Neil Goodrich is SVP and Senior Head of Technology at Phillip Jeffries, a family founded and family run luxury wall covering company that grew from a garage startup with 10 grasscloths into 5,500 SKUs and 15 locations worldwide. The company works with artisans around the world and is deeply involved in environmental and charitable causes, including 500,000 trees planted with the Arbor Day Foundation. Neil came to the role from professional services, drawn to a company that makes products with techniques handed down over generations, and he leads a technology mandate built around being the easiest wall covering option for an interior designer. He joins the show to talk about how AI fits a craft business, how to spend the benefit of AI productivity, and why he believes security has shifted from hardening to response time.

Here’s a glimpse of what you’ll learn: 

• How Phillip Jeffries uses technology to be the easiest wall covering option for an interior designer
• Why Neil sees the trade wall covering space as behind the curve on technology, and how that sets the company apart
• How an AI agent could help showroom staff cover 5,500 SKUs and questions from swatch matching to shipping dates
• Why Neil frames the real AI question as how to spend the benefit, and why he chooses to enhance the core experience
• What the robber barons and the Mandalorian teach Neil about ratcheting up work and handing too much to AI
• How AI gave a self described non artist new creative skills, and why he still expects a premium on handmade work
• Why Neil says patching jumped from a nice to have to a top priority overnight
• Why Neil argues hardening is no longer sufficient and response time is what matters when AI finds every target
  
  
  

In this episode…

Sponsor for this episode...

This episode is brought to you by CyberLynx.

CyberLynx is a Bethesda managed IT and cybersecurity company. Local techs you know, not a call center. Month-to-month. 24/7 intrusion detection.

We help growing companies with managed IT, help desk, backup and recovery, and a fractional CIO.

Talk to us at https://cyberlynx.com/contact, info@cyberlynx.com, or 301-798-9170.

Check out previous episodes:

Start Small, Scale Smart, Govern Carefully: A CISO’s AI Mantra with Adam Palmer - Ep 246

$20 a Seat Snuck In on Us: The Hidden Budget Problem of AI with Michael McAndrews - Ep 245

Air Gaps Just Don’t Exist Anymore: Securing Critical Infrastructure with Tony Bryson - Ep 244 

Transcript: 

Neil Goodrich 

SVP and Senior Head of Technology

Phillip Jeffries

Matthew Connor: Matthew Connor here, host of the Cyber Business Podcast. Today we're joined by Neil Goodrich, SVP and Senior Head of Technology at Phillip Jeffries. Neil, welcome to the show.

Neil Goodrich: Thanks. Thanks for having me.

Matthew Connor: Thanks for coming on. Before we get too far in, a quick word from our sponsors.

Sponsor Break — CyberLynx: Hackers are using AI to conduct machine-speed attacks. Is your security keeping up? CyberLynx sells industry-leading AI-powered cybersecurity solutions that detect threats in real time, so you know about an attack before the damage is done, not after. Learn more at cyberlynx.com. That's cyberlynx.com.

Matthew Connor: And now, back to our show. Neil, for those who aren't familiar, can you tell us about Phillip Jeffries and your role there as SVP and Senior Head of Technology?

Neil Goodrich: Sure. Phillip Jeffries is a family-founded and still family-run luxury wallcovering business that started in a garage with, excuse me, ten grasscloths, and has grown to fifty-five hundred SKUs today, with fifteen locations globally. It's an amazing product that really connects artisans from all over the world and transforms that into amazing wallcovering products, and we're deeply involved in environmental and charitable causes. We've planted five hundred thousand trees with the Arbor Day Foundation, as an example. So it's a really amazing place, both with the product and with the culture and who the company is. That's us in a nutshell.

Matthew Connor: I actually really love this, because all too often, especially today, we don't hear about companies doing well by doing good. You hear about these companies that are purely focused on shareholder profit at all costs, that is their guiding principle, and the ends justify the means. And then you get these ideas in business school that you can be good, and yet it seems to die on the page all too often. But then on occasion you hear stories about companies like this, and you're like, yes, see, it can be done. You can be good, do good things, still make money, and be good for the planet and good for people. So I love that, it's amazing.

Neil Goodrich: And I think that's central to the philosophy of Phillip and Jeffrey, and it was central to the philosophy of their dad, who's the original founder before them. It's present in all kinds of blood drives, and we have relationships with local kids' organizations where they will come to the office and spend the day. So it's just inherent, and it's structured, there are structured programs inside Phillip Jeffries to support those endeavors.

Matthew Connor: That's amazing. So let's dive into the technology part. When you hear "wallcoverings," you don't immediately think technology, you think more artisans, and that's great, but obviously in any modern organization there's going to be technology. Is it a lot more than you'd think? How does that work?

Neil Goodrich: The to-the-trade wallcovering space is generally, I would say, behind the curve when you think about technology. One of our cornerstones is that we want to be really easy. We want to be the easiest wallcovering option for an interior designer, and that's obviously all enabled through the technology piece, and it continues to get richer and richer with more opportunities, AI and automation, and a very service-oriented outlook on how we make the interior designer's job easier. I think that sets us apart from a lot of other folks who are not thinking about the interior designer, they're thinking about how to make it easier for them as the business. I think that's infused in everything we do, from the way the showrooms operate. So our role in the technology space is to enable better experiences that set us apart, and make it fun and easy to operate with us.

Matthew Connor: That's kind of like the approach Amazon and Apple took that was so much different from the competition and really set them apart. The key to their success was focusing on who their actual client is, and making it easy and good for them, versus a bunch of engineers saying, well, this is what we can build, and so they build an ugly box. It does cool stuff, but nobody really likes it, unlike an Apple product, where they were focused heavily on the user experience, and the same with Amazon. So it sounds like you're taking the same approach when it comes to wallcoverings.

Neil Goodrich: Yeah, and I think it predates me. It's just been part of our DNA, so it's been part of this technology mandate from its inception.

Matthew Connor: I think today everything comes back to AI, and as it should, it's so transformative. We are in the early days of it, even though we're just under four years since ChatGPT came out, and it has been a wild ride in those four years. But now, in these last six months especially, we're seeing the frontier models become so much better. I think when people first heard "AI," they expected it to be more like it is today, and the expectation was a little high. People went into it and tested it and said, well, this thing is no better than, okay, now shut it down. And then other people went way too far, like Meta, where they said, fire ten thousand people, we're going to have these, you know, and that didn't work out. But now I think we're at the place where people expected to be, where you've got very useful LLMs that can do a lot of things and are very easy to use. If they haven't already been traumatized by something in the first four years, they're now at a place where they're like, oh, cool, let's do it. And they should be rechecking every month or so, because it's totally different. So how does this work for you guys? I know that's a long intro, but where are you in that, and what does that mean for where Phillip Jeffries is going to go with technology and AI?

Neil Goodrich: Man, big question, so many bits and pieces of answers. We've definitely applied it inside the IT shop, just to accelerate all of the standard operating things. It's almost a gimme answer from the QA and the code writing and the troubleshooting, that part has been sort of a freebie. We continue to look at the customer piece, and at our sales staff in the showroom who are interacting. I'm trying to articulate this nicely. The questions and conversations that happen in a showroom are so wide and varied. Someone might come in and say, I have this swatch of this other thing that's going in this room, what do you have that would work with that? That's a huge answer when there are fifty-five hundred SKUs, all the way to "when is my order going to ship?", it was backordered. So one of the assets of the AI chatbot agent, to me, is the immediate breadth of ground it can cover, and I think a lot about how we outfit our sales staff to be able to create this instantaneous, smooth answer. I don't know what that looks like, I'm talking in generalities, but I think about those experiences, and how we accelerate them and make it easy for the designer. You have to imagine the interior designer is essentially a project manager. They've placed all these orders at all these different places and they're trying to keep track of all of that. So what can we do to make that the fire-and-forget part, so that they keep coming back to us for their wallcovering needs? The AI piece is part of this service proposition, along with all the regular ones, internal things like, how do I find this, where's this document? Basic productivity boosts that are not science fiction, they're doable, and they're close to being commoditized out there. So I think a lot of those pieces are what we're thinking about.

Matthew Connor: That's super cool. And here's where I think things get really fun. I'm going to beat up on Meta, because why not? When you look at how they went about their firing of people, they were focused purely on, hey, wait, we could replace people, and I think that is a hundred percent wrong when it comes to what AI does, because the power and the benefit of AI is that it supercharges your users and your service. I think the new standard of productivity, of deliverables, of work, is an AI-powered standard. And the funny part is, because we're early days, when you deliver that to people, you're not just letting some bot produce something and pasting it and sending it. Your people now have powerful, fast results that look amazing, like you spent months on them, and yet it took you two minutes to produce. Then you tweak it, you do your thing, you add to it, and you send it, and people are blown away. We've already found it's something like six dollars spent on services for every one dollar spent on software, so we know that is the future, it's how that dollar spent on AI produces six in service. Applying that to what you're doing, I see the interior designer come in with that swatch, and how cool for the salesperson to be able to take a picture of that, and it goes through your fifty-five hundred SKUs and gives you a list of, well, okay, how about these, the top ten, what do you think of these? I mean, come on. Going through fifty-five hundred SKUs, that's really hard for people to do.

Neil Goodrich: But AI like that, it's the vehicle to become the advisor in that scenario. We want you to sort of fall backwards into our arms and trust that we're going to make some amazing recommendations and help you solve your creative problem. I think about, to your earlier point, how people spend the benefit of AI, which is a discussion I've started to see in some articles about the four-day work week. Who gets the benefit of AI, and how do you spend it? Do you reduce headcount, or do you use it to offset scale? Do you change your scaling ratio so that as the business grows you don't need as many people? To me that's still very much in the wild. I think people are making crazy bets in one direction or the other. I don't think we're in any of those camps. I think we think about it as enhancing the core experience of what Phillip Jeffries does, and I honestly think that is where we're at today.

Matthew Connor: And enhancing the core experience needs to be the focus for every business. Let us not completely redesign our business and fire half of our employees because we're now twice, three times more productive, thinking, if we fire half the people, boy, we're making so much more money. Wrong. You're going to have real problems. But if you enhance your core offering, if you enhance your people, if now their job is so much more enjoyable because the tedious part is handled, because we can only make so many decisions in a day. Our brains just work that way, I can make X number of decisions a day before my brain is tired and fatigued and I'm not as productive. So if AI takes a lot of that workload, and you get to do the fun part, like interacting with the people on the sales floor, great, and AI does all the heavy lifting in the background, you can have that great exchange and be more productive. So, getting back to your question of how you spend the benefit, I do think now is the time to simply enhance. But it does raise the interesting question, if you go back to the robber barons and the six- or seven-day work week, and a five-day work week to them, why would the children need two days off? To us it's crazy talk. First of all, they're kids in factories, they shouldn't be there anyway, and seven days a week, come on, that's a little extreme. And they were shocked when productivity went up when you gave people two days off, because you weren't just driving them into the ground. I think it's a really interesting question whether we're doing the same with the five-day work week in the modern day, where people tend to be plugged in eighteen hours a day because of their phones and computers traveling with them. Is it starting to ratchet up a little bit, especially with AI, where it's like, look, it's not that hard, it's fine for me to be reachable all evening, I can knock that out real fast? Are we wearing people down like the children in the factory? And will we in the future say, yeah, of course a four-day work week was so much better than five, and of course a three-day work week, people come in and rock for three days and do amazing stuff, and then they've got four days off to relax and come back and crush it for three days? Is that the future? Or do you give people four days off, and now they don't want to come back for those three days? I think that was the fear of the robber barons. I don't know, but it's an interesting topic. What do you think?

Neil Goodrich: I'll say there's a lot to be said for social momentum. We can't even get the law passed about daylight savings time. We've been talking about it for like twenty years, and it was invented because we were in the fields. We can't even let that go. So it feels like we're kind of mentally far away from grappling with a four-day work week. It feels like we need a whole new set, maybe when the Gen Zers are in Congress. Then they'll be like, yeah, it's about time, four-day work week, I've been saying this since I was in high school. I don't know that our generations are going to get that done if we can't get daylight savings changed. It does make me think, I don't know if you ever saw any of the Star Wars series The Mandalorian from Disney, but they had this amazing episode where they land on a planet and want to do something, and the people say, well, you've got to help us first, all of our AI robots have gone rogue. And they say, we'll just shut it down, and the people say, if we shut it all down, we don't know how to do anything, we don't know how to make our own food anymore, or how to drive. I think about that a lot as we give more and more stuff over. It's the old digital calculator. I remember my parents giving me that speech about how you've got to have a watch with hands on it so you don't forget how to tell time, and you've got to do the math by hand. And I don't know where I land. We're equally crazy, we used to let a guy sit across the aisle from you on the plane and smoke because he was in the smoking section and you were not, and we thought that was okay. I can't imagine that happening anytime soon, but obviously we have done equally crazy stuff as a society, and then looked back over our shoulders fifty years, twenty-five years later and said, what were we thinking? So who knows what they'll look at. We could look back at ourselves and say, we thought it was okay to just let the AI agents run, can you imagine, so weird, there were no rules. What do you mean there was no regulation? We could look back at ourselves and think we were wild. Who knows? I just don't have a lot of hope for the four-day work week anytime soon.

Matthew Connor: I agree. And I think you nailed it with Gen Z, because if you look at what happened with the millennials, growing up with screens from birth, a lot of them really struggled with human skills, because they were no longer going out to play until the streetlights came on. They were raised inside, don't go outside because somebody's going to kidnap you, it's going to be a bad thing. So they grew up scared, and the only safe place was online, and it wasn't safe, there was nothing but bullying and bad things on there, and it created all kinds of issues. I'm not dogging on millennials, I think they feel the same way about the effect it had on a lot of their generation. But what's fascinating is that Gen Z are naturally telling their parents, put the screen down, let's connect and have dinner. It's a real movement. They're coming into the workforce asking about work-life balance, and they have no problem working hard, and they also truly value that balance. Somehow it seems to be the right thing, and it's hard for the Gen Xers and the baby boomers to say, yeah, that's cool. Most of us, you've got those guys bleeding from their eyes and they still won't leave the office. You say, you need to go home, you're giving everybody Ebola, and they say, I just need to finish this email. Whereas Gen Z says, you know what, I'm not feeling that great, I'm going to take the day off, and that's healthy and good. So I like where the pendulum is swinging, and I think you're right that it will be Gen Z that gets it across the finish line for us. But it does make you wonder where this all takes us.

Neil Goodrich: I think the work-from-home argument is very similar, right? You can look at the struggles of how you came up through the ranks, and what the culture was when you were cutting your teeth, and you can see echoes of that and see people pushing it. Who knows what it will be like ten years from now. I think it'll be a wild ride.

Matthew Connor: Well, it will. And one of the things that's so fascinating is that we're kind of living in the future. Seriously, we now have self-driving cars that are statistically eight times safer than a human driver already, and it's not even at the point where it's fully there. We're right on the cusp and it's already eight times safer than humans. And the response times, not just reaction time, it's like 0.12 seconds to identify something and respond, whereas humans need a second, literally, and then we often overcorrect and overreact because we're human. So I think that's a really great example. But going back to The Mandalorian, where is that balance in the future? Does this create a sort of renaissance where people start valuing the human interaction, the human-created things, the artisans? I often say I'll never want to see AI Tom Cruise hanging from a plane. I want to see the seventy-, eighty-, ninety-year-old Tom Cruise hanging from the plane, the real guy. I'm like, how the hell is he still doing it? And that is so much more entertaining than the AI-generated stuff. No matter how good it gets, the fact that it wasn't real makes it less appealing for some reason. So I wonder, especially with the Gen Zers coming up, whether people start going on vacations that are survival skills in the woods, where people learn these cool skills like, hey, if there's a zombie apocalypse, or in the event of the AI overlords, and do it just for fun, learn how to survive on the land and build their own houses. Does that become a thing people really start valuing? When we no longer have to work to do stuff, do we start doing that stuff more for entertainment and personal benefit? Or do we go WALL-E, where everybody's just in a recliner, fat as hell, sucking down liquefied Doritos and Mountain Dew? Which direction does it go?

Neil Goodrich: I will tell you, it was one of the attractive pieces of coming to a company that makes stuff. I came from professional services, and it was cool to be back in the world where there are real people using techniques that have been handed down for generations to create this thing, and we're part of that product. You're part of this lineage, part of this artistry, and then we're doing something new or fresh with it, matching that up with some other modern things. The design team has an inspiration room, which is one of the coolest places in the whole building, with everything from clothing items to drawers full of books and swatches of random things, and there's something to be said for that element of creativity. But the flip side is that I have never been able to draw, but I have all these images, right? I had to withdraw from the only art class I ever had, because after three or four weeks the teacher said, okay, we're going to start grading on actual quality, not effort, and I went from that class straight to the registrar's office and said, I need you to take me out of this class. So, like in The Matrix when they say, I need to fly this helicopter, the ability to add has been this huge additive experience for me, where I have skills I've never had before. Does it make me think about the graphic designers out there? Yes. I'm not trying to take their work away, and no one wants to draw my random thing on a Friday night when I'm trying to create images. So to me it's a really difficult split with artistry. There are some things we probably don't need. Do I think a photographer taking stock photos for corporate websites was fulfilling? Probably not. Did it pay the bills? Maybe. And what happens now that that's out of the picture? I think we have to find a new equilibrium for all of that. There are parts we can probably AI, I don't know what the right term is. We had "digital transformation," and now I feel like we need a term for when we do that with the process. I think there will be a premium on artisan, bespoke, handmade things. How refreshing is it to see a post on LinkedIn that's written by a person, and you can tell? So I think there's already a value, a breath of fresh air, in some of those things.

Matthew Connor: Yeah, and I think you're spot on, you see it already on social media. Any AI-generated content, whether it's written or video or pictures, is off-putting at some point. It was novel and that was cool, holy crap, look how this small company can create this commercial. And then it just became so much AI garbage, and the novelty has worn off, and now you cannot just throw garbage at people and expect them to lap it up and be happy about it. And it goes back to what we were originally saying, it's how you AI-power your workforce. It's not a matter of handing it all off like Meta, damn you, Meta, I'm just going to beat them up all episode. You can't just hand it off to AI and say, yep, we're done. I don't think it works, we're not at that point yet, and I honestly hope we never get to that point. In the interim, I don't think it's one of these things where AI takes people's jobs so much as, if there is a day where people don't have to work because so much has been produced, AI is creating so much in terms of resources, services, basically wealth for everybody, that you can live like a king or queen and push a button and everything happens for you. Your house is taken care of, you've got a robot that does all your cleaning and cooking and home security, keeping the peace, and all of that is super affordable because it didn't take ten million humans to create it. It was basically turning sunlight into these products, because if we're using solar to power the AI, which is basically just converting energy into intelligence, then in essence we're taking sunlight and creating products and services. If that's the process, it will technically be super affordable, to the point of almost completely free, because it's all generated and the resources are all handled automatically without people having to be a part of it. All of that is to say, if we do get to that point, I like to think it frees us up for those really enjoyable moments, to really enjoy life and interacting and have all the benefits of this stuff, going right back to what we originally said, that it's about empowering people. So, bringing that back to the present day, now that we've gone on our futurist tangent, the fun part about where we are today is that it's so exciting, there's so much cool stuff happening. Let's talk security for a second, because right now a lot of people are really scared about bad guys using AI to find zero-day exploits, and what do you do there? Are our organizations equipped and ready for that level of attack? It's a matter of hoping and praying it doesn't hit us, and if it does, okay, fine, how do we recover? I think we're at the point now where people are focused on it being not a matter of if, but when, and we need to be prepared and recover. So the tech leaders aren't being fired because the organization got hit, the tech leader has got us prepared so that if we get hit, we'll recover quickly, it won't destroy us, here's our plan. But I wonder, is this where we need to be fighting fire with fire? They're basically bringing a gun to a knife fight. It kind of reminds me of the Indiana Jones scene, and we'd rather be Indy in that analogy, using the gun against the knives. So are we at that place? I think this is a real question everybody is faced with today: how should people be dealing with the modern AI-powered threats?

Neil Goodrich: It's fascinating to see an activity like a patching program, or some kind of schedule, which was always later in your maturity curve. It was a nice-to-have, we did it when we could, and there was a scramble where you'd do that one hotfix. It used to be sort of tertiary, down there in the lows, and it went to the highs overnight. That's been wild, just to change from an operational focus. But I think there are simple things, like leveraging AI tools to query my inventory of PCs that are out there, which ones aren't patched, and patch them immediately, or, if a human has to go there because there's a week-long whatever, I think there is a way to leverage the same tools. I remember really early on Darktrace felt like one of the early AI tools, like, hey, I think something's weird here. I think those are much more mature than the other side, and the idea is to use AI to keep the maintenance piece done as quickly as those guys want to exploit it, to keep it fresh and current.

Matthew Connor: Well, I think you kind of nailed it there, because in today's day and age, we used to be able to rely comfortably on being fully patched, yay, if that ever happened. But let's say you did. If you were fully patched, you could feel safe that, barring the two or three elite hackers out there in the world who could come up with a zero-day exploit, we're fine. The odds of those three folks coming after us were not high. Now some kid in Lithuania, with a prompt, has a zero-day exploit and is just shooting at random and crawling the internet for opportunities. There's a much higher probability of being hit with a zero-day today than there ever was in the past. If you weren't Chase or the federal government, if you weren't one of the big targets, you were probably okay, even from a large business on down. But going back to your point about the early days of things like Darktrace, I think what we see now is the level of maturity in AI and technology. I like that, going back to your Darktrace analogy, having something able to look at your network at all times and say, you know what, that's not normal. Now if patching isn't done, or a zero-day exploit does happen, something sees that and says, oh, that's not normal, let me stop that and call an adult. Is Adobe supposed to be doing this? This is not normal for Adobe, so I stopped it, are you sure you want Adobe to do this? Fantastic. Or, I noticed this weird traffic on the network that we can't see. We don't see it in the SOC, you don't see it in the logs, because it's not something that fits the typical filter. It's something abnormal, something unique. So I think tools like that are the future. Well, they're the present too, I mean, that's how we defend against those zero-days, I don't know of any other way.

Neil Goodrich: Yeah, because is it enough to do the normal fundamentals? You've got to be doing that, but that's the thing, that's a trump card. They brought a lightsaber to your sword fight, right? I love our analogy today. They were having a great time, and what do you do with that, because they just buzz right through it. I think you have to have the sort of visibility that only comes with those modern defenses. In my last place, you sparked something, we had the security team start to build some agents and experiment with them themselves. One of the things they uncovered is that you have the backlog of high, medium, and low things to go investigate, which is always longer than the person has time to look at. So first of all, no one's getting to the lows. Well, one of the agents immediately identified that three things we had as three separate lows were actually related, and it wasn't three lows, it was one high. So the aggregate, holistic view, the idea that you have this thing that can, again, we come full circle to the breadth of ground it can cover and collate, we are not going to compete with that, but it's got to be served up to a human to make decisions about. I think about it as the same model: search all the SKUs, do the research for me, let me make the decision. I've seen that be powerful. I think hardening is no longer sufficient. It's about response time, because you're not going to be on top of every single exploit. Anybody in the world can get behind the keyboard now, and again, the breadth of ground it can cover. Why is my mid-sized, couple-hundred-person company a target? These things that used to be companies that weren't targets are now targets, because it doesn't take any effort to research or find the target. I can just say, find me companies who haven't updated their firewall, and it's a mom-and-pop hardware store in Dubuque, Iowa, or this division of Chase that's in a basement somewhere that they forgot about. You can find it instantly. So obscurity is no longer a weapon.

Matthew Connor: Yeah, I think you hit the nail on the head there. It really is. And it's funny, because even when zero-days are discovered, when we know, oh hey, we've identified a zero-day, it is exploited within minutes, versus it used to be weeks or months. There was enough lag between the zero-day being out there and its discovery, however it was discovered, that it gave the manufacturers time to patch it and push it out, and then herd immunity took place. Now it's minutes. There's not enough time for the manufacturer to fix it and patch it, and we can't just wait a month or two until it gets patched while it's fully exploitable in the wild. That goes back to your whole point, we need tools like Darktrace, some way of having visibility to say, oh yeah, that's bad. Because as you said, you're no longer just safe because you're small, smaller means you're more of a target because you're easier. Chase spends fifteen billion dollars a year on cybersecurity, they're a tough nut to crack. Whereas that mom-and-pop hardware store in Dubuque is so easy, they spend zero dollars on security. They're using Norton Antivirus, sorry, Norton, but you knew it was coming, or they've got some free antivirus, that's all they spend on their security, and nothing is patched, and they get hit super hard. So I think you're spot on, and this has been a blast. I'm going to give you the last word. Anything you want to add?

Neil Goodrich: No, I think it's been amazing. I love to just freewheel, and I feel like we covered a lot of ground, from The Mandalorian to AI security. We got some great analogies in there. No, it's been awesome. Thanks, it's been a blast.

Matthew Connor: Neil, before we go, can you tell everybody where they can find out more about you and more about Phillip Jeffries?

Neil Goodrich: I mean, you can find me on LinkedIn, and you can find Phillip Jeffries at phillipjeffries.com, where you can see all the amazing, killer products I mentioned earlier today.

Matthew Connor: I love it. Neil, thanks so much for coming on. Until next time, buddy.

Neil Goodrich: Thanks, you too.