Published: Thu 10 January 2019
Just saw the news of Jeff Bezos' divorce on TV. This made me feel quite
sad. As a complete outsider, I wouldn't really know what's going on
behind the scenes but I always thought the marriage between an avid book
reader and an novelist would last forever.
I thougth of a tweet Bezos
last May. It's a quote from Emerson which Bezos printed out and put
onto his fridge so he can look at it everyday.
To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and
the affection of children; to earn the appreciation of honest critics
and endure the betrayal of false friends; to appreciate beauty; to
find the best in others; to leave the world a bit better, whether by a
healthy child, a garden patch, or a redeemed social condition; to know
even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is to
Published: Wed 09 January 2019
Where Did the One Million Figure for Detentions in Xinjiang’s Camps
The first estimate, from Adrian Zenz, a social scientist at the
European School of Culture & Theology, is based on an accounting of
the detention camp populations totalling some 892,000 individuals in
68 Xinjiang counties as of the Spring of 2018.
The second estimate comes from the Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit
Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD). Between mid-2017 and mid-2018,
CHRD interviewed eight ethnic Uighurs located in eight different
villages in southern Xinjiang. Each person gave their own estimate of
the number of people detained in their village, which CHRD used to
surmise a detention rate for each village. These village detention
rates ranged from 8 to 20 percent, averaging out to 12.8 percent
across all eight villages. Just as Zenz did, CHRD “conservatively”
rounded down to reach a 10 percent estimated detention rate.
When State-Building Hinders Growth: The Legacy of China's Confucian
Do countries with a long history of state-building fare better in the
long run? Recent work has shown that earlier state-building may lead
to higher levels of present-day growth. By contrast, I use a natural
experiment to show that the regions of China with over a thousand
years of sustained exposure to state-building are significantly poorer
today. The mechanism of persistence, I argue, was the introduction of
a civil service exam based on knowledge of Confucian classics, which
strengthened the social prestige of the civil service and weakened the
prestige of commerce. A thousand years later, the regions of China
where the Confucian bureaucracy was first introduced have a more
educated population and more Confucian temples, but lower levels of
wealth. The paper contributes to an important debate on the Great
Divergence, highlighting how political institutions interact with
culture to cause long-run patterns of growth.
This is a neat article with some interesting data points. I love to
believe in the conclusion but I think the author has the cause and
effect sequence wrong.
I think the poorer parts of China tend to be flatter, share common
langauge, thus easier to rule through a central state. But because of
their location, they are too far away from the coast to benefit from
international trades. The wealthier parts tend to have poor
transportation system, more cut-off from the central state and, without
a better choice, had to rely more on trade, thus enjoying the fruits
from doing so.
China smartphone shipments seen down 12-15.5 percent last year: market
shipments dropped 15.5 percent to roughly 390 million units for the
year, with a 17 percent slump in December.
The Chinese smartphone market, the world’s largest, could shrink
another 3 percent this year, Canalys said, in what would be a third
straight year of declines. Smartphone shipments in the country had
fallen 4 percent in 2017.
Published: Tue 08 January 2019
I finally found time to sit down and watch Ray Dalio's famous 30 minutes How The
Economic Machine Works
video. It's totally different from the classic Econ 101 but it feels more
practical and seems to explain the world economy better and in a simpler
Things I learned:
- Credit/debt boosts growth first and depress it later. Credit
encourages spending which boosts economy; however the need to pay back
the debts reduced spending which depresses the economy.
- Higher interest rate lowers the assets present value. Given the same
future cash flow projection, higher interests rate means higher
discounts, which means lower present value.
- Stock market goes down when economy and profit growth is strong. This
is counter-intuitive but it's part of the natural cycle.
- Short-term cycle is 7-10 years and long-term cycle takes about 70-100
- Productivity matters in the long run. Credit matters in the short run.
- When the economy becomes deflationary because of the contraction from
debt payment, printing money converts credits to money. So printing
money is inflationary. It works because as long inflation is higher
than deflation, the debt burden is taken care of. The key is to
balance the inflation and deflation.
- The term "Lost decade" comes because of a long term readjustment takes
10 years for the market to go back to where it was. Even when the
deleveraging is handled perfectly, it will still take 3 years for
going down and another 7 to go back to where it was.
- Three advices: don’t let debt increase faster than income, otherwise
the debt will crush you; don’t let income rises faster than
productivity growth, otherwise you will become less competitive;
always improve the productivity because it is what matters in the long
Published: Mon 07 January 2019
Many of my friends were shocked when they heard that our photo printing
business made everything in New Zealand instead
of China. People couldn't believe that, with all of our automation,
we can provide the same service in New Zealand 25% cheaper than getting
them done in Shanghai --- this doesn't even include the international
shipping cost yet.
The common belief is that outsourcing is an inevitable trend. Small
countries like New Zealand can't do anything about it, except
just following along and hoping for the best.
I disagree. I have the evidence to believe that there are certain types
of businesses that'd be better off manufacturing in New Zealand, to stay
close to their market.
Bloomberg recently published a long opinion piece on this topic called
Your Clothes Could Be Made in the USA
The article has done an excellent job describing the key factors that
are causing apparel production jobs to move back to local markets or
neighbouring countries (Like Mexico for the US).
Here are the four key reasons for brands to make the move.
Stress their heritage and increase control over supply chains.
Burberry and other British fashion labels have moved some of their
production as “Made in England” became attractive to luxury buyers
after an import boom in the 1990s and early 2000s. Hugo Bosss, the
German fashion label, has started selling a “Made in Germany”
collection, produced completely (except for some fabrics) in
Metzingen, the company’s corporate seat.
Speed beats marginal cost advantage and basic compliance is upgraded to an integrated sustainability strategy.
Failure to respond to demand for an item consumers have seen on
Instagram may mean huge volumes of unsold clothing. Unable to tell
consumers what they should wear, producers must treat short lead times
as the No. 1 priority. Fast fashion is giving way to ultra-fast
fashion, as practiced by online retailers such as Boohoo, Asos and
Lesara. This doesn’t work well with shipping from Asia: Delivery to
big Western markets takes about 30 days by sea.
Shortened lead time increases gross profit margin.
But as lead times gain importance, shortening them compensates for
some of the labor cost disadvantage by increasing the share of clothes
sold at the full price. Raising it by 6.1 percent for a garment that
takes 60 minutes to produce would justify the transfer of production
from China to the U.S., McKinsey calculated.
Automation and robotics drive down production cost.
Automation can drive down the cost in Western countries. Now, sewing a
pair of jeans takes an average of 19 minutes, more than half of the
total production time. McKinsey and RWTH Aachen figure robotics can
cut that time by 40 percent to 90 percent. At another important step,
distressing the jeans, technology exists to cut the time necessary
from about 20 minutes to 90 seconds: Levi’s does it with lasers.
Published: Sun 06 January 2019
Just like the previous two days, I'm handcopying a piece of writing today.
This one is a letter from Steve Jobs. It's so tightly crafted that it's almost beautiful. (Source: Daring
Apple today announced that it expects to generate revenues of about
$1.4 billion to $1.45 billion in the June quarter, down from previous
guidance of about $1.6 billion. The lower-than-expected revenues are
primarily due to soft demand in the consumer and creative markets
such as advertising and publishing. Geographically, revenue shortfall
is expected to be offset significantly by higher-than-expected gross
margins primarily due to lower costs of some components. Accordingly,
the Company has revised its earnings guidance from $.08 to $.10 per
diluted share, compared to previous guidance of $.11 or slightly
"Like others in our industry, we are experiencing a slowdown in sales
this quarter. As a result, we're going to miss our revenue
projections by around 10%, resulting in slightly lower profits," said
Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO. "We've got some amazing new products in
development, so we're excited about the year ahead. As one of the few
companies currently making a profit in the PC business, we remain
very optimistic about Apple's prospects for long-term growth".
Here is John Gruber's commentary on the writing.
Look at the tight construction of that message from Apple in 2002.
First paragraph: put out the numbers. Second paragraph: it’s an
industry-wide problem, but Apple has “amazing new products” coming.
And then the kicker, the dagger: “As one of the few companies
currently making a profit in the PC business…”.
We’ve got some short term bad news but don’t worry, we have this.”
And… out. Short and sweet. Rip off the bad news Band-Aid, express
quiet confidence that Apple is in great shape, and that’s it. Message
Published: Sat 05 January 2019
Another day. Another tweetstorm. This time by
Just like yesterday, I'm handcopying the full thread here as a way to
appreciate and understand it better.
Key concepts: specific knowledge (proprietary knowledge is what I prefer
to call it), leverage, accountability, and judgement.
- Seek wealth, not money or status. Wealth is having assets that earn
while you sleep. Money is how we transfer time and wealth. Status is
your place in the social hierarchy.
- Understand that ethical wealth creation is possible. If you secretly
despise wealth, it will elude you.
- Ignore people playing status games. They gain status by attacking
people playing wealth creation games.
- You're not going to get rich renting out your time. You must own
equity --- a piece of a business --- to gain your financial freedom.
- You'll get rich by giving society what it wants but does not yet know
how to get. At scale.
- Pick an industry where you can play long term games with long term
- The internet has massively broadened the possible space of careers.
Most people haven't figured this out yet.
- Play iterated games. All the returns in life, whether in wealth,
relationships, or knowledge, come from compound interest.
- Pick business partners with high intelligence, energy, and, above
- Don't partner with cynics and pessimists. Their beliefs are
- Learn to sell. Learn to build. If you can do both, you will be
- Arm yourself with specific knowledge, accountability, and
- Specific knowledge is knowledge that you cannot be trained for. If
society can train you, it can train someone else, and replace you.
- Specific knowledge is found by pursuing your genuine curiosity and
passion rather than whatever is hot right now.
- Building specific knowledge will feel like play to you but will look
like work to others.
- When specific knowledge is taught, it's through apprenticeships, not
- Specific knowledge is often highly technical or creative. It cannot
be outsourced or automated.
- Embrace accountability, and take business risks under your own name.
Society will reward you with responsibility, equity, and leverage.
- The most accountable people have singular, public, and risky brands:
Oprah, Trump, Kanye, Elon. (AD: Trump? Really?)
- "Give me a leverl long enough, and a place to stand, and I will move
the earth." - Archimedes.
- Fortune require leverage. Business leverage comes from capital,
people, and products with no marginal cost of replication (code and
- Capital means money. To raise money, apply your specific knowledge,
with accountability, and show resulting good judgement.
- Labour means people working for you. It's the oldest and most
fought-over form of leverage. Labour leverage will impress your
parents, but don't waste your life chasing it.
- Capital and labour are permissioned leverage. Everyone is chasing
capital, but someone has to give it to you. Everyone is trying to
lead, but someone has to follow you.
- Code and media are permissionless leverage. They're the leverage
behind the newly rich. You can create software and media that works
for you while you sleep.
- An army of robots is freely available --- it's just packed in data
centres for heat and space efficiency. Use it.
- If you can't code, write books and blogs, record videos and
- Leverage is a force multiplier for your judgement.
- Judgement requires experience, but can be built faster by learning
- There is no skill called "business". Avoid business magazines and
- Study microeconomics, game theory, psychology, persuasion, ethics,
mathematics, and computers.
- Reading is faster than listening. Doing is faster than watching.
(AD: what the hell does this mean? Spend less time socialising and
more time reading? Just do it mentality?)
- You should be too busy to "do coffee", while still keeping an
- Set and enforce an aspirational personal hourly rate. If fixing a
problem will save less than your hourly rate, ignore it. If
outsourcing a task will cost less than your hourly rate, outsource
- Work as hard as you can. Even though who you work with and what you
work on are more important than how hard you work.
- Become the best in the world at what you do. Keep refining what you
do until this is true.
- There are no get rich quick schemes. That's just someone else
getting rich off you.
- Apply specific knowledge, with leverage and good judgement, and
eventually you will get what you deserve.
- When you're finally wealthy, you'll realise that it wasn't what you
were seeking in the first place. But that's for another day. (AD:
This is pretty fruastrating way to end a thoughtful thread. )
Published: Fri 04 January 2019
This full thread is from
Steven Sinofsky is one of the best strategic thinkers and this thread
talks about the topics I blogged yesterday.
- What's the typical way for a luxury brand to broaden its appearl.
- How does a platform make money?
- How does players on a platform make their money?
- How has Apple avoided been bogged down by the partners?
(I'm re-typing everything again so I get to appreciate his points
better. Steven, or twitter, owns his tweets. Not me. )
- Apple has long known it is missing the boat on providing low priced
phones --- strategic mistake to cede "low end" to Android. Or raised
prices too much/soon. Then it must be an easy answer to just lower
prices or make low priced phones. Ack! Harder than it looks.
- Pricing is much more sophisticated than this. Pricing not only says
who can afford your product but also establishes a brand, determines
channel & more. Many say Apple is a luxury brand; certainly they
focused on that.
- PC v Mac really showed the weakness in appealing to luxury brand in a
volume driven market. High prices were the undoing of the Mac from
the very early days.
Going back to 1990, height of Apple, PCs sold at 10X the Mac run
rate. But Macs had much higher margins per device.
- While available software was a big part of that 10X, reality was that
a Mac computer also cost substantially more than a PC, and depending
on configuration was often 2X the price.
Everyone knew. Apple/Jobs refused to license Mac System enabling
cheaper Macs (one approach).
- PC strategy was low everyday prices for PCs. BUT there was a catch or
three --- really important to think about relative to iPhones
PCs were made up of hardware, OS, chips. To have low prices Intel and
Microsoft benefited from an ecosystem that "raced to the bottom".
- Intel and Microsoft held on to most of the profits in selling PCs
(and MS w/Office). The retailers and PC makers had very slim (to
zero) margins for two decades. Often PC hardware seemed like a
- The first key to having low priced offerings is that you have to have
a set of partners who are willing to compete on thin margins in order
to bring the product to market.
Very tough for one player to be the high margin and low margin
players. Race yourself to the bottom?
- The second key thing PCs benefitted from was a channel that allowed
distribution by price maintaining price walls - business PCs could be
expensive/sold direct (ThinkPad); consumer PCs sold as a bundles with
high margin components useless as business PCs. (Dell's Inspiron and
- Buying a PC was a complex navigation through model line selected by
segment (Big Business direct, SMB, individual, Education,
Government). Then each form factor was "good, better, best".
Byzantine. That's how you offer low prices and avoid everyone paying
and have some margin.
- Plus that is where crapware comes from --- those partners need some
way to make margin. Adding software, selling screen real-estate, and
so on are the only tools remain that allow for partners to make
something when hardware and OS are fixed.
- This is how business always does premium+low priced offers, eg
clothing where brands stand for luxury but aspire to mass market.
Brands like Calvin Klein, Ralph Laruen, Armani w/ topi tier labels
(like Purple) at select channels or direct. BUT also have mass
- Each of those distribution points is a different label, different
quality, and so on. No retailer that carries Purple will carry Sport
or RL. They might want to but they won't be allowed to ---
distribution constraint that is carefully managed.
- So when people say Apple needs a cheaper phone there are many
questions to answer beyond the "get over yourself" luxury brand
What is distribution constraint? What partner absorbs some cost to
leave margin? What is the branding?
- Easy question --- would a cheap phone be sold and supported in Apple
stores side by side? How would the rest of the customers feel about
more crowds and tougher appointments competing with people who paid
half as much? Sell one phone against another --- how?
- This doesn't even have to be a product question which most people
jump to --- sure remove fancy camera, memory, storage,e tc.
But these are all hardware items that competitive products will
simply add and market against --- "buy our android phone with
- Apple is constrained by software because apps need to work on all
devices --- something that Apple has stretched further than Windows
ever did (watch to phone to tablet, and soon Mac). ISVs/devs will
never embrae API differences at different price points.
- Consumers bemoan Windows 10 Home, Pro, Enterprise. Insane energy
goes into trying to have features that don't fragment developers and
OEMs (drivers, etc) and can be deployed efficiently while alos
maintaining price differentiation. That's literally the entire
- The levers available to do cheaper products are not all available to
Apple. Those that simply say they have a pricing problem need to
solve for the product, the distribution, the branding, and more.
- Big companies become enormously consternated over brand value
props, channel conflicts, and so on. Where Apple avoided all of
these was owning them all. The downside of owning them all is this
limits responding to the challenges.
- At Microsoft we always reminded ourselves that you don't sell 300M
of something at one every day low price. Most all energy was to
maintain price floor.
AMAZINGLY Apple managed to sell over 200M of something per year at
pretty much one every day high price, then increased price.
- Anyone that thinks Apple is unaware of the challenge and has not
sketched out ideas, tested them, and thought about them immensely is
crazy. Literally this consumes a company or at least has been the
- Example --- I can't count how many times Windows/Office toyed with
"lite" versions. Fewer features cost less. DUH! Imaging such product
and everyone wants it. How do you market it? What brand is it? How
much revenue do you forgo? Is it freemium? trialware? annoying?
- Literally the constant drumbeat from the press, partners, channel
was that PCs were too expensive, Windows or Office too expensive. No
matter what the price was. Also Intel hearing the same. Magic for
Intel/MS was getting others to cave --- who caves for Apple?
- I once ran the numbers on selling just one SKU of Office rather
than the seemingly infinite number. It was literally billions of
dollars of lost revenue immediately and more over time --- leaving
revenue on table PLUS alienating customers at both high end and low
- What does all these mean? Apple may or may not have a "pricing" or
"price point" or "structural"/secular challenge. For sure just
releasing a cheap phone doesn't make all better.
All takes place in context of lots of cheap/bad competitive phones.
Lots to consider.
Published: Thu 03 January 2019
The Verge recently ran a featured story on the risks of operating in
Amazon's Marketplace is an e-commerce platform where 6 million sellers
compete against each other to fulfil your orders. Near two third of the
items sold on Amazon are sold by these third-party sellers.
It turns out that some sellers use Amazon's own rules against each
other, devising intricate schemes to get their rivals suspended. Once
suspended from the platform, sellers find themselves in a bewildering
To quote the story:
“You have manipulated product reviews on our site,” an email from
Amazon read. “This is against our policies. As a result, you may no
longer sell on Amazon.com, and your listings have been removed from
A rival had framed Plansky for buying five-star reviews, a high crime
in the world of Amazon. The funds in his account were immediately
frozen, and his listings were shut down. Getting his store back would
take him on a surreal weeks-long journey through Amazon’s bureaucracy,
one that began with the click of a button at the bottom of his
suspension message that read “appeal decision.”
A sad situation to find yourself in as a small business
owner. Plansky certainly had my sympathy. But sadly this is to be expected.
I understand that selling through other people's platform saves tons of
money from marketing, giving a young business a headstart at the
beginning. But building one's entire distribution channel on top of
Amazon is willfully ignoring the basic rule at play here.
The platform wins by making everyone else a replaceable commodity.
Generally speaking, there are two kinds of businesses: value creation
Value creation sets out to make a difference, and the primary
way to win is to create something new that people didn't know they want
Arbitrage is to focus on the things people know they want and identify
the suboptimal market opportunities and buy-low-sell-high.
Value creation makes something new and demands a premium. It wins
through exclusivity. Arbitrage removes any inefficiency in the market
and drives the cost down and makes the products available to a broader
The platforms win by making all sellers play the arbitrage game. It's a
volume based market. It's a race to the bottom" game. Not a value
creation one. As a business owner, it's our responsibility to know which
game we are playing and deal with our hands well.
Published: Wed 02 January 2019
A few great links/tools I found in the last a few days.
What's the difference between second guessing and
The former is questioning a decision without material new information.
The latter is revisiting a decision after material new information has
been obtained. It is second guessing which is destructive for morale,
because it calls into question not just the decision but also undermines
the legitimacy of the decision making process itself.
Re-evaluating on the other hand is healthy but requires a good decision
making process. In particular, there has to be a relatively clear way of
assessing whether something is in fact material new information.
Exceptionally designed and fresh tool for making estimations. If nothing
else, do check out the screencast on the web page. It's mind blowing
Guesstimate is a tool for performing estimates using monte carlo
experiments. It can be used similarly to excel, but provides the option
of providing ranges and distributions as values instead of individual
points. Other metrics can do mathematical operations on these
cells/metrics. After each new input is added or changed, a set of 5000
samples is randomly generated from each input and goes through the
specified operations to produce confidence intervals in the output.
What happened in 2018 and What's going to happen in 2019:
Eroded trust in institutions and technology, dicey US, messy Brexit and
sluggish China predicates a difficult macro business and political
environment. Technology, riding the transition wave from industry age to
information age, will continue to grow.
In 2018, we saw social media usage in the US flatten out and possibly
even start to decline a bit.And the usage of screen time management
apps, like Screentime on iOS, is surging. We know we are addicted to
tech, we don’t want to be, and we are working on getting sober.
All of this lost trust is challenging for big tech, and the tech sector
in general, but is also a huge opportunity for new companies and new
technologies that can offer different products and business models that
we can trust more, or don’t need to trust.
This loss of trust in 2018 was not limited to the tech sector. In the
US, and also in many places around the world, we are losing trust in our
institutions and our elected officials.
I expect the combination of higher rates, uncertainty in Washington, and storm clouds globally (which we will get to soon) will cause business leaders in the US to become more cautious on hiring and investment. Consumers will make essentially the same calculations. And that will lead to a weaker economy in the US in 2019.
The startup/tech economy is somewhat immune to macro trends. Many startups and big tech companies were able to grow and expand their businesses during the last financial downturn in 2008 and 2009. Some very important tech companies were even started in those years.
The tech/startup economy is driven first and foremost by technical and creative (ie business model) innovation. And that is not impacted by the macro environment.
So I expect that we will continue to see big tech invest and grow their
businesses and do well in 2019.
However, I do think a difficult macro business and political environment in the US will lead investors to take a more cautious stance in 2019.
But all of that is going to happen at the margin. I expect 2019 to be another solid year for the tech/startup sector as we are in a possibly century-long conversion from an industrial economy to an information economy and the tailwinds for tech/startup vs the rest of the economy remain in place and strong.
FiraCode: Fonts designed by
programmers for programmers. I have just switched all my dev environment
to this new font.
Programmers use a lot of symbols, often encoded with several
characters. For the human brain, sequences like ->, <= or := are
single logical tokens, even if they take two or three characters on
the screen. Your eye spends a non-zero amount of energy to scan, parse
and join multiple characters into a single logical one. Ideally, all
programming languages should be designed with full-fledged Unicode
symbols for operators, but that’s not the case yet.
Flat Design vs. Traditional
I've never been a big fan of Material design from Google or the Metro
style from Microsoft. Apparently it takes twice amount of cognitive
load for people to use these flat design interfaces! Twice!
In the past few years flat user interface design has become the
predominating visual style of operating systems, websites and mobile
apps. Although flat design has been widely criticized by HCI and
usability experts, empirical research on flat design is still scarce.
We present the results of an experimental comparative study of visual
search effectiveness on traditional and flat designs. The following
types of visual search tasks were examined: (1) search for a target
word in text; (2) search for a target icon in a matrix of icons; (3)
search for clickable objects on webpages. Time and accuracy parameters
of the visual search, as well as oculomotor activity, were measured.
The results show that a search in flat text mode (compared with the
traditional mode) is associated with higher cognitive load. A search
for flat icons takes twice as long as for realistic icons and is also
characterized by higher cognitive load. Identifying clickable objects
on flat web pages requires more time and is characterised by a
significantly greater number of errors. Our results suggest replacing
the flat style user interfaces with interfaces based on the design
principles developed over decades of research and practice of HCI and
Published: Tue 01 January 2019
Waking up this morning, I felt energised. There was a strong sense of
excitement in the air. The kind I felt when I was about to embark on
a new and unknown journey. It was the same excitement when I boarded a
two-day train ride to go to a university that's 2000km away. Or when
Zephyr and I decided to leave China and spend a year travelling when I
I'm energised by the new leverages I have. In 2019, I will have a team
and a modest amount of capital I get to use. I finally have the
resources to execute the plans. It'll be so much fun to work closely
with a team again, especially when their experiences and career paths are
so diverse. The last two years has been a slow burn. I could see that
I had hit a plateau. I was running at full throttle, but life
stayed in the same place. The more the business grew,
the more tasks I needed to do, the less concentration time I have, the
less I learned and the less productive I became. It was a
draining experience that I'm glad it's over.
I'm energised by the product I will work on. I have been in and out the
personal photo space for 12 years now. I feel I have learned a
tremendous amount, not only on the technology side of what's possible
but also a deeper understanding of the human emotional needs photo print
products fulfil. With the rest of the business in capable hands, I will
finally have the space to explore the problem domain again and give it
my best shot. To build something I'd be proud of.
I'm also energised by the opportunities for personal growth. I used to
spend most of my time playing with different technologies and
under-developed my social and interpersonal skills. So in 2019, I'm
looking forward to learning from the amazing people I work with. Of
their expertise. And how they communicate. I can't wait to read a long
list of books that'll certainly broaden my horizon. And lastly, I am
looking forward to the daily meditation and blog post exercise.
So 2019, here we come.
Page 1 / 15