‘Email is the future of work’ with Superhuman CEO Rahul Vohra

Finding ways to be financially savvy is a smart move. And knowing you could be saving money for the things you really want, like that dream home or new ride, is a great feeling. That's why the State Farm Personal Price Plan can help you save when you choose to bundle home and auto. Bundling—just another way to save with the Personal Price Plan. Prices are based on rating plans that vary by state. Coverage options are selected by the customer. Availability, amount of discounts and savings, and eligibility vary by state.

It is designed to create engagement. It is almost like a casino or a slot machine. It is addictive behavior.

I'm always aware that the kind of— the less we think and the less we remember, the more sort of stupid we become.

I was with you up until the straw man around somebody dying. I was trying to be dramatic. We can come back to that idea.

In Silicon Valley, some say that the app Superhuman is the future of work. However, its principle is not as futuristic as one might expect. There's no quantum computing, no blockchain, no industrial metaverse or whatever. Instead, it's addressing a very down-to-earth problem, which I think we all face, which is email management, something that eats away our time and distracts us endlessly. To discuss productivity and the future of work, we have Rahul Vohra. CEO and founder of Superhuman with us today. Thanks for joining the show, Rahul. Well, thank you for having me. I'm going to start with my kind of classic question here, really, which is to get into your wildest prediction for the future.

Well, in the future, and this may sound crazy, we'll all still be emailing and we'll actually stop using the tools like Slack and Teams. Why?

Why? Surely Teams is the future. Slack is the future. Everything should be real time. Everything should be sort of done as a pop-up. Notification on your screen, what makes you think that email is the way ahead?

Well, despite their simplicity, or perhaps because of their synchronicity, those tools like Slack and Teams directly decrease our personal productivity, they slow our companies down. I would even say they erode at our very well-being. For example, if I were to show you my Slack this morning, you would see multiple pages of unread channels, Each one of those channels would contain dozens of topics, all jumbled and interspersed with each other. And as the morning would continue, I would receive multiple synchronous messages of many kinds. Some would be important, some would be urgent, some would be neither, arguably unnecessary. And yet it would be impossible for me to discern which is which. And even if I could somehow focus on those messages which are important and are urgent, they alone would be overwhelming. I would reply to some and drop the ball on others. And when I do drop the ball, I would be missing opportunities, slowing down my team, and living in an increasingly anxious state. Now, I'm also British, but I've been living in Silicon Valley long enough to know that this is actually all kind of by design. It is to keep us addicted to the hamster's wheel of continuously checking Slack or Teams. So I think in the next few years, we will see this massive reinvestment in email, in task management, and in the core fundamentals of productivity and collaboration.

Now I need to sort of put my hand, my cards on the table here and say, I am an absolute lover of email and I despise Slack. Like every time I've worked at a company where it was suggested that Slack was used, it sort of killed my brain. But why do you think it's become so popular? Like how can we all be doing something quite so stupid?

As I said, it is designed to create engagement. It is almost like a casino or a slot machine, or to use a gaming metaphor, a loot box. It is addictive behavior. There are some pretty good studies on what makes humans, and more generally, animals addicted to things. And that's when the reward scheme is random in time, and ideally, random in results, but also increasing in results over time. And that's kind of how careers progress, especially when they're operating over Slack or Microsoft Teams. In other words, it's turned into a slot machine.

There is a bit of a sort of a cheeky thing here, though, which is I see you talking a lot about inbox zero. And to some extent, inbox zero has become another sort of gamified way of working, this sort of obsession with getting down to zero. Is there a sort of contradiction there, or do you see this operating in a very different way? No, not at all.

There's actually no contradiction. And I used to be a game designer before I was a founder. There's a big difference between game design and gamification. And when we talk about creating this idea of Inbox Zero and helping you get there on a regular, even a daily basis, we're actually using the fundamental principles of game design, not gamification. So typically with gamification, you may remember sort of 10, 15 years ago, it was a very big deal. You're looking at things like points, ladders, trophies, badges, the usual hallmarks of taking an existing application and then trying to make it game-like. But game design is altogether different. When you build something with game design, you actually make it genuinely fun to play. People fall in love with it, they tell their friends, and it becomes an intrinsically enjoyable experience. You do it for the inherent satisfaction of it, not because of an extrinsic goal.

So amongst the listeners, there'll be a wide variety of people, and some people will be already using Superhuman and extremely happy with it. And other people have no idea what we're talking about. So can you kind of explain what Superhuman is and how it helps? And in particular, I'm aware that you've evolved the product quite recently using AI to automate many tasks. So, you know, what does, what does Superhuman do? How does it help us? And where's the future of the business going?

Absolutely. Well, let's start with the core Superhuman experience and then we can talk about some of the more recent AI innovations. They are very exciting. We built Superhuman to be the fastest email experience ever made. And it works. Our average user saves 4 hours every single week. But Superhuman is more than just saving time. Our average user also gets through their inbox twice as fast as before, and they reply to their important emails up to 12 hours sooner. Many also see inbox zero for the first time in years. And this is a really big deal. There's roughly a billion professionals in the world. On average, we still spend 3 hours a day reading and writing email. And if you're not using Superhuman, you're using Gmail and Outlook, That's 3 billion hours every single day. That's over a trillion hours every single year. In fact, it's harder to find a bigger problem in the business world than that. So everything about Superhuman is designed for speed, to help you focus on what matters and to do so faster. I'll give you a few examples. For example, our desktop app, it's the only email app that's designed to be driven primarily with keyboard shortcuts. And most experts would agree, don't touch your mouse, use keyboard shortcuts instead. If you work 8-hour days, then simply by switching to keyboard shortcuts, you'll save around around 134 hours a year. That's 17 workdays every single year. As another example, consider follow-ups. You and I have had to follow each other up over the last few months. You're sending crucial emails, you're closing deals, you're meeting deadlines, you're landing meetings, but people are busy and you may not hear back. So how do you track this? Well, perhaps you can do what I used to do, which is keep everything in your head, or maybe you painstakingly copy everything to a to-do list. Instead, Superhuman lets you instantly set follow-up reminders. If you haven't heard a reply after a time that you've set, it'll just bring the email back. No need to keep any other lists. And then as a last example, on the workflow side, email volume is not our only challenge. We also need to manage a tremendous amount of email variety. In a normal inbox, for example, urgent emails hide behind Google Docs, FYIs obscure time-sensitive opportunities, calendar invites push critical messages below the fold. Now, if you reply in the order that emails appear, your brain is constantly switching gears. You're changing between projects, you're alternating between brief acknowledgements and in-depth replies, you're flipping from updating your team to replying to mom. And this is what we would call context switching, and it costs valuable time. Many listeners will be familiar with the idea that whenever we switch context, it actually takes our brain about 20 minutes to recover and to get back to full efficacy. So to solve that, One of our most powerful features is split inbox. This lets you actually split your inbox into the streams that you care about the most and which you can then focus on. So for example, I have streams for the design tool Figma, for the wiki Notion, for Google Docs, and internal company emails. So I can then focus on those things first and in the order that matches the priorities of my day before I get to externally facing emails. And as you've mentioned, we're also massively investing in AI. Last year, we released Superhuman AI. So with Superhuman AI, you can now turn a whole idea into a fully written email. Just jot down a few words or a phrase and we'll turn it into a fully written email in your own voice and tone. So it sounds like you do. It matches the voice and tone of the emails you've already sent, and it applies that to everything that it creates. You can also reply to emails instantly. For example, let's say someone was emailing you saying, hey, can I be on your podcast? You could just hit Superhuman AI and say, We're fully booked up for this quarter. How about we reconnect in Q2? And it will write a fully written email for you. And even more recently than that, we released Auto Summarize, which shows a one-line summary above every conversation. As new emails arrive, it updates instantly. If you want to see more details, you can just expand it. And we've been using this for a while. It's actually changed how we work. We always read the one-line summary first, and sometimes we don't even read the email. As a result, we're moving faster than ever before.

I'm often a little bit skeptical about new technology, but when I saw some of the demonstrations that your company has made, it seemed incredibly powerful. I think one of the most impressive elements about it was the degree to which it was integrated with other functions, the way that it could bring in the calendar function to suggest the next appointment time, the way that it could bring in other contextual data. For me, the problem with email has always been that all of the programs that we use are designed around what the program makers wanted to make, rather than the actual flows that we follow as people. You know, normally we have to sort of go between Excel and Word and PowerPoint and sort of scrape different things between them. Are there things that are going to carry on in that direction? Do you see the sort of future of Superhuman as being something that somehow sort of blends everything into one interface? You know, what things you wish that you could do today that perhaps are too technically challenging to do right now?

Absolutely. And this is a fundamental cycle or a swinging pendulum in technology. We always bounce between fully integrated and fully unbundled and then back to fully integrated again. And that's a perfectly normal and good cycle for us to be in. Right now, I believe we are in an integration cycle. And it's interesting, if you look at email technology outside of Superhuman, you have products like Outlook, which are nearly fully integrated, and then products like Gmail, which are nearly fully unbundled. Now, the way we think about it is a little bit different, which is we do believe in an unbundled world. We believe that you should have an email application, a calendar application, a tasks application, a contacts application, but that your data should magically and delightfully appear in the application that you're using. Let's say, for example, you receive an email in Superhuman. You ought to be able to hit T, for example, to create a task. Now you can then create that task inside your email application without leaving. Let's say that one day we build a task manager, a task application. When you're looking at that same task without going back to your email application, you should be able to see the email that it was created from. And let's say you're in your task application and you mark the task as done or you assign it to somebody else. When you're back in email, you ought to be able to see those changes. So this is the idea that you have finely honed tools which are best in class for the category that they're in. And also your data magically and delightfully follows you around. This is the superhuman difference. It's bundled yet unbundled at the same time. In terms of what we've built so far, you're right, we've built a tremendous amount of calendar integration and this is some of people's most favorite stuff. So for example, I could email you and say, hey, are you free for lunch tomorrow? And as soon as I type tomorrow, it actually shows me tomorrow's calendar. So I can see whether I'm free for lunch tomorrow. And it turns out I'm probably not. It also shows me a keyboard shortcut, going back to that idea, that I can then use to page to the day after tomorrow, or even the day after that. And I can keep on tapping this until I find a free time. Now, as I'm tapping that shortcut, it's going to be updating the email that I'm drafting to you. So the email that I'm drafting may actually end up saying, Hey, are you free for lunch next Monday? Or are you free for lunch on the 15th? Or what have you. And I didn't have to change what I typed. So it makes these certain common workflows like scheduling, which actually turns out to be 30% of all emailing, much faster, much more fun, much more efficient. Another example of an integration that we've already built is social profiles. When you receive an email in Superhuman, we show you everything about that person over on the right-hand side of the screen so you can see what people look like. Where they're based, what they do, where they work, even links to their social profiles like Twitter and LinkedIn. You can see their recent tweets. And all of these things help you quickly get up to speed on somebody and become more astute, more personal, more effective. So yes, there's plenty more of that to come.

I'm always aware that the kind of— the less we think and the less we remember, the more sort of stupid we become. You know, I'm kind of aware that I don't know anyone's phone number other than my parents' landline and my own mobile number. I don't really remember people's birthdays now because I've sort outsource that to technology. Is there a kind of risk that by automating things, we're somehow not understanding things in the same way, or perhaps we're not taking things in in the way that we should? Like, I see a lot of these sort of automation flows and the sort of demonstration will be someone sort of asking for a day off because they're sick. And there's a sort of risk that we will go into the office one day and not be aware that someone sort of died because at no point did we ever read the emails where people were kind of explaining they were off that day to sort of get some sort of treatment or something. Like, have you sort of given thought to the idea that maybe things that are hard and somewhat boring are still quite good for us in the muscles that they sort of build for us over time?

I was with you up until the straw man around somebody dying. I'm trying to be dramatic. Sure, we can come back to that idea. I mean, look, I'm a technologist and a technology apologist. To use a more recent parlance, I'm an accelerationist. Almost everything good that we have has come out of technology, and I will die on that hill. You only have to go back not that long ago, maybe 500 years to medieval times, and in today's money, it would've cost thousands of dollars, literally thousands of dollars to make one very rough, really uncomfortable hemp shirt. And you had to make your own. Everyone made their own. And it was so ridiculous and the world was efficient. And then, of course, we create technology, we specialize in using that technology, and we stand not on the shoulders of giants, but on the shoulders of each other and all that have come before us. It wasn't even that long ago, this century, the 1920s, '30s, '40s, where if you were a man of standing, you were probably going to buy an automobile, and you absolutely knew how to be a mechanic on that vehicle. You absolutely knew how to take it apart, put it back together, fix all your own problems, even though you may have been nobility or a gentleman. It was just a skill that you were expected to have. Today, I literally know nobody who would be able to work on their own car. And by the way, that's absolutely fine. And so I think we're in another one of those transitions. It's in fact always happening. It's happening today with AI. The less that we have to do, paradoxically, the more that we can do and the more creative and strategic it frees us up to be. So I think we're actually all set up to have greater impacts going forward than we've ever had before.

I think, I mean, for me, these things are all about the fact that we now have wonderful tools. We need a little bit of restraint with how we use them. You know, it's one thing to automate the setting up of a meeting. It's another thing to sort of automate the creation of someone's personal appraisal and to have a sort of AI, you know, dictating someone's sort of future career. I always have this other sort of slight sort of niggling doubt in my head, which is that, you know, generally—

Finding ways to be financially savvy is a smart move. And knowing you could be saving money for the things you really want, like that dream home or new ride, is a great feeling. That's why the State Farm Personal Price Plan can help you save when you choose to bundle home and auto. Bundling, just another way to save with the Personal Price Plan. Prices are based on rating plans that vary by state. Coverage options are selected by the customer. Availability, amount of discounts and savings, and eligibility vary by state.

The sort of work expands to fit the technology available. You know, the creation of desktop publishing tools coincides with the tax code becoming so big that no one could ever really print it out. You know, the creation of robocalling, you know, now means that people get sort of pestered all hours of the day because it's not reliant on another person to sort of make that. I'm always aware that by making it easier to send emails, we may just be increasing the number of emails that we get. We may be using AI to write longer emails for us and then other people using AI to condense those emails down. I'm always sort of intrigued about the degree to which we use this stuff with, with real thought and care and attention. And given the sort of the fact that email is free of charge to send, there's always this kind of weird almost etiquette about the degree to which people are owed a response from you and the degree to which we sort of handle that. I loved one of the sort of tweets I saw aimed at you with someone talking about Superhuman as a mental health app sort of masquerading as a sort of email client. And I thought that was sort of fascinating. So I kind of wondered, you know, to what extent is the company going into that direction of sort of calmness, or is it much more about productivity? To what degree is it about work versus people's whole lives?

It's always been all of the above. I'm laughing because you mentioned the tax code becoming larger so that you can't even print it out anymore. And when I first moved to this country, it was about 13 years ago, I literally laughed out loud when I filled in my first— I mean, at that time, we were still filling in forms on airplanes. And at the bottom of the form, it said that it was printed in accordance with the American Reduction in Paperwork Act. And I thought it was hilarious how you had to have an act, which presumably was printed on paper to reduce paper. But in any case, everything you've said is exactly why companies like Superhuman need to exist. We need the good guys. We need companies that are building what I call humanistic technology that exist not just for the benefit of corporations, but actually for end users. Although Superhuman is built entirely for the work use case. You know, we are a $30 a month tool, and we don't expect people to pay that for personal use. We have vast swathes of people and companies buying it for work use. Although it is a work tool, it is also a calmness tool. It is also a wellness tool. And especially in this age of remote and hybrid work, so many of our customers come to us saying, hey, our employee base is anxious. They're stressed out. They are unhappier now than they were 2, 3 years ago before the pandemic. Can you help us? We've already asked them what it is that's making them unhappy. It's these combination of factors, including how their email feels to them today. So can you help us? And of course, the answer is absolutely. We're all about productivity, but we're all about living your best life and working in a way that is as stress-free as possible, not just for you, but also bringing that calm and that reduction in anxiety to your colleagues.

Who do you sort of see as the competitors to Superhuman? Is it sort of people that are using paper calendars and sort of Post-it notes still, or is it people obsessed with sort of Asana or Basecamp? Like, where do you think your growth is going to come from?

Remarkably, we have no startup competitors. At all, really. We're one of the very few venture-backed email client applications out there at meaningful scale. We've raised around $125 to $130 million, and we have just north of 100 people working very intensely on building the fastest email experience ever. So really, the only competitors, if you even consider them as such, are the incumbents. They are Gmail and Outlook. But we don't really think of them as competitors because these products are almost on autopilot at their respective companies. They are actually free, depending on how you think about it. Or in the case of Outlook, they're maybe single-dollar digits per month. And they're not designed for productivity. These are the classic examples, much like Slack and Microsoft Teams, where the design hasn't changed considerably in multiple decades. It's literally been the same since the mid-1990s. '90s in the case of Outlook, or the early 2000s in the case of Gmail. And so Superhuman is what we think these products would be, but if they were designed from scratch today with today's technology and with humanistic principles in mind.

This is me being quite cheeky, so we might need to sort of take this bit out, but I'm aware that lots of extremely large software companies make pretty bad products. Everyone that I know in a huge company that uses Teams basically hates it. You can look at, you know, a program like Word or Excel, and it's hard to come to terms with the idea that it's changed so little over the last 10 years. Why do you think it is the case that people accept bad software? And why do you think these large companies are quite so happy to innovate at such a pedestrian rate?

Oh my gosh, what a thing to unpack. Okay, let's start at the start. Yeah.

Well, if you're uncomfortable with this, we can take it out.

I'm not at all uncomfortable with it. I wear my opinions on my sleeve. Okay. Why are people okay with bad software? It's not that people are okay with bad software. I think folks, especially today compared to 20 years ago, are increasingly and acutely aware of what makes software good and what makes software bad. You're probably familiar with the phrase, "The consumerization of the enterprise." This is the idea, and this is a phrase that that sort of was thrown around Silicon Valley and that venture capitalists would use. This is the idea that because of widespread ubiquity of reasonably well-made apps like Facebook and Instagram and Snapchat and Airbnb and Uber and Lyft and all of those things, we now expect the same quality, the same attention to detail in our work applications. But of course, that hasn't really happened. It was sort of happening in the startup world, but it hasn't happened in the incumbent world. So the expectations are there. The reason why it hasn't particularly happened is, well, as they say, you've got to follow the money. It's simply not where the dollars are. If you look at companies like Microsoft, like Salesforce, even to an extent like Google, most of the revenue— and this is especially true for the first two— most of the revenue comes from Fortune 500. And of that, most of the revenue comes from Fortune 100. And if you look at how those companies are run, they're not picking software on the basis of, does it make people 10% happier, or does it make people 10% faster? They're picking software on the basis of longstanding relationships, and is it compliant with all the various laws that they have to stay compliant with? And of course, price. And by the way, it's difficult to change software for a company of 50,000 to 100,000 people. I mean, I can't even begin to imagine the change management required to go through such a large shift. So, this isn't to say the people running those companies are doing the wrong thing. In fact, I would argue the people running those companies, especially on the IT side, are being completely rational in how they choose and select software. It's only to say that the actual end-user experience is but one of many factors that they have to consider. And of course, so many other factors are going to end up winning out. So that's on the buying side. Let's then talk about the production side of software. And I think a really good example, to stick with the email example, is Inbox by Google. So it's not as if Google doesn't realize that Gmail perhaps is a little bit stale and needs work. Every now and then, they do create a new email experience. And the one that got the most traction in the last 10 years was a new email client that Google created that was compatible with existing Gmail accounts called Inbox by Google. And it was really quite good. I'm sure a lot of our listeners used it. We definitely took a lot of inspiration from the product. It did lots of very cool things, great ideas, some of which have now made their way back into Gmail. But here's the thing that blew my mind. It got to 500 million users. If it were a separate company from Google, it probably would have been worth billions of dollars. And yet it was shut down because the derivative of the derivative of the growth rate, meaning the rate at which the rate at which the growth rate was growing, was too slow. Apparently, in Google, they have thresholds on how high that thing has to be in order for it to make sense, because when you're a business the size of Google, things have to be growing so quickly in markets that are so large for it to warrant any attention whatsoever. And by the way, all I'm articulating is the reason why startups exist in the first place. What I'm articulating is the reason why maybe companies shouldn't be that large, and I'm a red-blooded capitalist, so it's kind of weird that I'm even saying this. I'm not saying that companies like Google should be dismantled. I would never say that. Let Google do what Google does. But this is the reason why large companies struggle to compete against startups, because the thing that can make a startup wildly successful may yet be too small for a Google, too small for a Microsoft, too small for an Adobe. It's why Adobe wouldn't have built Figma, for example. So there are these very interesting capitalist corporate forces that, in a sense, prevent these large companies from building a superhuman. In the beginning, at least, it's not worth their time. And by the time it is, it's almost too late.

Where would you like to apply your, your sort of mindset and your skills next? You know, to some extent, do you think you've kind of— you've done email and in the next sort of 2 years it'll be wonderful and then you'll need to move on? Or do you think there's more work to be done within the email domain first?

Oh my gosh, there's always, always more work to be done. We, I think, will never be done with Superhuman, the email experience. But as I think about this year, there is a tremendous amount that we're adding to the experience that isn't pure-play email. So we are continuing with our AI investments. Imagine waking up to an inbox where all of your emails already have a draft pre-written for them. Imagine dictating just a few ideas of an email into your phone and having that email fully written for you effortlessly and in your own voice and tone. Imagine a first-class calendar experience baked into Superhuman. One day, a first-class task experience baked into Superhuman. Whether these things are existing in the same window or in a different window. If we go back to this idea of bundled yet unbundled and your data magically and delightfully appearing wherever you happen to be and wherever you want it to be. So there's always a tremendous amount to be done. I'm about 9 years into the company. I started it towards the end of 2014, early 2015. And I was joking on Twitter with several of my customers yesterday. It always feels like this is just the beginning. No matter how many millions of lines of code that we've written, no matter how much revenue we've generated, no matter how much time we've saved— at this point, Superhuman is saving teams over 10 million hours every single year— no matter how big those numbers get, it always feels like we're at the beginning.

I kind of asked you this before, but what's the one thing you wish you could make happen now that's sort of technologically or politically impossible to do? That's a great question.

The debate du jour, to go back to the accelerationist comments, is how much we do or we don't need AI alignment. And in particular, should we be decelerating AI progress versus accelerating AI progress? And I am firmly in the accelerationist camp. Some people would say, and the argument boils down to, new technologies are dangerous, therefore we should slow down the production of new technologies. And I simply don't agree with that. What I think we should do is figure out how to build new technologies safely. Folks, if they've been watching the news, may remember in the last few days we had an Alaskan Airlines blowout. There was a window that depressurized. It was extremely scary, I'm sure, for every single person on board that flight. And yet, that plane landed perfectly calmly, perfectly safely. The oxygen masks descended, and everyone was fine. And that sent me down a rabbit hole of aviation technology. I started, mostly for entertainment, I started watching videos of planes landing with their landing gears not down, planes landing fully sideways in 100-mile-an-hour crosswinds, planes landing. There was one crazy one where the wheel wasn't facing forwards, it was facing sideways, and it landed and the rubber was burning off until all the rubber had burnt off, and then it was just skidding along on metal, and then the metal burnt off. And in all of these cases— oh, of course, there was the famous one which landed on the river here in America a few years ago. In all of these cases, everybody was absolutely fine because people took the safety seriously, and we engineered these things well, and we can do the same for AI. But what it doesn't mean is that we should slow What it doesn't mean is that we should be fearful or scared about AI taking jobs or people dying, to go back to your previous strawman, because we don't have the fabric of care built in between people or in our technology. These are all valid concerns, and we can build for them and around them. But boy, the future is going to be amazing. And I think we're already seeing it today and last year. The technologies that I am describing inside of Superhuman— writing an email in just a few phrases with just a note, one-line summaries, more broadly, large language models, ChatGPT, even more broadly than that, generative AI— those technologies were science fiction 2 years ago. And yet here we are today. I love it.

I'm a really big fan of Superhuman. I really like the way that you approach these things. I think it's quite unusual in this sort of technology sphere to have someone that's solving these things in quite a human-centric way. You know, there's so many sort of urgent needs to adopt AI that people are sort of adding it into every single text box that people can fill in. There are so many people that are sort of adding on to things based on what can be done rather than what people need. And there's so much sort of bad software out there in the world. So I love what you're doing and I love the sort of ambition and the spirit. And I'd love to see what else you can change, whether it's the world of spreadsheets, whether it's the calendar app or ideas really a kind of operating system for business, a way to do things that are extremely boring in a semi-automated way, which is somewhat seamless. So Rahul, thank you so much for being on the show.

It's been a pleasure talking to you. Thank you so much for having me.

Take care. That's it for this episode. I'm your host, Tom Goodwin. This series is produced by Marta Rodriguez Martinez, Alice Khan Valli also assisted in the production of this episode. The theme music is by Alexandra Jazz. Sound editing is by Jean-Christophe Marceau, and sound mixing is by Mathieu Duchesne. Our editor-in-chief is Ali Isyan Aydin. If you aren't already, you can listen to this series on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, CastBox, or wherever you get your podcast. If you're already enjoying this podcast, please consider leaving us a positive review and of course sharing it. You may of course subscribe on YouTube. Thanks for listening.

Finding ways to be financially savvy is a smart move. And knowing you could be saving money for the things you really want, like that dream home or new ride, is a great feeling. That's why the State Farm Personal Price Plan can help you save when you choose to bundle home and auto. Bundling—just another way to save with the Personal Price Plan. Prices are based on rating plans that vary by state. Coverage options are selected by the customer. Availability, amount of discounts and savings, and eligibility vary by state.