Dan Wilson Call — Feb 11, 2026 (Raw Transcript)
Attendees: Thomas, Michael, Dan Wilson
Versus getting like overly locked in, I think the dev partnership could make sense like all the Blues want it, but I'd make them ask for it versus you suggesting it. Because like the most likely is that you end up becoming just overly. Built into their infrastructure and there's like no transferability to speak of other than like, you know stuff. You'll learn stuff, but like you're going to have to do a lot of rework for the next client. So thinking about the deployment strategy is going to be. A substantially like important part of plan. Ning. Like I would want to know what are all the other systems. Like I want a whole system map like what are all the applications that are. And play. What are the benefit managers in play? What's the scope of each? Where are decisions made? Where is all the medical policy information held? How is it updated like? The full gamut of it, because then you can start to think about your dependencies upstream, downstream, and then how to architect this thing with the right points of connectivity to other payers. I want it like worry too much about. Like, I mean, if you could get to pay or design partners around the same time, obviously that's better because you just get less locked into what one person wants. I wouldn't sweat that a whole lot. It'd be more in my mind about like knowing the trade offs you're making and why you're making them and then ensuring that you. The way I always think of it is like you don't put a load bearing wall where you may have to put a door later on. You know like. It's just you may make some decisions where it's like I'm, I'm, I'm building for that system, but I know that in other situations that might actually be like 3 systems. Therefore I need to make sure that I'm not like too fixed in my business logic at this point. This needs to be flexible. Thanks. OK. This is exactly where we're going to go with this because we don't, we've never done like interoperability before. We've never worked with some of the tech stacks that have names I've never heard of before. And so this is helpful feedback to kind of get us thinking about what should we be aware of as we start some sort of scoping product project with them and understand like where all the kind of bodies buried and what should we kind of be grabbing as we kind of do a project scope have, have you raised money yet? So we're doing that now. So like we're talking with seed stage investors because like this client is going well and then we have a couple more outsourcing groups that we've been working with that are interested in leveraging the product too. So we feel like the BD is at a good point to where seed stage investors wouldn't want to pick this up. Is it going to sound kind of crazy? So. You can shoot it down immediately and just know that I'll put it out of mind and then be oriented back to what you're talking about. But like. I was approached by some investors who asked if I wanted to start AUM company. And they offered $15 million. And I told him I wasn't sure. And. But probably not. But like, I don't want to. I just, I'm not ready to go like all in on that thing, right? But then the pieces started to line up where the guy who runs the UN product at Epic wants to leave. And join something. And then five guys I used to work with that sold their last company to change and built a bunch of back end infrastructure for payers. To generically connect to EH, RS, pull the data, put into payer formats and analyze it, but then weren't sure what they wanted to actually do with it. Approach me and asked if I'd want to like Aqua, hire them to go work on something else and. They know, umm, like cold. But they're not. I don't think that the people, neither of those people I just talked about, are the ones to, like, run the thing or to think about it super differently from the way it's been done in the past, but they'll know how it's done today. One of them is the product guy I think could think about how it should be done, but he's not the guy to go and like be the CEO. And the tech team I think could totally do all the tech around like an activity and getting the data and thinking about legacy systems, but it's probably not the tech team to go and do. Like the AI side of this, at least. Not like they would need coaching. They could probably learn a bunch of it. They're good, but they're just. That's just not their background. So I'm wondering if there's like AA play here that's supposed to be like collapsing all of this down. Where I don't. Again, don't really want to be the CEO, so like not the CEO, but I could be like. Executive chairman or something and like put time into it but not be like 100 percent on it. Try to get these guys to put the money in. Aqua hire those five and all of a sudden we've got a team of products. They got a commercial guy too. And have a team of like, you know, 7 or 8. And like go after it, I mean that I think that's a good idea. I mean we're all doing the same thing. I don't think I have any like pride of ownership with this. Like as we're kind of describing to you like we're kind of early, we're just starting this this fund raise. We're kind of you know at a pretty good cycle with the PD. But there doesn't need to be like half a dozen of UM companies that are doing this. Like I think we're all kind of going after the same kind of issue here. Like the clients can only work with one vendor at a time. Like I think if you had more capital you could go and kind of blitz this a lot more aggressively because like this is sort of the time and place to start making moves on umi think as as we're hearing from people. So like, I don't think this is a bad idea. Who are the investors by the way Dan. So it's a firm GPV, Great Point Ventures and. The their initial offer which I've not countered, but I've got another call with them and like I pushed, I was like let's just talk in a month. I need like a month, like sort some stuff. So my next call with them is maybe a week or two. But they offered so. A first tranche of 5 million, a second contraction of 10 million that would be allegedly at our option to call down. And the valuation that they set was loose, but they were like they were talking about how they wanted to see their way to like 3040% with that for that $15 million. Which I felt was like. You know, maybe a little expensive, but I had negotiated it at all. It's not terribly expensive. It was a lot of money. So I was thinking about going back to them and being like, let's just start with two. And then let's do a tranche of 5 and then let's do a tranche of eight or something like that, so. They want to put 15 to work, do it, but like let us have a little more flexibility. But if if we wanted to make a play at it, I'd have no problem taking 5 to start. Like we could spend that, I think efficiently. With this team I just discussed. I would not want to be compelled to take the 10 unless we wanted to take the 10 because I don't know them well enough to say like unequivocally we want them to be that big of an investor. But I've been diligencing them a little bit in the background and it's been positive. I think they're, I think they're, you know, they want to be good investors. Like I don't I've, I've definitely not picked up anything negative. I was just surprised at how quickly they offer the money. Yeah. So it's like, you know maybe a little bit paranoid that like there was something I was missing, but I've not been able to find it. So I think it might genuinely just be they want to have exposure to the UN space. They think about it as umm, prior off. Like they don't even know exactly what part of it they want. So I mean I think the story back would be like we're going to go up at authorizations, we're not going to specifically silo it this, I'd want this to be a platform for all of these use cases. In time. And then it's just like where do we start? And I think inpatient concurrent review is an acceptable starting point as we thought in the past. And and with this just this is just SAS. This is just tech. There's no services angle to it. I want to do services. I don't. I don't. I don't think tech alone gets this done. I don't plan to like fully outline that to them at this point, II would. But no, I mean in my mind. If we were doing this, I'd want to go in and figure out like everywhere you can use tech. Obviously do that, but then. So I just sent like we know this guy Kevin. We met him at a conference. And so the press release was interesting because we know their other CEO Jose and like he just got appointed as like CEO of this very large outsourcing group to essentially technify it, right. And like layering AI for the reviews. Yep. So. Like I'm just telling you like the thesis is there. Like you know the incumbents are doing this and like if there is a layer of services on it, like I think it's happening, right? Like this is, I'm just trying, this is happening. Yeah, look, Kevin's good. He's a nice guy. You know, what's that? You know him? Yeah. I had dinner with him. Probably been two years though, but I was talking with him so. Like curation and precuration, yeah. So he did Advisory Board inclination. So he's super well connected with the United crowd, so. But yeah, IIII would put him in your like he is a good competitor. He's smart and he knows a lot of people. So. You know, good and bad validates the space, but not that I don't think any of us needed that validated so II would say it does. Create a competitor for sure. The space you guys are playing in is not going to lack competitors. Like you're going to have to out execute and you're going to have to move fast. Yeah, and. You know, like, and you do have to do this with the payers and with the providers. Like, this is not a thing that you can just like, build independently and then like easily just layer on top of what they're doing. And so anyone that's going to make any movement here, like needs to be working hand in hand with someone who's already doing a lot of volume, I think. Yeah. Remind me the two of you in terms of your background. Like how technical are you? I think we've been coding for the last year and a half or so, like Michael as an engineering degree from Princeton. But in terms of like deep coding, deep tech, have we worked at FANG? No, but. That hasn't stopped us yet. Like no, no, no, II don't mean it in that sense. I'm. I'm just trying to figure out like I've got, I've been doing way too many things this last year, but in my head they all connect. But I can't say it out loud because it makes me sound like a rain Man over it. But like so, I've been working with this deep tech platform, right? And. I've been trying to figure out what the right business model is because they want to be a platform they don't necessarily want to be. Like. Front end delivery for all these things. And so part of me wonders if there's a scenario where we also further outsource. Like we set up this new CO that's like it's authorizations, maybe it's authorizations and payment integrity, like maybe you can make it like a wider mandate, but like the authorizations. To start and you put all this talent into it. And like the forward deploy engineering and the application specific development sits there but when it starts to get into like. Tuning agents, tuning models, setting up reinforcement learning like optimizing throughput, optimizing cost per you know, GPU or you know cost per token or whatever, right, like we're delegating that down through a contract to this like platform business. Now you help make their story of like, yes, see where a platform, we have other platforms building on top of us, they don't get pulled in. To the UN stuff, we draw a line of demarcation. I with them have just sold a deal to a large recycle business where we're being asked to embed at a hospital and help them build out full end to end automation for the Rev. cycle. There's a lot in that I could create like a clean line of of division where it's like on the UN stuff. It's this new CO right and on. Phone triage of new patients coming in and asking a question about their bill, it's stochastic, right. And we like we build it out with this other company and whatever. But I don't know like in in this Rev cycle that we just sold, I helped him win a deal for the they won one of the wiser contracts with the Fed. So they're now stepping in and doing authorizations for CMS. Like what does that actually mean and so like maybe there's an opportunity to get. Embedded in some of that work. So I don't know, there's just like, there's a lot brewing here, yeah, and it feels like. Depending on what you want to do, somehow we've got to start collapsing down efforts. Efficiently and the best way to do that is before money has been raised like right so or before much money has been raised. So anyway, maybe think about it, it sounds like it's not like a dead on arrival kind of situation, but like talk about what that might look like and mean and what would be ideal and what roles you'd want and all of that and then maybe we just have another quick chat and. I can then socialize it. I don't know if they'll go for it 'cause I don't know how much of their thought is like contingent on me being the CEO. And like, truly, I don't. I don't really want to like, i'm happy to be like, very involved. I'd rather have one of you guys do that if one of you really wants to be or. Or if you guys think that you're better suited for a different role like. We could actually like look for Aceo and just continue to use that as like an open spot that we need to fill and I can kind of like interim kind of fill it, but I wouldn't want to set an expectation with the investors that I'm like single tracked on this so that. That's why I'm just thinking of like from a titling perspective, making sure that it doesn't. We can also totally bait and switch them, you know. Honestly, like, it's not. You with entrepreneurs all the time. We can totally get the money and we could all just know that as soon as it's in like I'm going to be transitioning to like a board role, you know, executive chair role or something. II don't. I don't want to be duplicitous, but I generally am on board with like the solves a lot of our problems, right, like raising capital, like hiring the team, like kind of thinking about like the next 12 months of the business. So like. What you're talking about with? This is what I think II think you guys desperately need to be partnered with somebody who like intimately understands the state of the state and what's been tried over the last 20 years. Like, I don't think you can learn it fast enough. And also, those people are not startup founders and they won't have the passion to just like like you've now stuck with this longer than I thought you would. Which is a testament to you. It's not like a knock at all. And like. You can't. You can't pay someone to care that much. You can't so like. I also think the two of you are founders, right? Like and so. Like that's the DNA that needs to be in like a leadership position for this to have a shot. I'm just I'm just trying to figure out like how to then like put the pieces so that there isn't. There isn't like a ton of time spent getting up to speed like. You're you're going to have to ask a bunch of discovery questions that like, someone doesn't have to ask 'cause they just already know all the answers to, and you need that person as part of the org. Yeah. Yeah. I mean I think there's, there's no shortage of capital looking to go after umm, there is limited talent I think of people who could kind of pull this off and maybe the question is, you know, how do you match the, the talent to the capital to kind of pursue this most efficiently? That's that's kind of how I'm thinking about it. The the question is like is this capital the right capital is the right price, does it give us enough leeway like there's other capital out there if it isn't this like if this concept makes sense, I just know that this, this team of five who I think is like. I just think they're an accelerant, like they work well together, they communicate well. Why they can't figure out like my red flag with them is you've got all these people, you've successfully built companies before. There's certainly no shortage of. Payers need help with data like why are they considering their first foray wasn't successful and they're now like, I think they were looking for a quick flip because. I think. That's what they've always done. When I look at their track record like one of the guys who see it has started and sold like 5 companies and he specializes in like owning most of a company and selling it in a couple of years for like 50 to $100 million. So he's probably worth you know, 34500 million dollars from doing these like. It's pejorative to call it a single, but like double, double, double, you know. And I think they were, they're kind of like looking at that way when that first, you know, swing didn't hit, they're like, is there a quick hit in here or not? And so that's where I don't think you necessarily would put them in say like let's totally build the company around these guys. But like I also think that attitude is being driven in primarily that one of them who wants, who doesn't need to work and just wants to kind of like still have hobbies. So part of me thinks like you actually put him into a diminished role. He's still like elder statesman who helps like transition in a bunch of this stuff. And the people in the tech, there's like 3 of them not made their money yet and still want to play for something. And so you, you anchor them as kind of the core engineering team at the onset. And then we put in a new like product person who. You know, can be like more of ACPOS, individual. I also think all these guys know too much. And, umm, is one of those areas when you know too much, you think it's like can't be solved. And the reality is probably somewhere between them and what you think. And so it's like, can we then calibrate in on like what's the right push to the market that actually can also still generally fit with most of the underlying realities. I mean, I think there's going to be a ton of things with this client, with Ramira where we're not going to be that excited to do it. Like you know where we would have been like OK, we're going to have to buckle down and just really like work with a vendor or you know, find someone and help us do that. And there's also stuff here where we're like this is really exciting, like we're getting to build agents, we're doing. You know, building a clod code system unit where we're doing whatever right kind of this new AI, forward development, so. In the more of the former and the less the latter we can be doing the two of us, I think the more we're kind of using our skills in the best possible way. Yeah. So whatever way we can do that, right? Like, I think we're interested in. Yeah, what is? Wearing conversations at with them in terms of like deal structure, economics, that's I think what we're going about to discuss in 30 minutes. Yeah, we've got, we've got to call it two. What do they want you to come in and do? Are you supposed to propose? We have proposed. So essentially the idea is some sort of taking what we demo to them and building it within their stack is as far really as we've kind of gotten the logistics beyond the discovery, the pricing like all that. I think this is like the 3rd call or 4th call that we're having with them. So this is like we're going to be talking about all this in 30 minutes OK, so. Without knowing what the hell I'm talking about, because I don't know exactly. What anyone is expecting I would say. You know, getting them to talk is going to be a key versus you telling them what you think, because it's got to be like, what are they? What are they thinking? And then you're trying to steer them into. Like this is bigger than probably what they think it is. So like if they're going to think about this in terms of head count. Like if the two of you aren't going to get this done, you're going to need what behind you? So like coming in and kind of having a clear idea of all the people that you're going to need to stand this up well and the fact that you want to look for opportunities to involve their team. But the reality is. The more integrated with their team, some of this stuff is. That's like just dependencies that slow it all down. And so there is like a question of like what's the right degree of integration versus not? That I think is open ended and that will drive them the people you need. So like I mean if you can get this into a cost plus model. That's the lowest risk for you, right? You basically say, like, we'll just keep bringing the resources we need, we'll price it at marketish rates. You tack in like a 4050% margin on your cost. You're not going to make a ton off of it, but you'll at least, like, not lose any money on it, and you're getting like. Pay to codevelopit. The challenge with laying it out that way is it starts to look a lot like work for hire, and you're going to get stuck in contracting where it's like you're doing like you don't want. This can't be worked for hire. And so like the. The better way, if you can swing it, would be to scope this out well enough that you can give them some degree of. Like project based or milestone based or something that makes it a little bit. Harder to just like, say why is this not work for hire, right. And and your response being like, well, 'cause we don't want it to be, you know, like something about like the product already exists. Like they may all know it doesn't really exist in the way that's ready to go live. But like talking about it as like a subscription or talking about it as like a license to existing. I, you know, like, so you know what they're going to get out of this is maybe a license. That is not commercializable outside of their plan that. Incorporates your IP like. You probably have to give them some. Broader, you know, agreement, you just got to make sure it doesn't like hurt any of your go forward commercial objectives. One thing that a lot of these plans want to do is be like Optum where they go and DR revenue from these like other services. So you know what Optum would do in this case is they may take warrants in the business. So are you familiar with warrants. Yeah we'd be OK if they took warrants. I mean that would be like I think a big sign of validation in my view. Yeah II think it could be good and I would just you you associate them with. Commercial spend or their their actual spend with you. So what I would do is say something like. You know, the first $1,000,000 of spending annually that they have with you doesn't earn warrants, but you know, or whatever the initial scope is. But like as it expands out they can earn warrants. Or as we commercialize maybe like warrants are more valuable even if they sell another health plan on to the platform. You know, they get additional warrants for that type of thing, or first dollar warrants, right? So something like that then aligns incentives nicely. This is good. I think we need to like, let them speak a little bit to hear if they're even interested in these sorts of things. Because as far as we know, they want us to do some work for hire and I think they're probably amenable to like a licensing fee. But they're also the mind that like they can build a lot of things internally now and don't like software and so. It's a it's a tricky balance, but I think this is the new world of AII think it is too. I mean that's like it's another. Yeah. That's like another vote. Or like using something like the stochastic. Where you both would benefit because they're trying to avoid getting pulled into the selling time. But to your point, that's kind of like what the market is expecting? You guys are comfortable embracing that, which I applaud because I actually think that's like the safest way to build a business right now. You just you've got to charge for all of it. But. You want to make sure that. You get some operating leverage over time. Which means like at some point you got to be able to pivot this to selling more. Like you got to have perceived IP that people are paying you. IP Fee Plus. All the setup stuff. And then as your IP base grows, that fee gets larger because objectively you can bring down your implementation expense, your configuration expense, all that stuff. Yep, that's exactly what we were thinking of. Yeah, I think that's right. It's then just making sure that from a legal perspective you're able to build background IP that is not wholly owned by them. So creating like your definitions here are going to be like critical. So you're going to have like foreground IP, background IT, premier. IP you know Daisy IP would probably background IP but. Who's your lawyer? We have a friend of a friend who's our lawyer. Are they good with IP stuff? Everything's OK. I wouldn't say he's like excellent at IP. He's like a startup player. Yeah, I would also bundle in at least like 50 grand to this for expenses of like lawyers. It probably won't be that expensive, but just like, just expect. That you're going to. That's helpful. Like. You could probably get it for like literally like 10 or 12, maybe 15. But. Maybe not, and I'd, I'd rather I'd rather kind of buffer it up. In my head, 50 might be a high watermark, but like 3035 is not. Because they're going to end up giving you and they're going to probably want to give you their paperwork. Which is gonna be like almost impossible to turn into what you need. So what I would do is just say you'll get them a contract, but if they can send you their sample SAS, MSA, make sure it is not a non SAS agreement. Not that this is going to be SAS, but you want to drag language from that as opposed to language from like a professional services agreement. Ask them for their BA. And then tell them that you'll give them amsa or like a master agreement, but you'll factor in as much of the terms and structure from their language as you can, or maybe even work off of those. There's, but like you're just not sure. You're going to have to see what their standard is. You want to make it easy for them, but don't set the expectation that it's going to be editing from theirs. If you can avoid it, you you may not have a choice. And so like don't die on the sword, just like no, it'll be exponentially easier if you can give it to them and then forget. Forget trying to work off of your VAA. It's going to be their VA no matter what. So just like get their BAA early. And then. Know that the lawyer is going to have to do a fair amount of time on the IP section to make sure that you guys are properly protected and that residuals like you're going to want to make sure you're good on residuals. So anything that you learn and that you have retained in your head, like all that stuff, you're free and clear on. The other thing you could consider is. I think they make investments. What? You go have your call. Let me text this guy who I think took money from them and just confirm and then see if he would talk. After you have more information, we can sync up, figure out what you heard, and then we can maybe pull him in to give ideas of how he structured stuff with them. Yeah, OK. What else is going on? I mean we're just fundraising, right. Like I mean so we've been talking a bunch of V, CS. You know we've had some, we've had some relationships with people. I think they're excited. We're not, we haven't gotten a term sheet yet, but. How much you want to raise 2 million? And what what would you do with that? The idea would be to hire one or two more technical people like Michael and I. We have a good nurse who's who we've been working with that knows more about UN than us to do go to market and to help us with some of the clinical materials. And that's kind of like what, two years, you know, 345 people kind of get you nowadays. OK OK. I'm, I'm excited about this other opportunity Dan. So if you hear more information on it like Michael and I are going to shoot that down right away. I think let us also get you more information on like how this contract is shaking out with Premiera because I think that might be interesting too. But I think it absolutely would. I mean realistically right, like that's part of the. The kind of like value you're bringing to the things. So like, I would keep grinding on that regardless, right? There's definitely no reason not to. And then. It take a long time to materialize. So like we can run this other thing down and I don't want to like I don't want to oversell it. It's not a big thing at this point, but we can like if if it's not a dead on arrival. Part of my issue with pursuing it had been that even though I had these other pieces, I couldn't figure out. How it would go because it doesn't have like the founder DNA with those other pieces and. Like, I don't think you can like. You can't like hire a founder. So like it just so this is honestly like opportune timing because like it might be the missing components taking like crack at it. Cool. Yeah, I think we're we're excited. Sounds interesting. Well, good luck with the call and. Yeah. Let me know how it goes. Thanks, Dan. Helpful as always. There's a lot of legal things I hadn't thought about before and I think this is going to take a while. Like I think we're looking like these. My first contract was not dissimilar, it was with Aetna. We didn't have a product yet. Really. I'd like a little demo, kind of same, same, same thing. And it was insane. I had. It was a team of three or four of us at the time, and we went straight to commercial paper. It's took three months. Which is like the fastest to this day I've ever heard. And and they offered to like, hire Deloitte to help us get through their contracts because they were so extensive, like. You know, addendum ABCDEFGHI, you know. And so II just I prefaced it with like. It will take a while like it even if they are all aligned and they say go. You're probably sixish months from like, actually, really. Being ready to go. And so I just factor that into your own kind of like burn rate stuff and timing and it's possible as faster like I said we did in three months. So it it it could be faster. It's just like the stars were completely aligned to make that happen. But it's like that's probably your window. It's possible they would do something like that's not a full commercial agreement like let's get a confidentiality agreement in place. Let's like start to embed, let's start to do information passing like A robust confidentiality agreement could be a bridge to like do some stuff in parallel. Just know that there's no money with that, so you're going to do it on your own dime, like if you got to fly out there. So maybe you could even talk about like. They ever do like if they know how early stage you are, there could be some kind of a like, you know, let's just do it. Simple services agreement, not complicated, no IP, whatever and let's just do like a 3 month. Consultative agreement. Where they can pay for your travel, pay for your time and will use that time to create the work product that would go into a statement of work for the actual deliverables. So like minimized expense you know you're hiring the two of us to come in and do like a full assessment, map everything you know, whatever and come back with a set of recommendations compared to best practice like make it sound more management consultant T in a sense because then like the deliverables that would be part of their. IP are going to be like assessment documents. Who gives a **** about, right? And you know you can probably bill your time out at a buck 50 an hour or something like that plus expenses or something and and that might be a way to get paid to do what would otherwise be free scoping. I think that's right. And like I don't see how we would just go in and just immediately, you know, know what to do without some sort of scope. And so being sort of explicit up front around like I've been thinking of like maybe there's this two step kind of thing to your point of like 1st, we scope up this project, we identify the tech, we identify the IP and kind of make this proposal like all the systems and all the people. And then once there's like a go forward on that we can move that into like a commercial contract. But we shouldn't like be precluded from doing work just because we haven't defined the terms of the agreement yet. And and I think most SAS companies would have do all that for free, right. And so I think part of what you're saying is there's this new. It's a new set of expectations. Why would you do it for free? Go back to how the services firms always used to do it. It's just a tight design statement of work. And then you could work off of their like generalized. You know services agreements generally, right? Like super quick put a lightweight. Services Agreement in. I like that. I think it's a good way to kind of frame it for them. I don't see why they wouldn't be amenable. It'll tell you how desperate they are and how serious. Yeah, to be honest, like what I've learned is like a lot of times you don't ask these questions because, like, you kind of don't want the answer. You don't want to hear that it's not actually that important to them. But also like, then you just waste time. So it's better to kind of ask those questions as early as. You know yeah. Once a look at set. Yep. Yeah. I think we're I think we're in a good spot. We'll we'll we'll let you know how this goes we'll see how we'll see how desperate they are. Happy hunting. Thanks, Dan. I really appreciate this. You've been such a great advocate. Let let us know how that conversation goes and and we'll keep you in the loop. All right. Sounds great. Cool talk later. Bye, bye.
Post-Call Debrief (Thomas & Michael)
Hello. Hey, how's it going? AI notes and transcription on. I mean, that's that's an interesting proposal, dude. Like I think the. The opportunity would be very interesting. I don't know how we get paid, right? Where like we seem to be bringing like the leadership and like the client and the tech, but those guys are also bringing some tech, I guess. Yeah, I guess like decades of industry expertise, which is, you know, sometimes a plus and sometimes a negative. Yeah, I I'm thinking of them as like, you know, like much, much, much better than healthcare, right. Like they know the systems, they know HL780TI, I'm assuming, right? This is kind of how I think about these guys, right? It's a team of Ron Wilson's maybe, I don't know. Yeah, like, I mean dancing to advocate for most of them and they know you buy them like it seems like a really cool opportunity. We. 'D essentially like have built a start up and then kind of got get Aqua hired like quite quickly, right? I don't know how that shakes out in terms of like cash comp or like if we make out on anything on that or like what? I'm sure these guys would probably be thinking the same thing. Yeah, I mean. Well, here's another strategy, right? Like we have their our company. They have their company, right. Like we subcontract with them for like you know, all the ADTHL 7 **** that you know, you know we don't know how to do, right. Like all that crap. I don't exactly know who these guys are, right? Maybe that's that's one of the questions I don't know the answer to, because if they're 'cause I doubt they, you know, spend a lot of time with Claude and open and chat GPT and cloud code and whatever. Yeah, like. I mean like. We'll see. I'm not against it. Like I think there's a couple things that have to happen if this to occur. You know, 'cause II think Dan, I think Dan wants to do this like, he's like, oh, I don't really want to do this. I'm not committed. That sounds like the, the guy, the kind of, that sounds like the statement of a man who was, you know, wants to do it but doesn't, doesn't want to say, he doesn't want to say it yet. Well I don't think he wants like fully roll up his sleeves and be like CEO of a start up. I feel like that's what he doesn't want to do but he likes umm and totally understands it and. I mean OK, so the other things was like, I mean he had a lot of good things to talk about with like the commercial terms here, right. And and like seemingly the value of this contract is like much larger than I think we were, we were letting on