Setting Yourself up for a Successful Treasury Career with Lane Silverman

Foreign.

Welcome to this week's Treasury Career Corner podcast where I interview treasury professionals.

About their treasury careers.

Each and every week I talk to them about how they built their careers, where they are now, where they see both themselves and the treasury profession going to next, let's get on with the show.

In this week's show, delight to be joined by Lane Silverman, who's now a Treasury consultant and advisor for his own treasury consulting firm and doing various different things out there in the world of Treasury. Now Lane and I go way back when, so it's going to be an interesting conversation. We were just having a pre chat there and I said this could be a two hour podcast but we're still going to keep it a half an hour 45 minutes like as we usually do. So as people used to have that typical commute time, we know that's changed but as always, I'm going to shut up, I'm going to let Lane to do the talking. Very eloquent guy. Lane, if you would take us back to the dim distant past and like some others had more European people on the show tends not to be from say the UK so much or US but you actually started within banking and then grew your your career into Treasury. So maybe if you take us way back when. Sir, over to you.

Good morning Mike. Thanks, thanks for the invite and thanks for the nice words. If I go back to my career way back in the middle ages I started indeed in banking, but before I went into a career into that, when I graduated university, I actually didn't know exactly what direction I was going to go in. But to me banking had the closest relation to what goes on in treasury. And even in those days I thought that would be the thing that really matches where the interest of most treasurers are. Although nowadays I think there's a lot of accounting focus, there's a lot of focus on technology. Of course that didn't help much but in those days it was less guess so I started as a bond currency trader at a Dutch bank and this indeed was not in the UK or in the us. I'm from Holland originally, so that's where I started with the Dutch bank. First on a structured trading desk, structured finance trading desk, and then moved my way up to foreign exchange and bonds. But then eventually I moved my way out of that again and I saw the other side, the corporate side and I eventually went into corporate and there really landed as a first treasury position and a large Dutch trading company. So my start indeed was in banking, which I think still is One of the best starts for a treasurer.

And why do you think that? I know that we've discussed it before that you'd got that sort of trading element to yourself quite early on and then you transitioned into treasury and this is with, how do you say, Hagermeyer. Is that the right way to say yes?

Hagermeyer was a large Dutch trade hitch was at that time was a First Pacific was a Hong Kong company which had acquired part of Hagermeyer. So it was a conglomerate which had ties into Asia. And they're completely different now. But in those days the ties with First Pacific were very strong. Why do I think banking, not necessarily the FX trading or bond trading, but banking in general? Because what people think is the logical way into treasury is usually the accounting route. I totally do not think so. My experience with accountants has been mixed, so to speak. There's some very, very good treasurers and consultants that come from the accounting side and see that. But accounting is so rule based. And some of these rules make absolutely zero sense from an economic and treasury point of view. And once accountants get so ingrained in that that it's hard for them to see beyond that. And I think in treasury you look much more at the economic side. You look much more at risk in foreign exchange, much more at risk in the capital markets and liquidity flows. It is not that rule based. Well, maybe now more than in the past, but it's not that rule based as in account. I think once you get too ingrained in those rules, you lose the perspective what you need to see as a treasurer. So my best experience with people that I've hired have not necessarily been the accountants, but that's just maybe my experience. But in general I don't think it's the best entrance into treasury, although it is the most logical ones because it's sort of grouped in with finance in general.

And when you say the ethos of treasury and I, I get this as well. You know, I talked to a couple of guys when they said tax is similar. That tax itself, as you say, is very rules based. You have direct rules, these are things to do. Don't veer from them. And actually you, you hone in on those. Whereas with treasury you use them as a guideline and a springboard from there sort of thing.

Yeah.

Now when you've seen that and then as we sort of progress into you. So with Hagermeyer, what was it like for you that you know, starting corporate treasury and then because it then provided you that guideline, didn't it with you know all the way through Amex and then Huber and everything else. So talk us through.

I think one of the things I slowly discovered, of course being at the banks, you were service provider for the corporate CBFX or capital Marks. But once you get to the other side, to the treasury side of a corporate, if I draw that line through all of my career, I always take into account what is the main objectives in Treasury. It is to get money at the right place at the right time, reducing the risk both from a liquidity foreign exchange or from a capital markets perspective. And I think those are the aspects that really are most important in Treasury. It's the management of the risk. It's the getting the money where you need to get it and making sure that the company has sufficient funds in order to function. They be it either from a liquidity management or cash management perspective or from a capital markets getting out and getting funding, making sure that risks that you can manage to some extent, like foreign exchange and interest are properly managed. And I think that concept has always been with me throughout my career, that that's my main objective. That's what I'm. That's what I'm put on earth for, so to speak, in these corporates. And I think since the banks provided those and provided those tools to corporates, be it through hedging, be it through capital markets advisory, be it through funding products and other structured deals, I think that's what I go back to what I said earlier is the best preparation. But that basically has been important in all the companies, either be it through Hagemeier, which is a trading company, or even at American Express, which is again sort of a bank, but not really because they also provide travel services and card services. So the whole liquidity aspect is a little bit different than a bank, but more similar. But then later on when I went into the large chemical companies I worked for or the commodity companies, it's that liquidity and funding aspects that are very, very important for Treasury. And I think that's the aspect that you have to go in with eyes wide open. And that's what you're accountable for, I think. And not so much where this FX risk is being booked or what's the hedging results. Yes, the hedging results are important and are above the line or below the line. All that stuff is relevant, of course, or hedge accounting or very, very important. But it's the economics of the whole thing that I think CEOs and CFOs should look at for treasurer and the strategy of how to approach that. So I think that's maybe the difference or that's the direction.

And with that and sort of talk us through how you positioned yourself within those. You know, we've got listeners today and we, you know, I've said this to you before, that people are listening today to say, well, how did Lane become. You were VP Finance at Huber and then you became treasurer, Bungay and stuff like that. Talk us through how you got those roles, how you positioned yourself. Was it through getting to know people? How did it sort of it progress? What again, because people are thinking, right, this is great, and he got that start, but how did he then make the moves? How did he set himself up for that success, as it were?

Well, it's all relative, but in a sense, success. But I don't think I really set myself up for anything. I did what I liked, which was first banking and then I, and then I jumped over to corporate because I saw there was an opportunity there to apply what I've done. But after that I had a broad enough experience, and I think that's irrelevant, a broad enough experience in the various aspects of trade, treasury, be it fx, be it capital markets, be it funding, be it other types of risk management, that when I applied for a new position, it was always a position a level up. But I never thought I really could do it because I thought I don't have enough experience. This is missing from my resume. But I did it anyway because I thought you usually have enough good people around you. Certain things can be learned on the job. And I don't want to say I faked it, but that's how it felt when I went into DC positions and I didn't know everything, but I had confidence enough in myself that I could learn it or that I could dip into the rudimentary elements from that subject that I. That maybe I wasn't that experienced and that I could. That I could work it out. So I think I went from. From position to position each time and luckily a step higher that. But knowing very well that I may have not been that. Not the best person for the job from an experience point of view, because nobody has all the experience, especially not when you're younger. But I felt I had the ability and I had enough confidence that, you know, what. What's the worst that can happen? That's always a set.

Just honing in on that though, was it, you know, because sometimes see these memes and things that, you know, you know, you should apply for these jobs even if you don't you know? Because you're going to go for it and everything else. But it sounds like whilst you say you know, you didn't know everything but you knew, did you have an awareness maybe of the areas you weren't strong and that's a strength that knowing that. Do you know what you talked about accounting there? I'm not the strongest accountant. I know what they're doing and stuff and I know how to supervise. You know, there's various things in my day to day, there are some areas I am very good at and I sort of. But I think, do you know what? I could keep doing that, but I need to beef up on these areas or I'm going to get an expert in for our website or for various other bits that you think, you know what, I'll use someone who's 10 times better than me, 100 times better, but I know when to use them and things. That sort of being that as you say in the circus, you sort of conducting everyone around you and saying, right, I'm bringing those guys, bringing those. Is that the sort of way of doing it?

Yes, that's exactly what I did. Because it was indeed that awareness of the areas that you're not good at and don't fool yourself and definitely do not pretend, but it's the areas that you're not good at where you basically ensure or try to ensure that you've people around you who are good at that, but you know enough about that to be able to assess whether they need to go in direction A or in direction B. I think that's the, that's relevant part and especially early on in your career you need to do that. But the other part is the areas that I was good at, that I was good at and enjoyed make sure also even when you get more to the top, that you keep your hand sort of in there, that you do enough things yourself. Because completely let go and delegate everything, especially early on in your career, is not the way to go. And I think that's, that's the important thing to do. And also the areas that you're expert in are for most people the fun part. It doesn't mean that you completely let go of the other areas that you're not that good at. But as you said, the awareness of the things that you need to brush up on not good at or just don't have the experience in is very important. Be honest with yourself in that sense. And I've even to this day that that's, that's what I've done. And you hire. You hire for your weaknesses. I think.

So then talk us through, if you would just, you know, even if it's. And bring it. We'll get up to JTI in a moment. But yeah, you know what it was like as you reflect on those treasury experiences of being within finance at Chemicals Group and, you know, Bungie and then, you know, and then coming into, you know, sometimes with US corporate sort of thing or when I'm recruiting someone said, oh, I want them really to have fmcg. And I said, look, treasury is portable. You know, you sort of try and say to people really. Yeah, it's helpful sometimes. But, you know, did you find that at all or just give us a quick sketch of those.

Yes, I, I think when you said, indeed. I'm sure when you deal with US clients, they want industry experience. And from a Treasury perspective, yes, you have to know something, especially if you go out to the capital markets that represent the company, you have to know what they do. But you can, you can brush up on that. I mean, or you take the investor relations with you or you look at their presentation. So I think that's easy to represent, to learn. And if there's really questions on strategy, like an equity meeting, a roadshow, you'll have the top guys there anyway, even if you know as much, they want to hear from the top guys. So coming back to the, to the industry experience, if you look at my career and believe me, I'm not God's gift to Treasury, I mean, I went from banking, although that was a trading. I wasn't in the treasury of the bank, but then I went to a trading company, a pure trading company, which was the Dutch company, Hagemeier for specific, did the treasury there. And then I went back to banking, sort of American Express, a completely different environment, but the elements of capital markets, FX risk, cash management all stay the same. And the proof is that I went into a chemical industrial, chemical company where you did the same thing, a little bit different emphasis, but that's not necessarily because of the industry. It's usually because of the financial situation of the company where the emphasis is. Because if you look after the chemical industrial company, I went to Bungi, which is a large trading company, also producer fertilizer, et cetera, and they are one of the biggest grain and soybean traders. And there the emphasis was capital markets, funding and also cash management, also to extend FX risk. But where the emphasis lies in all these areas of treasury is not so much, in my opinion, the industry, although of course Retail has much more smaller cash management kind of structures than if you take a large industrial conglomerate. But they also need funding. And whether a company needs funding or not is their financial situation. I think so. I think more than an industry, it is the level or the status of the company. And where are they in their life cycle? Are they just ramping up or are they already at the top? Are they divesting? Are they in an acquisition mode? Have they made huge acquisitions abroad that usually their FX and their cash becomes more relevant to trapped cash? These kind of things are much more relevant than whether they make cigarettes, underwear, shoes or, or turbine engines, in my opinion at least.

Well, no, and I agree. And that's one of the things that I've observed and I've said to people that when I did this, I think I spoke about it, this North American association of Treasurers and they were saying, well you know, what are people looking from their treasure? And I said well it depends. And they were like, oh right, you know, it's a catch all question. But the fact was what I was talking about is exactly as you say, they're like, are they debt laden, you know, or are they cash rich or are they going to move from one to the next or where are they in the life cycle of the business they start up? Are they a well established company that's about to divest of everything or they company that's suddenly gone on acquisition trail or you know, what's the life cycle of their products? All of these then impact differently on the life and the skills of a treasurer. And you, you know, you brought that out yourself. And then, so talk us through then if you would maybe how you made some of those moves. Just, just a brief because I want to get into jti maybe explain for the audience that was the most recent role. But talk us through the steps from Huber and then, and then go from there.

Actually when I was at Hubert, it was an interesting company. It was first of all a privately held company. Just, just, just telling you this for the background that had huge plans to make various large acquisitions and become this large conglomerate. And that was during a period where I was at American Express this then. And the guys that were at Uber were all hired from two companies ago from Hagemeier. And these were all relatively experienced people that came from other large corporations. And Uber had plans to acquire huge companies. They were going to do a reverse acquisition into this large chemical company and then, and then be the masters of the universe sort of. But that all went to hell in 2001 and then the crisis followed. So we were sort of gearing up to make huge acquisitions, had already issued private placements and other bonds and got lines and of course then everything fell apart. And so I got recruited there because I had contacts from my previous companies and they looking really for people who had experience in capital markets and really getting company up to gear up for acquisitions, which was the main role that I and several other my colleagues did at Hagamar. So in that sense I got, I got lucky and I got unlucky. I got lucky because it was great experience. Another role in a company that's going to make acquisitions. But we were all dressed up but nowhere to go basically. And then I left that place and I got. And I got recruited for Bunge. And there each time the recruiters came to me. And the same thing was at Huber is with a certain mission basically. Look, we're looking for someone you can, can manage our effects. We're looking for somebody that can fix our effects. We're looking for somebody that can fix our capital markets increase or improve the relationships with the banks put in SAP, treasury and Bungi was the same way at that time they were looking for somebody who could help them on foreign exchange and also the whole bank relationship cycle. And that's what I did there. But. But when you get in there, you have one, sort of one or two things that the recruiters had focused on that they want you to do and put a team together and all that stuff. But soon you discover there's many more things that need to be done and maybe much more urgent because unlike you, a lot of recruiters don't have that much experience in treasury and neither do often senior management of companies. So what they think needs to be done is often very different than reality. But in any event, those are the missions that you got. And the same thing happened. Went to jt. The original mission was also just to fix their fx. That was the main thing. Well, yes, we did that, but there was a laundry list of other things that would have been. If I had been there before, I would have mentioned that to the potential treasurer coming in. But of course that's not that obvious if you're either not a treasurer maybe, or if you're coming from the outside and looking in. And I think that's the thing. So each time the role was with a specific mission to either fix something, improve something, set something up, which in itself is great because at jt, again, yes, the original mission was to fix the effects, but actually we had to Set up a whole treasury from scratch. Not that it didn't exist. It did. And certain things were working very well. But we, and I'm saying we because you can't do it alone. You have to, have to get in a group of people or work with the existing people to set it, set a direction and have a clear idea where you want to land in so many years, months or whatever the time frame and the activities are. And that's what happens then. So it's again repeating myself. But each time you get in with a certain mission and then you discover actually there's much more stuff to do, there may be much more to get into.

Was it mission led when you got into jti? And maybe you could, you could explain for the listeners. Some will know the group, some will not. And the interesting challenge is there. So what was that like?

JT is a very interesting company in, in the sense that JT is the leftover. If anybody is of our age or a little bit younger, remembers the barbarians at the gate. The large KKR to leverage buyout from. From RJR Nabisco. This was the. The international tobacco business of RGR Nabisco. The US part stayed in the us. It's now sold with another company. But this was tobacco monopoly from the Japanese government that decided to expand beyond the Japanese borders. And at that time, when they made the acquisition, I think it was 1999, way before I joined, but it was the largest leveraged acquisition by a Japanese company abroad. And so it was a large deal because tobacco is still very cash rich. And it's an interesting company because one of the things that the Japanese did do very well was, and as opposed to certain things they've done not very well in other industries and other companies, they recognized that the business that was run outside of Japan, meaning their acquisition, and they bolted on another acquisition in the uk, which was Galahar, which is also a large international tobacco company which maybe some people know. They let that be managed by the people were still in the company. So the man. So therefore you had JT International, which were the old RGR and Galahar people who managed it. And then you had the Japanese part and that was the overarching sort of mother company. But the true management of the international business was not done by the Japanese. And I think because the Japanese have not proven to be very, very apt at managing businesses outside Japan. Of course that's not entirely true because if you look at Toyota and Sony and everything else, those are very successful companies. But in certain industries, in certain businesses in certain managers are really good in managing Japan, but outside Japan that was not necessarily the case. And they recognize that, which is a very good thing, like we discussed earlier, they recognize their weakness, they corrected for it.

So build upon it as well. And that's one thing you and I said. They said, well, we don't know that, that. So we'll get someone that does know it, you know, and that they know what to do in that sense.

I had, from a personal level, always very close ties with Japan. Yeah, I've been going to Japan, not for work, for personal reasons, for many, many years. And I always because of the way Japanese work, which is very good and works very well in Japan, but it's more difficult if you're not Japanese to, to flourish in that environment, let me put it that way. And therefore I would say to myself, you know what I mean? Unlikely that I will ever work for a Japanese company. And that's what happened. Never say never. And here I am, worked for a Japanese company for 12 years almost. So I got in. But I knew the Japanese character, I knew how they worked and they do have long stamina when they make a change, it's not from the date to tomorrow. So I knew that and that's what I built into my plan in order to get treasury completely revamped and that's what we did there.

Then bring us a bit more up to date, if you will, because you're now embarking on the next journey and things. Because I want to then talk about some of your very interesting views. We recently shared the stage at the, you know, Euro Finance Treasury Leader Summit, which is amazing and we were talking about the world of treasury and work and how it's evolving. But you then recently finished there or bring us up to date with you.

If you want again at JT was a very interesting ride because we did change treasury completely. The way it's structured, the way it's set up and from capital markets FX to liquidity management, how we set up also integrated Japan and non Japanese because they were very two distinct entities functioning under one company. I think before I go into what I'm doing now or when I exited, it's setting up the team was very relevant and I think one of the things on stage where we said we had at the conference was the interesting part. Whether you hire for attitude or you hire for experience, again, I don't know. You may know that better where the pendulum is swinging nowadays, apart from the whole diversity aspect. But I think if I look what we had to accomplish If I just had hired for attitude, we wouldn't have been able to get there. Absolutely. I mean experience is relevant and experience in a certain area is absolutely relevant. Now if you hire a more technical guy, he may not have the treasury technical aspects, I'm talking it technical, but he may have others, but it's still technical and some of the treasury aspects he can learn. But if you hire a front office FX guy, well, I'm sorry but it's impossible to put, with all due respect, a bookkeeper, account accountant in a front office trading position. So no matter how good the attitude is. So in that sense, if I look the teams that I put together, we put together, yes, they had to have a good attitude because otherwise it's just a pain to work with them. So that I think goes without saying but I think from a experience perspective it was very relevant. So if you look when I, when I left, I think we have a team of, of highly experienced, highly capable people that know their stuff and I think it's only then can actually accomplish things.

I think for the listeners, they might not quite understand exactly where you're leaning that way and I'll describe it if I can in my words, that as you say, it's putting people into the place where they're going to thrive rather than, as you say, trying to force someone down the line of let's not use their skill set. And that's what you're talking about, that it's about getting the best out of people because you've done that very effectively with the, you know, the entire team at JTI and everything else previously. Now as we sort of move into this new way of working and working from home and this, you know, more flexible and perhaps you and I have experienced throughout, you know, our careers, you know, how do you think that's going to reflect on those people and hiring and the future? You know, what do you think? People listening today and they think, oh yeah, crumbs, we're in that situation where we have to hire it. What, what are you seeing the challenges going forward? You know, you and I talked about recently that you've been approached for a potential A gig and they were like, it's five days a week in the office. You're like, no thanks. It was just like. And you and I both were saying this, that a UK client of ours tried to say to us, oh, we're we, you know, a bit old school, we like things on paper. So right, okay, that's warning sign. But then the greater warning sign was like, but we really believe in everyone having to be in the office. Not like, you know, on option no. Everyone is in the office five days a week and must be in the office. It's a must, not a request. And we're like, okay, only 5% of our entire salary survey of 600 plus people want to be back in the office five days a week. And we totally understand that with you. What are your ethos and how would you sort of respond to that, as it were?

I would say this. Are those attitudes of people who want everybody in the office that much different from in the past? Meaning, yes, pre pandemic started already, the working from home maybe one day a week or two days a week. There's some companies that did that, but if you go backward, that didn't exist. I bet you the managers that are in charge of departments of areas that now want everybody in the office are the managers. I'm sure that would walk around the floor and make sure that everybody's still there at 4 or 5 o' clock, regardless of what they were doing. I think that's just a continuation of that attitude. And I don't want to work for people like that because it's putting form over substance.

Yeah, love it.

And I think that's the, that's the problem with that. I think the, the attitude of being in the office all the time, that you have to be in the office to meet people, to interact. I understand that and I think that's good. Unless the team has already been together and there's no new people Y, then you can suffice. But even still, when I at jt, when we were out of the office, we couldn't go back into the office, but we would meet in restaurants and discuss stuff there. So it's nice to have that contact. But that's a different type of approach than saying, I want you in the office, I want you there at nine and I want you there till five. And whether you are just sitting and sleeping behind your desk, maybe you care, but it doesn't matter. I need to show that I'm in charge. And if that's the way these managers feel that they have to show to their seniors that they're in charge, there's something seriously wrong with that. So I think that reflection of those companies is more of an attitude problem than anything to do with true efficiency or thinking that it doesn't work because it will work. I think anyway, that's my reflection of that. And with jt, everybody was very good with that. I think now I've left but I think now it's two days in the office. Choose which day and as long as the stuff gets done, I think that's the main thing.

Yeah, it's about achieving that as well and I agree and I think it's. Yeah, it's fascinating when, when you put it that way and yeah, it's a new way of working and things. I mean we've, we've taken a lot of your time actually. It's quite, it's flown by sort of thing. We're not quite. Well, we're not quite the end of the office and the end of the episode rather talking about office working and everything else. I mean just on that we touched on working from home and nothing that was interesting. I know that when we say spoke the future of treasury, what are you seeing as coming down the line? You know, if you're looking into your crystal ball sort of thing, what are you seeing as the, the thing that people need to be watching out for or what. What's in the back of your mind.

As it were at the conference that we were. You already saw some themes that are new, I think new in the sense of the magnitude in which it's hitting treasury and which is a reflection of the time. I think one of the things of course is ESG is hitting treasury hard and some companies harder. I think that's. Companies need to get ready for that. So I think treasurers need to be on board on that and sometimes if it's linked to financing, if the companies need financing, it will be linked to financing and in certain industries they will have to prove as that goes further and further, meaning the requirements on esg because the banks and a lot of the financial institutions, meaning insurance companies, are sort of the gatekeepers of that. So I think that's a new area in treasury that treasurers will have to come up to speed whether they like it or not. I think the other one, but that's always an ever evolving facet is of course technology. I mean there are more and more companies. I'm not talking the original or traditional treasury management system providers like Kiba or Wall street, but SAP for instance. A lot of people have SAP and SAP. Treasury was never the best, but it's now really taken a step with S4. Hana to a new. I think it's very important that treasurers understand the architecture and the structure and the implementation of those things. I think those are important. Other than that, I don't think anything else people oh, there's much more FX volatility. Well if you go back 20 years, there was maybe even more volatility. So I don't think that's anything new. I think those things are just aspects that you need to be aware of. But I would say the technology and by the way related to that is of course there was also some brief discussions on cryptocurrencies. Well, I mean, it's such a small part right now. Is that going to go further? I don't know. I mean it's having. It's now in a world of pain right now, the whole crypto environment. So it's not something that really is going to play a major role for companies right now. But it could. But related to that in certain countries is the central bank, digital currencies. That may be something that both banks and companies need to familiarize. So I think in general, treasury is becoming less esoteric in the sense that it's the relationship with ESG helps them get much more in relationship to what other parts of the companies have to do. Because if commercial and production has to be focused on environment, well, so does finance. That may have not been always the case in the past. And then the technology part will have to be really. A treasurer will have to know his stuff on technology and you cannot get away with just being an ex banker or trader.

Yeah, you need to know the ecosystems and all that.

Exactly, yeah.

And all the mechanics and things. So as we will do, as we do in each, we'll put the LinkedIn details for Lane in the show notes. And I talked to Lane actually before that. We're closing the show now. Just slightly tweaked it a little bit. I hate to hear myself just saying, oh, let's meet in the real world. So. So what we do now is we'll put lane's details and LinkedIn so connected. Great to have, great guy to have in your network. And it'll be at various conferences and things like that. But as always, we're going to give Lane the final say today. What are the closing words of the show, sir? That you want to give and I'll for a change shut up and let you, you do the talking. Over to you.

I thought about this and of course we can. I can, I can say the things about technology and the capital markets but. And it may be something I was thinking about that's more up your alle from a hiring or looking for a position perspective. I think one of the things I would like to say is I have done that to some extent. When you're looking for another position, not when you're starting out, when you're starting out, grab any position that where the treasury does, the Treasury Department does a lot of interesting things that you can learn. But later on when you're in the mid level or further on in your career, I think there's two things that maybe not everybody necessarily looks at is look what we said earlier, look at stage of the company, what they're doing, see if that fits what you want to do. Either be it in funding or FX risk, but just as important and that's harder to generate. Make sure if you can, that the senior guys, the non financial guys in the company are savvy financially because I think that's something that in a lot of companies I see that's lacking where the CEO and the senior guys are either marketing guys or engineers and they know zip about finance. And therefore whatever you do in treasury, whatever strategy you come up with, yes, it may be appreciated as an end result, but you have nobody thinking with you, you have nothing to bounce off on. So I think if you can, when you look for a new position, make sure that the companies overall are financially safe, savvy. That doesn't mean that they have to be super successful, but at least that there's that, that spirit in the company that finance is, I would say the blood of the company may not be the heart, may not even be the stomach, but it definitely is the blood of the company. Where cash is king.

Hello, it's Mike here again. I hope you enjoyed this week's show. If you did, then maybe you want to follow, follow the show or subscribe, depending on where you listen, whether that's itunes, Spotify or another great place to listen to the show from. It's totally free and means that you'll be the first to see each and every week when we release a new show. And maybe whilst you're there, you could even leave a quick review. Reviews and ratings are among the most important metrics for a podcast to effectively rank. And as you can probably appreciate, the podcast is a lot of hard work to produce. Produce every week. It'd be amazing. Just take say 20 seconds, leave a quick review of my amazing guests and their great career stories. We'd really appreciate it, thanks very much and I can't wait to see you soon.