, we'll we'll we'll discuss all
0:40
about this. Uh, we are going to get to
0:41
some good news. I've been reading some
0:43
of our comments as I always do. And
0:45
someone said, I think Simon surfaced
0:46
this, that we never report on any good
0:48
news. We have some good news today, some
0:50
very rare good news in London's IPO
0:52
market. Uh, that rarest thing. Uh, we'll
0:55
be talking about that.
0:57
We're also going to have Christian May,
0:58
our editor-in-chief, joining us later in
1:00
the program to talk about the
1:02
pernicious, uh, creeping impact of tax
1:04
thresholds. Um, but Simon, who's already
1:08
made an early appearance, joins us now
1:10
to help, uh, decode the market's matrix.
1:14
Welcome, Simon.
1:14
>> Thank you for having me.
1:15
>> Simon, let's let's talk first about this
1:17
this AI picture. So, we've got this
1:18
bilateral between Trump and Xi today.
1:21
Could they save us all? Um, we've been
1:24
talking about this for a while, but like
1:25
could this be a moment where proper
1:27
global regulation falls into place?
1:29
>> Well, essentially, I was I was, uh,
1:31
talking to a friend recently who works
1:32
at one of the big, um, AI firms and they
1:34
said, you know, this is a moment where a
1:37
big new, uh, powerful technology is
1:40
being is being developed that has
1:42
ramifications for global security. This
1:44
would be a great time to have a set of
1:46
global leaders who are really in favor
1:49
of global cooperation and agreements.
1:51
Uh, and we do not have that set of
1:53
global leaders. We have the the complete
1:55
wrong set of global leaders for that
1:57
kind of cooperation. However, there is
1:59
going to be a meeting between Trump and
2:01
Xi. They are the front runners in what's
2:03
being described as an AI arms race.
2:06
You know, the two countries with the
2:08
most powerful tech.
2:10
So, if some kind of cooperation can be
2:12
established, that would be a huge step
2:14
forward. Although, I'm not going to go
2:15
going to bet on it personally.
2:16
>> I mean, look, I raised nuclear weapons
2:18
for a serious reason because the last
2:19
time we were in a similar kind of
2:20
existential situation, if you believe
2:22
what people say about the threat of AI,
2:24
was the Cold War. When actually
2:26
the the assurance of mutually assured
2:28
destruction did mean that a global
2:31
regulatory framework was put in place,
2:32
which so far has prevented another
2:35
nuclear attack.
2:37
So, do you think there is a possibility,
2:38
even though you know, we are essentially
2:39
in a sort of Cold War with China, that
2:42
we could find ground here where our
2:44
mutual interests align?
2:46
>> I mean, there's certainly opportunity.
2:47
Whether someone like Trump would embrace
2:49
it is a is a separate question. I think
2:52
there is
2:53
room for cautious optimism as to the
2:56
timeline or the sort of horizon for when
2:58
a serious threat is posed by AI.
3:02
You know, people I speak to AI firms say
3:04
actually, you know, the next five years
3:07
will be you know, the kind of threats
3:08
will be individual incidents. They won't
3:10
be
3:11
civilizational threats. It'll be things
3:13
like, you know,
3:14
a bank gets hacked and it has to suspend
3:17
withdrawals for a week or something like
3:19
that. Or an energy grid gets hacked and
3:22
suddenly there's a
3:23
48-hour long power cut. Those will be
3:25
the kind of threats. You know, I don't
3:26
think we're going to see in the next
3:28
three or four years the kind of
3:30
you know, world-destroying threats.
3:32
>> so
3:33
so what you're saying is maybe we could
3:34
have a framework for misuse of AI by
3:36
state actors, but if it's malign or
3:38
rogue actors, surely that's much harder
3:40
to police.
3:41
>> Mhm. Mhm.
3:42
But, I guess that you know, the hope is
3:44
that
3:45
by that point, by the point when
3:47
something becomes really serious,
3:49
we'll be long past uh Trump presidency
3:51
and there might be someone in his stead
3:53
that takes this a bit more seriously. I
3:54
do think it it'll take more than just
3:57
world leaders meeting. It'll take some
3:59
kind of serious incident to properly
4:01
focus minds on cooperation.
4:03
>> I do worry as well that the debate about
4:05
AI, particularly here in the UK, and
4:07
fine, it can sound a bit parochial here
4:08
in the UK, but that it's dividing along
4:10
political lines. So, you have uh Ed
4:13
Davey making his big speech at the
4:15
Liberal Democrat conference about how he
4:16
thinks that we need to slow it down,
4:18
that we need to regulate it, and so on.
4:19
And then you have much more sort of
4:21
people on the right saying, "No, we need
4:23
to take advantage, um and we need to go
4:25
for it in the UK." And I worry that that
4:27
is going to get in the way of actually
4:28
what needs to happen, which is a
4:29
sensible non-partisan debate on how we
4:32
benefit from it, but also protect
4:33
ourselves from it.
4:34
>> Mhm. Mhm. And I think there has to be a
4:36
a realization of the the relative role
4:38
that the UK can play in that. Uh the UK
4:41
is not a world leader, and so the bigger
4:43
danger to the UK is actually losing
4:46
access to some of this frontier
4:47
technology,
4:48
>> Exactly.
4:48
>> rather than having some kind of threat
4:50
posed by it.
4:51
>> Purely for the interest of time, Simon,
4:53
let's talk about something more
4:54
positive, the IPO news we've had this
4:56
week.
4:58
>> Yes. An actual IPO. I mean, I almost had
5:00
to go back to the dictionary and check
5:02
what it stood for,
5:03
uh because uh we have uh potentially
5:05
about to have the biggest London IPO
5:08
uh in around 5 years.
5:10
Um so, there was this, you know, big
5:11
flurry of IPOs at the tail end of COVID
5:14
when there was a lot of pent-up capital
5:16
um being deployed. Uh and then we've had
5:18
a quite long lull two or three years
5:20
now. But it looks like that might
5:22
finally be coming to an end uh with the
5:24
float of a company called um Airtel
5:27
Money, which uh provides uh fintech
5:30
services in Africa. It's the sister
5:32
company of Airtel Africa, which is the
5:34
the telecoms firm. Um and they could be
5:37
worth as much as $9 billion,
5:40
uh and they this week have filed their
5:42
application to float in London.
5:45
>> I mean, we should celebrate that, but I
5:46
should introduce a note of pessimism,
5:48
which is it does come off the back of
5:50
RAC putting the brakes
5:52
>> Yes, literally.
5:53
>> Literally 24 hours later after RAC said
5:57
that there that talks had broken down,
5:59
as it were, on
6:00
on their roadside float.
6:02
It's a fascinating company, Airtel
6:04
Money. I mean, they have more than
6:06
50 million customers in Africa. So,
6:09
they're actually huge. I mean
6:10
>> I mean, Revolut is is, you know, our
6:12
biggest fintech, and that has about 100.
6:14
So, they're not massively far away from
6:16
from Revolut in terms of size.
6:18
Their corporate structure is utterly
6:19
bizarre.
6:21
So, they're listed in London, but their
6:23
actual headquarters is in Dubai. Their
6:26
legal headquarters is in Amsterdam, and
6:27
their operational headquarters in Kenya.
6:29
So, how quite how they piece that
6:30
together, I don't know.
6:32
>> it works.
6:32
>> But the guy running it is a Brit, guy
6:34
called Ian Fara Farao, I think, who is a
6:38
Warwick grad who used to work at
6:39
Vodafone.
6:40
>> Very good.
6:41
>> Oh, good stuff.
6:42
>> And is is there a glimmer of hope for
6:44
the the fintech revival that sometimes
6:46
we've been hoping for? We've seen
6:48
Revolut have surprised us a bit with
6:50
their potential dual listing, which
6:51
could be happening. Obviously, they're
6:53
abandoning us a bit for New York, but
6:54
they are also at least going to have
6:55
some presence in the UK.
6:56
>> Yeah. Are there others in the pipeline?
6:57
>> I think I think I think there could well
6:59
be. I mean, I was chatting to the CEO
7:01
Ian earlier.
7:02
He told me they spent the best part of a
7:04
year trying to decide where they wanted
7:06
to float and when, and they looked at
7:08
various other options. They looked at
7:10
Amsterdam. They looked at the Middle
7:11
East for a float, and they settled on
7:13
London because he said, "A, there is a
7:15
deep pool of capital that is available
7:17
here they can they can get access to,
7:19
and they value it for its fintech
7:21
expertise, that there are so many big
7:23
fintechs in London that there is a pool
7:25
of, you know, very well-educated
7:28
investors and analysts that understand
7:30
this market, that know what the what the
7:32
opportunities are."
7:34
>> Speaking of a sophisticated market,
7:37
we need to talk now about
7:39
all of our favorite websites, Pornhub.
7:42
>> Yes.
7:42
>> Which is now being subject to a probe by
7:45
regulators. What's going on here?
7:47
>> story is riddled with innuendo, isn't
7:49
it? But yes, Ofcom
7:51
are looking at Pornhub. I mean, they're
7:53
looking into Pornhub. They're not, you
7:54
know, doing something inappropriate at
7:56
their desks.
7:57
And the reason for that is because of
8:00
the new age verification rules that were
8:02
introduced a few months ago
8:04
by the
8:06
in accordance with the online safety
8:09
act. And Ofcom are concerned about the
8:13
efficacy of Pornhub's
8:15
checks. They say they may not have
8:18
sufficient due diligence. They may not
8:19
have conducted sufficient due diligence
8:21
when implementing their new age
8:22
verification system, which they said may
8:25
not be highly effective.
8:28
So, I don't know quite how they've
8:29
established that, but presumably there
8:30
was a lot of trial and error involved.
8:32
>> So, if we were to to tread undelicately
8:34
around this, we're suggesting that there
8:35
are people who are managing to get onto
8:38
Pornhub's site and access its material
8:40
without necessarily proving that they
8:42
are over 18.
8:44
>> Yeah.
8:44
>> And and and that there might even be a
8:45
suggestion that that that Pornhub
8:48
haven't done enough to properly enforce
8:50
the rules. I mean, clearly it it can't
8:51
be great for their business model, cuz
8:53
it would have relied before on a lot of
8:54
people just casually coming across
8:55
things. It's quite a big behavioral
8:57
change to then actually give them your
8:58
data. There must be quite a lot of For
9:00
those who do use it, there must be quite
9:01
a lot of pent-up guilt about actually
9:03
handing over email address, presumably
9:05
like a scan of your ID.
9:07
>> Yeah, credit cards, that kind of thing.
9:08
>> cards for something you would have just
9:09
been able to idle onto before,
9:11
hypothetically.
9:12
>> Yeah. I I think this is always going to
9:14
have been the problem with the online
9:15
safety act in that, you know, it twas
9:18
ever thus that you know, teenagers try
9:20
to get access to things they're not
9:21
allowed to do. I mean, you know, I was
9:23
playing 18-plus video games when I was
9:26
10, you know, because I got mom or dad
9:28
to buy it in the shop and then create an
9:30
account for it.
9:30
>> That warped your little mind.
9:31
>> Well, yeah. I mean, and
9:33
I suspect it's the same thing with this,
9:35
that that people are always going to
9:36
find ways around it and if it's as easy
9:38
as just being able to get mom or dad's
9:40
credit card and put the details in,
9:42
then, you know.
9:43
>> I mean, I think we should be serious
9:44
about um protecting children from seeing
9:47
uh
9:48
adult content. But uh well, but from a
9:50
business perspective, isn't the problem
9:51
here that that Pornhub um decided just
9:53
to pull out of the UK um because it said
9:56
it's it's no longer possible for us to
9:58
operate. We we cannot do these checks.
10:00
>> And we can't continue to operate because
10:01
the online safety act is going to
10:02
encompass all users, not just those
10:04
we're trying to protect
10:05
>> from this content. And it's not just
10:06
this website, there are many other
10:07
smaller websites like community forums
10:10
and so on that have to go through all of
10:11
these rigorous checks um and so can no
10:14
longer operate. It So, you know, it's
10:16
it's bad for business, isn't it?
10:17
>> Yeah, I mean, this is the biggest
10:18
problem with a lot of UK tech
10:20
regulation, uh which is that most tech
10:23
companies, tech platforms are global in
10:25
their nature. They have, you know, a
10:26
global market, a global customer base,
10:28
but they can't regulate uh for different
10:31
markets separately. And so, effectively,
10:33
their regulation globally is the sum
10:35
total of every national regulation. And
10:37
so, if one country makes it too hard for
10:39
them to regulate the rest of their
10:41
customer base, they just have to cut
10:42
them off.
10:43
>> Right. Purely for time and also so I can
10:45
go and clutch my pearls as the ads uh
10:48
read, we'll we'll go to a break now.
10:50
Simon, thank you very much for joining
10:51
us.
10:52
>> Thank you.
10:52
>> Viewers, listeners, you don't go
10:54
anywhere though. Uh we're going to be
10:55
talking about tax thresholds, how
10:56
they've been very pernicious, and how
10:58
they amount to a stealth tax. After the
11:00
break, don't go anywhere. Guessing is
11:03
for game shows, not your business,
11:05
especially when your margin for error is
11:07
zero.
11:07
>> Workday is the enterprise AI platform
11:10
for HR, finance, and IT with a deep
11:12
understanding of your organization's
11:14
context and guardrails.
11:15
>> So, every AI action is permission aware,
11:18
giving you accuracy 24/7 and the ability
11:21
to not just get work done, but get it
11:23
done right.
11:24
>> It's a new Workday.
11:25
>> Welcome back to business as usual. Now,
11:27
the British public has been subject to
11:28
all kinds of tax hikes over the last few
11:30
years, but one that really doesn't get
11:32
enough attention is frozen thresholds.
11:35
Now, to talk about this, we are joined
11:36
by our editor-in-chief, Christian May. I
11:38
hear you have some things to get off
11:40
your chest about this.
11:41
>> That's what I'm here for. This show is
11:42
very successful and it's been running
11:44
now for a while. And this is the first
11:45
time I've exercised my authority to say
11:48
I want to come on your show and talk
11:49
about something.
11:50
>> You asked You asked in a very restrained
11:52
way, which I
11:53
>> I did.
11:53
>> What if we'd said no?
11:54
>> Well, then I would have just burst in
11:56
and commandeered the microphone.
11:58
Um cuz I'm mad as hell and I'm not going
12:00
to take it anymore.
12:01
Um I wanted to talk about frozen
12:03
thresholds because we all of us spend so
12:05
much of our time looking at possible
12:07
future tax changes and what went up at
12:09
the last budget and how they're going to
12:11
get through this time and where does the
12:12
headroom stand? And this is all very
12:13
important and interesting, but there's a
12:15
sort of foundational sin, if you like,
12:18
that I think we do need to spend a bit
12:19
more time considering.
12:21
And I think it accounts for a lot. Um
12:25
And I have to put this into context, I
12:26
suppose. It was 2021.
12:28
>> Chancellor Rishi Sunak
12:30
>> obviously at the height of the pandemic,
12:31
pandemic that was going to end up
12:33
leaving us with a bill of 300 billion
12:34
quid. Uh said that he was going to This
12:37
was March 2021. He was going to freeze
12:39
the personal allowance and the
12:42
thresholds, the the income you're on, at
12:44
which you start paying different rates
12:45
of income tax. And he said that he was
12:48
very clear and he knows this is This is
12:49
going to basically take money away from
12:51
people, but this is a national crisis
12:52
and it's the fair thing to do. And
12:54
that's what he did. So, he froze those
12:55
thresholds, the
12:57
um the income level at which you start
12:59
paying 20% tax, 40%, 45% tax. Um
13:04
And then the following year, new
13:05
chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, said that um he
13:09
was going to do the same. In fact, he
13:10
had to extend it because it was the
13:11
right thing to do.
13:13
Um and then in Rachel Reeves' first
13:15
budget, amidst all the horror of the 40
13:17
billion pounds worth of tax rises that
13:19
she imposed, she said she was going to
13:21
end this. She said it was appalling, and
13:23
she was right. She said this fiscal
13:25
drag, as it's known, not only pulls
13:26
millions of people into higher rates of
13:29
tax each year because their salaries
13:30
might go up with inflation, but the
13:32
thresholds triggering new tax bands have
13:34
not been going up with inflation. And
13:36
she said it was an outrage, and I
13:37
applauded it. And then, 12 months later,
13:40
in November 2025, she realized that she
13:42
needed even more money, and therefore
13:44
she wasn't able to do this, and she
13:45
extended it through to 2031. So, you
13:48
will have had
13:49
10 years of those thresholds being
13:52
frozen.
13:53
And that will have
13:55
pulled in over that decade about an
13:57
extra 50-60 billion quid for the
14:00
Treasury. And which, by the way,
14:01
accounts for just under a third of the
14:04
amount by which the benefits and welfare
14:07
bill will have risen over that 10 years.
14:09
And I was looking at all this yesterday,
14:10
and I wrote a small column about it, and
14:12
I wanted to get it off my chest, and I
14:13
thought we should come in here and talk
14:14
about it. I probably used up all my time
14:17
just setting the scene, but the scene is
14:19
egregious. It's appalling. You know, I
14:22
guess what I wanted to say was, of all
14:24
the reasons and there are many why
14:25
people might feel like they're stuck,
14:27
why we don't feel as a country like
14:28
we're moving forwards, why people
14:30
individually don't feel like anything's
14:32
getting easier, this is the foundational
14:34
problem. They are paying tax to a degree
14:36
that they really ought not to have been
14:38
paying. And I'll just end by pointing
14:39
out that if you are on a relatively
14:41
modest salary of, say, 65 grand, you are
14:45
now paying 3 and 1/2 thousand pounds
14:47
more in tax than you would have been had
14:50
those tax thresholds risen in line with
14:52
inflation. So, I just wanted to put it
14:54
out there that we shouldn't overlook it
14:55
as we think about all the other ways in
14:57
which taxes might rise or should be cut.
14:59
This has been and will be, by the time
15:01
it concludes, assuming it's not extended
15:03
beyond 2031, a decade-long
15:06
sin.
15:07
>> When, um, I think it was I can't
15:09
remember which Labour front bencher it
15:10
was. There was one who confronted Jeremy
15:12
Hunt about this in Parliament probably
15:13
back in 2022 and accused him of being a
15:15
fiscal drag queen, which I think he's
15:17
he's he took actually quite a lot of
15:18
offense to, and I think probably could
15:19
have could have taken it in in in better
15:21
humor at the time. But that was a labor
15:23
front bencher saying that to him. Now
15:24
it's presumably will will slip the other
15:26
way. Quite depressing that there's a
15:28
bipartisan level of complicity in this.
15:30
It must be very tempting if you are a
15:32
chancellor or a treasury official simply
15:34
to let this just drift on and on. How do
15:37
you break the deadlock on this?
15:38
>> But the politics are interesting as well
15:39
because I think now both Lib Dems and
15:41
Reform are saying that they would
15:43
unfreeze the threshold. So it is a It is
15:45
a policy that has some level of
15:47
bipartisan agreement the other way.
15:50
>> So it's quite easy if if if you're that
15:51
bit further away from the prospect of
15:53
government. I mean not not the Reform
15:55
are potentially that far.
15:56
>> I mean look, one of the things that's
15:58
happened here is that it's and this is
15:59
precisely what Rachel Reeves did in
16:01
2025. She had to make the numbers add up
16:04
towards the end of a certain forecast
16:06
period in order in order to be able to
16:07
say that she's going to get through with
16:09
her fiscal rules.
16:10
And one of the ways you can do that is
16:12
to just is just to point to future as
16:15
yet unrealized, technically
16:17
hypothetical, tax arrangements that will
16:20
on paper mean that you can add it all
16:22
up. But the consequence of that is that
16:23
if this does stay in place until 2031
16:26
and by the way, it could be extended
16:27
even further, but I think you should get
16:29
people out on the streets at that point.
16:31
You've got a decade in which people
16:34
not only
16:36
paying
16:37
more tax than than is reasonable, well
16:39
out of kilter with inflation, and also
16:41
you've also got more more people pulled
16:43
into those rates of tax that was
16:45
designed never to catch them. And it's
16:46
it's this sort of foundational sin now
16:48
that I think accounts for a lot of the
16:51
feeling that people have of an
16:52
unfairness, of a certain kind of
16:55
low-level persistent hardship that
16:58
they're not getting on in the in in life
16:59
in the way they thought, in the way they
17:01
feel they ought to. I don't know quite
17:03
how you get out of it, although I would
17:04
reiterate once again that the 50 billion
17:06
quid raised by the policy over a decade
17:09
really is a
17:10
tiny little rounding error in the grand
17:12
scheme of government expenditure and
17:13
only a third of the amount by which the
17:16
welfare bill will increase over the same
17:17
period.
17:18
>> Obviously, you're right that it's it's
17:19
hardest for people in the lower tax
17:21
brackets, but we are sitting here, so we
17:22
should we should you know, raise the
17:24
question. I think it also confuses our
17:26
whole perception of wealth. So, what a
17:28
figure that I found really striking, if
17:29
it had gone up in line with inflation,
17:31
the top rate taxpayers should be earning
17:32
£191,000.
17:35
Instead, it's something like £160,000.
17:37
And that's that's skewing our whole
17:39
attitude to wealth and all the
17:40
conversation we often have about Henry's
17:41
and so on.
17:42
>> Yeah, look at the I mean, let's look at
17:43
the figures and I'll try I'll try and
17:44
remember them as best I can. At the
17:46
moment, the personal allowance is about
17:48
£12,500. I think that's the amount you
17:49
can earn before you pay any tax at all.
17:51
Had it risen in line with inflation, I
17:53
had we not been
17:54
suffering under these frozen thresholds,
17:56
it would be about 16 quid, which is
17:58
quite a generous allowance by European
17:59
standards.
18:00
The 40p rate, the which you start paying
18:03
40p in the pound,
18:04
is
18:06
about What is it, Alice? 45 grand?
18:09
Should should be should be 64 grand.
18:11
Maybe it's it's 50 grand, I think, and
18:13
it should be 64 grand. And as for the
18:15
additional rate of 45p, I mean, Jeremy
18:17
Hunt's got a double whammy here because
18:19
first of all, he
18:20
lowered the
18:23
threshold on salaries down from 150 to
18:26
125,000.
18:27
That puts you in that disastrous 100
18:29
grand cliff edge withdrawal of personal
18:31
allowance, child care nightmare zone.
18:34
And of course, he's extended the freeze.
18:35
So, yes, you're right. The 45p rate
18:38
should only really be applied to income
18:39
over 190 grand if all was fair, but
18:42
life's not fair.
18:43
Well, life's not fair, and that's
18:44
probably going
18:45
>> Note to leave on. As a somber note, but
18:47
>> have called it We should rename this
18:48
podcast Life's
18:49
>> Life's not fair and and galvanize the
18:51
public towards towards rage.
18:53
Christian, thank you so much for coming
18:54
in for your your 8 minutes rage. It's so
18:56
important that we do this every once in
18:57
a while. And always let us know when you
18:59
when you'd like to.
19:00
>> for me, you're right.
19:01
>> I think it's important. We'll we'll
19:02
we'll we'll figure out a good schedule
19:03
for it. And that is all we have time for
19:05
on the podcast today. So, thank you all,
19:07
viewers, listeners at home, for
19:09
listening to Business as Usual, brought
19:10
to you by Workday.
19:12
>> Thank you very much.
19:13
>> This podcast was produced by Joe Lee,
19:14
and we'll be back tomorrow at 6:00 a.m.
19:16
Goodbye.
#News