"The music industry is a strange combination of having real and intangible assets: pop bands are brand names in themselves, and at a given stage in their careers their name alone can practically guarantee hit records."

- Richard Branson

Dane and I hung out this morning and got talking about Branson so when I read this quote today I figured I'd post it up...it's interesting to think about how this relates to our industry???

Yeah, but in the music industy a pop band stays in the "cool" status for 3 months.

We're in this for life. (or at least more than 3 months!)

I think it relates to any person-centric industry or business, and the really successful practitioners are the ones who, for lack of a better word, exploit their notariety to generate sales and buzz. There are definitely a number of individuals doing this in the wedding photography business, and a ton in the rest of the photo industry.

Like most marketing tactics, though, I'm left feeling a little squeamish . I think it takes enormous resolve to do the above, but still stay true to a higher purpose. At the same time, I think it is incredibly easy to misinterpret someone's motives as improper (man am I guilty of this!) , so in the end, I just sit tight and try to learn what I can from these individuals.

I think an example of someone who's got it made like this is Dennis Reggie...

Yea...I think Reggie, Fong, Cantrell, Colon, Buissink, Celentano, etc...have all reached a level of success where one of the main reasons their products are valuable is the name behind it.

...I know a lot of photographers resent this but when you really consider the way this industry is we have to realize that there is no "right" way...which is wonderful and freeing. It also leaves room for someone or some group to step in and say "this is the way it should be." Currently there is no group that does that and the closest thing we have is Denis Reggie who has taken this responsibility on his own shoulders for the past 20 years and has successfully changed this industry!

When I look at what Reggie and Fong have done for the wedding photography industry I'm incredibly thankful and I think we might have a different definition of "exploit" (and you may not even be talking about these guys but I could see how one might point to them) but like I said - I'm thankful for what they've done and what they are continuing to do to change this from a "mom and pop" industry into an actual legit and business focused industry. I've talked to all three of you and I know that you all have great business minds so I know you appreciate this too!

I think it only bothers me when I'm the actual consumer -- I get insulted that the individual, company, etc. doesn't realize that I see through the hype . Sometimes I long for real honesty and loath hyperbole. I think a certain paternal figure in my life turned me sour to all things exaggerated basically leaving me unable to trust or believe the full extent of any claim, story or emotion. (Thankfully, I have met enough genuinely honest and truthful people in my life to counteract this!) I can see how that has been carried over into my consumption habits, my views on society, materialism and the like. But now I'm burrowing down into a very long conversation, and one that is usually much more enjoyable with a nice cup of coffee (just so long as it isn't Starbucks...okay I'm kidding, I drink Starbucks ...and yes, that could make me a hypocrite...ah, but what else is new?)

...so anyway.

Photographer-wise, I wasn't thinking about anyone specific, nor do I have anything against a business I feel that is 'exploiting' (that is, unless I am the consumer...but let me get to the darn point here). Well, and unless that exploitation isn't hurting anyone...but doesn't all exploitation effectively take advantage of a situation? (stay focused Peter...)

I figure, in direct contradiction to my personal feelings about right and wrong, in business, whatever the market allows, the market should get. It feels a little slimy to say that, but I think it is the ultimate truism of Capitalism.

Is it wrong to do 'X' if the market is completely happy and desirous and willing to spend through the nose for 'X'? If you buy into a, pardon the bastardization, laissez faire viewpoint of business, or a Darwinian one, or a Capitalistic one, then NO, it is not wrong to do 'X' if the market will buy it. And that can certainly take the form of a $20,000, or $50,000, and yes, a $120,000 wedding photography package. If the market doesn't bite, the business will adjust or not make any money at all. If the market does bite, well, whether I think it's stupid or slimy or misguided or anything else, it's their choice. And in doing so, they, as the market, are supplying that demand, and in some manner that I have yet to full accept on a personal level (but completely understand and accept in a business capacity), justify the supply.

Having rambled, but hopefully made my case for a 'business standpoint acceptance' of this phenomena, does anyone else struggle with this on a personal level? Are we really here to squeeze as much money out of the next guy as possible? ...and I know that there are plenty of businesses out there, and perhaps 100% of those that might be placed in the 'exploitation' category, that have excellent intentions, provide an awesome service and product, and do good in the world. And yes, I do my best to try not to judge (and fail miserably every few minutes) as there is no way for me to know enough about another person or business' situation to pass judgment, but I think you all know what I am at least attempting to say here.

Another thing I should point out: After rereading what I wrote, to ensure that I don't sound to radical or crazy , I realized that it sounds weird for me to have a definitive personal point of view that differs so much from my business point of view. So to clarify, my personal point of view is how I look at the world as a consumer. My "business point of view" is how I look at other businesses, in other words, when I am judging them (which is bad BADDD!), which is why it is so accepting. In my personal business dealings, I try my best to stay true to my personal beliefs, and when I stray, I try even harder to come back. That doesn't mean I don't charge an arm and a leg for my work, but what it does mean is that I don't throw in the other arm, leg, clothing, house, and dignity just because I can. (That sounded a little confrontational -- I didn't mean it that way!)

I love talking about this kind of stuff, by the way, and even if you all think I'm some crazy coot, I don't take disagreement on stuff like this personally. Having these kind of discussions makes me happy on some weird level, as if they force me to look inside myself more than I am used to doing.

Okay, now it's time for me to stop...

This is a great conversation...I like to hear what others are thinking about!

Hype is almost always deceptive and I hate that too...and I do think it is possible to promote a good product while using status/exposure in the industry to help sell it...this helps everyone.

I don't think it sounds slimy...the market will always balance itself out...and I'm curious why you think (personally) this has anything to do with "right and wrong"...

... I don't think we should ever charge even one arm or one leg...if someone can't afford us then they can't afford us...if they can - great. The consumer is the one making the choice and we can't put a moral responsibility on ourselves to decide whether or not we're going to be putting them into a financial bind by charging what we do. My biggest client will probably end up spending over 14k for her photography and I guarantee that she won't even notice it! It's not an arm and a leg to her. Now would that be an arm and a leg for me...yes...probably a liver, heart, brain, and the rest of my body! We absolutely cannot think about pricing our services based on what we personally can afford!

Like I said...this is a great conversation...and a firey one! I love it..

Cheers,
DJ

Most insightful thing I have heard all season. This is my problem. I worry way too much about the fact that we cant even afford ourselves! But if there is a market out there who will pay the price for what we have to offer, and if we value ourselves at a level at which we demand to be paid for our skills, then the price is appropriate. Regardless of whether or not I could afford me.

Thanks for that David.

Side Note: Anyone want do a little cheap family photos for us ???

:-) Awesome!

...and I'd love to shoot a family photo for you!!!

Okay, next time we are in Sunny Cal... we will swing by.

(Like that's gonna happen)

This IS a great conversation.

I just went on a long walk with Megan and we talked at length about this topic. I kind of wish I had the ability to write down even the smallest of the main points we discussed, but unfortunately, my short term memory doesn't really exist. ...where am I?

To be honest, I think a lot of my feelings on this issue are skewed due to personal experiences, and I am very aware that they might not simply place me in the minority, but perhaps, sometimes a little inappropriately so.

I'm going to attempt to explain my view on money, success and what I feel is the purpose of my life in a few short (hopefully) paragraphs in an attempt to shed light on why I personally take issue with charging what the market will bear (for anything, not just wedding photos) despite the fact that I can see, understand and accept 100% the validity of doing so from a business perspective.

To be clear, this is just how I try look at myself, not others (though it obviously seeps over whenever it feels like it!). In my life, I feel that I will not measure my personal success by how much money I make, or how much status I gain (in a community, business industry, etc.), or how big of a house I have, or how many cars I own (and how fast they go), or any other like-measure. How I hope to measure myself (and hope others do as well) is by what I do with the gifts I have (however small and modest they may be). So for me, money (as often as I can clear my mind to think this way) is simply a thing that you do something with. It isn't the goal, nor is it how I measure my worth or value, success, or place in this world. (Obviously this doesn't happen all the time -- I definitely experience greed on a daily basis!)

And please do not take the above to say that I feel everyone else is totally money-focused. I think that would be a terrible and extremely close-minded thing for me to assume!!

So... due to the fact that I feel the way I do about money and status, therein lies the greatest discomfort with the mentioned 'status-oriented pricing model'. For me, If I think something is simply worth $3, it is irrelevant to me that someone is willing to pay $7. If it makes them feel better to pay $7 that's great! But I'll still charge $3, and only because it makes me feel good to do so. Do I have a problem with other people fulfilling that $7 need? Absolutely not! Do I think they are wrong for doing so? That depends...

And here's where it gets tricky, so please bear with me and keep an open mind. And please keep reminding yourselves that I am doing my best to sound impartial and even-keeled, even though I may do a very poor job of it! ...and it's not my place to say anything is "wrong" anyway, so perhaps all of what will follow is moot! Oh man.

I think there is nothing wrong with charging $7 for something, even though you think its intrinsic value is $3 (let's establish that the "perceived value" is the markup, or what I would call the fluff, exploit, or status charge). If it fits with your constitution and you aren't compromising any of your beliefs or values in doing so, then more power to you. Charge $7. Charge $170. Heck, charge $1,700,000 if someone will pay it!

However, if you have specific beliefs that you feel are compromised by charging the extra $4 (and really, it's all based on motive), and you do so anyway, for the specific reason that you can and that it will make you gobs of extra dough, then I think it is very, very difficult to say that it is okay (Bad judger of others!! BAD!).

So: Clearly I have specific beliefs that make me feel that I would be compromising myself to charge anything above and beyond the intrinsic value of a service or product that I offer. So for me, doing so would be pretty lame and hypocritical. At the same time, and I posed this point to Megan on our walk, I am fully aware that I exist toward the edges of the lunatic fringe when it comes to societal perceptions, opinions, morals and values (or, at least, that is how I see myself). I think it is terribly wrong for me to judge anyone else on this matter, not just because it is improper to do so, but because their is the distinct possibility that my opinions, morals and beliefs are flat out wrong!

Also, I sincerely hope nobody feels offended by what I have said (or will say). My intention is merely to promote dialog, not get up on a podium and spew crazy thoughts. If I have, please do let me know!

I know this has already been said, but great conversation. I am a student of history, and because of this I am able to look at the world and the industries today with a broad perspective.

Businesses, the economy, politics, religion and life in general are cyclical. There are seasons, ebbs and flows for everything. The wedding photography industry is same. We are part of the industry in a time when it is growing the most since the invention of photography itself. It is becoming more streamlined, more professional and more consumer driven.

There are good things as well as bad things about this kind of growth. It seems like photographers are working together to better each other and the industry like never before. Good thing. The industry is becoming more professional and more standardized (in a loose kind of way). This is good for the consumer. The industry seems to be advancing rapidly in style, quality of products and creativity. Obviously good.

But there are some things that could potentially be bad. All glitz or show with no substance. It could become all about the product and not caring about the people involved like some corporations. Bad.


Peter, you don't need to apologize about your perspective. I think it is extremely important to understand your personal relationship with regards to money. As we all know, it can completely corrupt and destroy you. We are all going to be in different places in our relationship with money. That's what makes this world, and God for that matter, so unbelievably amazing. Diversity. And our individual perspectives about money will drive how we run our businesses.

Having spend time being supported as a missionary and also being the the corporate environment, I have a certain understanding of what wealth and money can do when you have a healthy relationship with it. There are so many things that I would love to do with my time and resources to help people and advance the Kingdom. But I can’t do them because I am stuck behind a desk making someone else rich.

Instead I would like to take my passion for photography, hopefully be financially compensated for what I love, and give to others in my down time. I even have a vision of how photography will lead to more church plants and the expanding of God’s kingdom. But that’s for another time.

All in all I am really excited about where we have come in the wedding photography industry. I think the market still has room to expand as we continue to move forward.

Kurt: Very eloquent points. I particularly identify with the one above. I spent 8 very enlightening months making more money for someone else (and admittedly a lot for myself). I don't think I contributed much to society during that time period other than I may have learned a lot more about who I am, perhaps making me a more honest person. I suppose that is a good thing. Our first baby didn't make it somewhere in the middle of my time there, and I promptly quit, wanting to devote myself to something much much greater (like a missions trip or a non-profit of some sort). I believed, and still do, that I had to do the best with whatever situation God put me in, so I ended up staying. I think I was meant to stay there for another 3-4 months to really see what money can do to human beings, and also to help me clearly define the lines that I will not cross. As traumatizing as the experience was, I am grateful for having experienced it.

I realized earlier that I don't think I addressed this question directly. I think there is a "right" and "wrong" implication for every action, decision, intention, etc. that we encounter during our lives. I would lump these moments in time into a "moral" or "ethical" moment. Most often, the intention or motive is what determines whether or not the action is moral or ethical (and thus, by my definition, right or wrong).

As Kurt alluded to when talking about how each of us deals with money differently, we all have different moral and ethical realities. And my ethics are not necessarily better or worse than anyone else's—they're simply mine and define how I view and live in the world. And that is why it is lame to pass judgment so quickly (or at all...if anyone learns how to eliminate judgment from their lives, PLEASE let me know!)—it is impossible to know what motivates the next guy. Despite how much you disagree with something he does, his actions may be 100% in line with his morals/ethics, and thus, he is doing nothing wrong in his eyes.

All of that said, I do firmly believe that there are definitely clearly defined and indisputable rights and wrongs. For instance, thou shalt not kill, etc. Obviously, the issue above, whether the structure of the 'market balancing itself out' is right or wrong, doesn't fit nicely into one of those square holes. And thus, it is fodder for a very meaty and enjoyable discussion...

Again, considering motive, if I were to test the upper limits of the 'market' and succeed, I would have to carefully examine my intentions for doing so. Was I simply trying to make more money? Was I charging more because I truly believed that I was worth that much? Was I doing it because everyone else was and I simply followed without additional justification? Was I doing it because I wanted to increase my image and status? Because I was pressed for cash and needed to eat this month? Because I was pressed for cash and really wanted a new TV (ooooh, I hate TV by the way )? Because I knew the client was loaded and could certainly afford it? Because I wanted to grow my business but didn't want to take out a loan? ...all of these, and many more, fall into a very gray area where they, depending on how well they parallel my core beliefs, are for me either 'right' or 'wrong'.

As stated in posts above, based on my core beliefs, charging an amount different than the inherent value of a product or service (it could be higher or lower, I guess) is wrong. Other people can do it and it would be totally kosher, as it would presumably not conflict with their beliefs.

A weird, but good example of this is how I left the company I mentioned previously. I was knee deep in a proposal for a government client of ours and was asked by my boss, the owner, to do something I wasn't sure was okay. I expressed the fact that I was unsure whether or not it was legal for me to do what was being asked and promptly met a barrage from my boss of yelling, hyperventilating, whining, pleads, more yelling and plenty of anger. As the 'discussion' progressed, I firmly refused to do the requested action and continued to do so until the message was finally received.

Coincidentally, I had a trip planned for the very next day, so I spent my vacation time simmering down and really evaluating whether or not I did the right thing. In the end, I decided that I had. Even if what I was asked to do was 100% legal, and absolutely the right thing to do from an external perspective, it wasn't okay with me, and I had every right to say I wasn't comfortable performing the task. (In reality, I am fairly certain what was requested of me would have been a breach of contract and a completely slimy thing to do regardless.)

So I quit (the moment I returned from vacation) over the principle of practically being forced to compromise my core beliefs, and not over the fact that I was asked to do something potentially improper. Had I chosen to stay, or had I chosen to do the action, I would have been lying to myself, and thus, doing something wrong. Had the owner asked any other employee to do the action, and they saw no problem with it, then that would also have been a proper reaction.

I think I am blabbering on again. Hopefully the above makes sense!

This is really interesting. And what a great comment, David. It certainly affects how I feel sometimes about where my pricing should be. It's a difficult line to walk. But I'd like to make an analogy. My wife and I bought our home 3 years ago, just as the real estate market in So. Cal was taking off (again). In two years, the value increased by about $200,000. Are we ecstatic? Of course! Do we think our home is worth its market value? Not really, because the real estate market here is out of whack. We could not afford our home if we tried to buy it today. But if someone came along with an incredible offer to BUY it from us, would we say, "Oh, we'll sell. But our home is not really worth your offer, so let us mark it down for you and give you a better deal." I don't think so. Is it exploitation to sell at the fair market value? No, because you'd be a fool to accept less. (And your neighbors won't be happy because it implies that the value of their homes is less.) So, should we as photographers offer our services for less than the fair market value? I don't think so. You will draw the customers who are looking for a photographer within their alloted budget. Denis Reggie said that if you're shopping for a Mercedes, you don't go to the Chevy dealer. It makes sense. So we just have to decide what we are worth and what we are comfortable charging, and let that dictate our customer base.
Christopher

Chris: I like your analogy, but I'm not sure that it fits. Accepting an offer on your home for its appraised value is not exercising exploitation in any way that I can see. The new owners could turn right around and hopefully list the home for a similar amount. And your neighbors, provided they have a comparable house/property, can list theirs in the same ballpark. Puffery would be listing it for 20% more than it was appraised, or its fair market value. And as this discussion has shown, there may in fact be consumers out there willing to pay such a price!

Likewise, Mercedes is not a company that exploits its clientele by charging a lot of $$ for its vehicles. The market for its cars is clearly defined and, yes, there is a certain brand-recognition markup, but not much. Cars of that calibre are all priced relatively in line with each other. Whether we need more $65,000 turbo charged SUVs on the road is another matter ...

As it relates to the photography industry, someone charging $20K for a wedding and delivers $20K worth of value to their client is also charging fair market value. However, a photographer charging $20K who delivers $10K of service/product value and $10K of image/name recognition value, is in a different scenario entirely.

Keep in mind too that comparing the service industry to an asset-based industry is tricky as you can always unload the asset (unless you were totally shiested) for the original purchase price less any depreciation + a bit of wiggle. I'm not sure a bride and groom can as easily turn around and sell $20K worth of photography services to recoup their investment. ...and eventually, the ability to say, "So-and-so did my wedding photography!" will lose its charm.

...and hopefully the discussion has shown that there isn't a global wrong or right in this situation. If there is a market out there for service/product value + an extra perceived value, then Capitalism dictates that it should be filled.


Added: Sorry guys, I feel like I'm hovering...I'll try to back off this one. Just thought of one more point:

Regarding the Chevy Mercedes argument... I think what I am trying to point out here is that the exploitation comes from a Chevy dealer looking at the Mercedes dealer and saying, "Hmm, that looks interesting. I've got brand recognition. I think I'll charge $45,000 for a _____." That would be puffery in my book. A Mercedes dealer charging $45,000-$90,000+ for its cars is still providing close to that level of value to the buyer. And the secondary market (used) validates that fact. In the same vein, the secondary market would indicate that the cheaper brands actually are excessively marking up their vehicles as the resale on those bad boys is pathetic.

The simple fact of the matter is, whether you think the crux of this issue is good or bad, right or wrong, etc., if you choose to raise your prices based on an extra "perceived value", your clients will either bite or they won't. The market will correct itself.

I'm really sorry guys—I hope I'm not bugging everyone too much. This is the last thing I am going to add, and then I am going to ban myself from posting on this topic any more (sheeeeeesh Peter!). ...and I may go crawl into a hole for a little while too.

Regarding the listing/selling of your home for the current going rate, which you noted you didn't feel was a fair value. Let's assume that it wasn't a fair value at all but you knew you could absolutely find someone to buy it. Out of the bids you get, the best one (say, $10,000 above the others) is from a buyer that you know, with almost absolute certainty, is stretching a lot to afford your place, probably has a crazy ARM, and you are certain that interest rates are going to keep heading up over the next two years. And let's also assume that you are fairly certain that now is the best time for you to sell, specifically due to rising interest rates, localized bubbles (especially in CA) and a fickle economy. And let's also throw into the mix the fact that you as a semi-savvy home owner, can tell that this buyer isn't too up on all of the intricacies of real estate, and you are almost certain that their agent hasn't given them proper information about the state of the market (e.g. that they are probably buying at the absolute worst time in the past decade). Would you still, without hesitation, sell to this buyer?

Were I in that situation, which I have not had the pleasure to be yet, I think I would feel morally obligated to do something, even if it were as minimal as asking casually, "Have you and your agent talked about the possibility that the value of the house might be flat for a few years and that we might be in a localized bubble?" If they say yes, then you are in the clear. But if you don't ask, don't you think that extra cash is going to weigh on your conscience?

(Again, sorry guys... I'm trying to fight the urge to post!)

Peter,
You're pretty thorough in your analysis and you've made some very good points. However, regarding the value of our photography, I believe you've missed an important aspect. Whatever the photographer has charged for the services, despite the fact that there may be no resale value to those images, they are priceless in their value to the client. Surveys have shown that the number one item people will grab to save from a burning house is their collection of photographs. I know I would. They are irreplaceable. This even brings into play the value of the home itself. It's a structure that can be rebuilt. However astronomical the cost of the home, it is not comparable to the value of a person's photographs. (Is this beginning to sound like a credit card commercial? "Home. . .$500,000. Photographs. . .priceless.") As for your point about exploiting a buyer in a hot real estate market, I understand your point. But I am not without a heart and would not knowingly take advantage of someone in that situation. I've offered my photography services for less than my listed prices when I felt compelled to do so. I'm just saying that in a normal real estate transaction, with a qualified, knowlegeable buyer, there is no reason to accept an offer for less than the fair market (or appraised) value of your home. The same holds true for our photography.
Christopher

I like this thread...more intense but really good and I just got this months Inc. magazine in the mail and one of the main articles is titled "Boost your bottom line by taking the guesswork Out of Pricing." with the the subtitle being "Do you know how much your product is really worth" - haha... of course we're not selling products as much as we're selling services but a lot of what the article talked about applied to this thread so I figured I'd post up some quotes...

• Alison Wellner, the author, suggests that business owners, "...think through the benefits of your product and make a rough calculation of what you think they're worth in dollar terms." I can't even tell you how many times I've had couples come up to me at a wedding (after seeing the presentation) and tell me how much they wish they could get married over again so that I could shoot their wedding...how much would that cost them?

• The Journal of Behavioral Decision Making states, "People make purchasing decisions piecemeal, influenced by the context of the choice." Good news for us! Why are we willing to pay more for a hot dog at a baseball game than at costco? ...because we expect to pay more at a baseball game. We need to be thinking about managing expectations of the industry even before our clients come into contact with us. Just last week I sent an email to Jeff Jochum, VP of Marketing at Pictage, encouraging them to get on the Wedding Channel for having this posted on their site!



• Bundle products together - "Studies have shown that people think they're getting a better deal when they cannot determine the costs of the individual items they're purchasing." hmmm...interesting???

• The final piece of wisdom, "The price you get for a product is a function of what it's truly worth - and how good a job you do communicating that value to the end user." Tell your clients why it's worth it to them to have their wedding day captured by you and how your products will make them feel 20,30, 50 years from now!

WOW.

I don't know where I was during this thread! I just found it.

I really don't have much to say except this is INCREDIBLY interesting and also INCREDIBLY complicated. Thanks Peter, DJ, Chris, and Kurt for contributing to this thread and giving us food for thought (more like a FEAST for thought.)

On a diffferent note, can I also just express how grateful I am that these really tough ideas can be discussed so humbly, and without the bashing that it seems would accompany this discussion almost anywhere else on the net.

Thanks guys and keep giving us stuff to mull over!

...I thought I said something along the lines that I wasn’t going to post in this conversation anymore ...

Harumph! I have a few thoughts to share:

- Primero: I second what Chris said about everyone contributing and making this such a rich, humble, humbling and insightful discussion .

- Second: Each time I read Christopher's response above, "... I am not without a heart and would not knowingly take advantage of someone..." I am find myself glancing at his avatar (this won't make sense if he ever changes it!) and accordingly, know that he is a genuine and good person to the core. Does that sound totally sappy?

- Third: I really dig the stuff DJ pulled from Inc and posted above. Very appropriate content and all very good advice. The numbers in that graphic he posted are flat out shocking. Not so much on a singular basis, but in the context that they represent the average cost. It kind of makes me wonder what sample the data comes from -- perhaps those are Canadian dollars? It is interesting that they are posted on the Wedding Channel, though, as the majority of the paying advertisers' starting packages are probably just a wee bit higher than that. Any rate, thanks for posting that.

- Fourth: If you haven't seen The Corporation, definitely watch it as soon as you have a free moment. It isn't directly related to this specific subject, but it will certainly get you thinking about business and life purpose in general (even if you think the movie is terrible and full of liberal hot air). One of my favorite (well, it made me sick to my stomach) parts of the movie is an interview with a commodities broker talking about the upsides of 9/11, the Gulf War, and the current conflict in Iraq. It's amazing to hear someone relate to such events in terms of profit on gold and oil commodities, simply amazing. I hope in my worst nightmare that I never have such an attitude about life and money! I thought the movie would make me want to get rid of all of my possessions and go join the Peace Corps (it almost did). Instead, it lit a very strong fire to find solutions to the societal issues that grind away so intensely. I think this discussion is part of that as I think there is a great group of people here who have the capacity to make a difference in the world through their businesses.

- Fifth: I continue to search for literature, resources and guidance in general about combining one's faith and morals with business and having success in both areas. Where do you guys go for such guidance? Can you point some of it this way?