Nerd's Eye View blog

How Do You Know It’s Time To Leave Your Advisory Firm?

March 16, 2017 08:26 am 1 Comment CATEGORY: Personal/Career Development

Finding your first good job as a financial planner can be tough. Not only because it's challenging just to find a job at all, but because it's not always clear up front which firms really do financial planning or not, and which jobs will be real financial planning jobs versus just a sales job. In many cases, the only way to find out is to take the job that's available, make the best of it, and hope it turns into a good long-term career path. Except when it turns out it's really not a good match at all... and then suddenly the challenge is figuring out whether it's time to leave, and whether having a short-term job stint on your resume will hurt your future career chances even more! So what should you do?

In this week’s #OfficeHours with @MichaelKitces, my Tuesday 1PM EST broadcast via Periscope, I discuss how to know it's time to leave your advisory firm to find another opportunity - based on whether the firm was a bit fit philosophically, or just not a good long-term growth opportunity - and best way to handle the situation if you find yourself in it.

First and foremost, though, remember that the best way to fix a problematic situation is not to make a change at all, but try to change the firm from within, rather than just running away from the problem. If you are worried about the investment or planning philosophy, or want to know if there's a better long-term career opportunity, then ask - broach the conversation with the firm owner. But it's important to be tactful in how you do this. If you are critical of your boss or the firm owner, they will likely just defend themselves, because that's human nature. Instead, come up with an actual solution, and offer it by having a "what if" conversation rather than a confrontational "why" conversation. If you come to the table with a proactive solution, most firm owners will actually be happy to work with you, adopt a solution, and get the firm in a better position than it was before!

Similarly, when it comes to career opportunities, if you want a career path, you may need to ask for it! I'm always amazed at how often people complain about having a lack of a career track, when they've never raised the conversation themselves! And realize that for most smaller advisory firms (which is most firms), this may be the first time they've taken someone through a career track, so the reality is they literally don't know what their career path is. Don't just sit back and expect that a perfect career track is going to be waiting for you, but instead, initiate the conversation ask about your opportunities with the firm as it continues to grow! The emphasis on continued growth is important, because both you and the owner want to be in a position of sharing a growing pie, rather than fighting over bigger pieces of a pie that isn't growing. If you find yourself in the latter position - in a firm that just isn't growing at all - the odds of a career track emerging are almost nil.

However, after having the tough conversations, the reality is you may decide that it really is time to leave. Perhaps something unethical is going on and you need to get out immediately. Or maybe the pie just isn't growing and that isn't going to change, so there's simply going to be nothing to share in the future. If that's the case, then what you should do next depends on the situation you are in. If you're really uncomfortable with how the firm operates and they truly aren't doing right by its clients, then get out right away. Life's too short for not doing right by your clients. But if it is "just" a lack of future growth, then realize that you can take your time and make a smart transition. Get your CFP experience (or finish the coursework if necessary!), save up some money for the transition, and take your time to truly do your due diligence on the next firm you work for. If you're checking the job boards and networking through industry associations, you may have a better chance of finding a good fit.

But in either case, understand that ultimately you don't have to worry about being labeled a "job-hopper" – or at least if it only happens one or two times. Just be straightforward about your prior situation, and take ownership for not doing your proper due diligence the first time around. Most advisors will understand that this happens, and will appreciate the attention you are paying this time. But whatever you do, don't make the transition without learning from it! If you go through too many entry-level positions without figuring this out, then ultimately, you may have good reason to worry about being labeled a job-hopper!

Social Security Rules And Strategies For Divorcee Spousal Benefits

March 15, 2017 07:01 am 1 Comment CATEGORY: Retirement Planning

One of the key benefits of Social Security is the spousal benefit – a payment at retirement that goes not to the worker who paid into Social Security over time, but his/her spouse. The payment was originally designed to provide retirement support for what were typically (at the time) stay-at-home spouses in a single-income household, and still remains relevant today for many spouses who take at least some time off from work to raise a family.

However, the spousal benefit is not only available for currently married couples; single people who were previously married may also be entitled to a spousal benefit, based on the ex-spouse’s earnings record. This spousal benefit for divorcees becomes available as long as the couple was married for at least 10 years, and the divorcee has not remarried.

For some divorcees, the ex-spouse’s spousal benefit is a key pillar of retirement income, and choosing when to start the benefit – early at a reduced amount, or at full retirement age for the full amount – is a crucial decision. For others, the ex-spousal benefit will ultimately be trumped the divorcee’s own retirement benefit from years of working. But for those born in 1953 or earlier, who are eligible for retirement and (ex-)spouse benefits, there is still an opportunity to further leverage the spousal benefit by filing a Restricted Application for just the ex-spouse’s benefit at full retirement age, and switching to his/her own individual benefit at age 70 – increased by 32% Delayed Retirement Credits!

For some divorcees, though, the biggest opportunity of the ex-spouse’s spousal benefit is simply recognizing when it’s available, and claiming it properly, as if the ex-spouse’s benefit is larger, the divorcee can actually step up his/her benefit to the higher amount!

#FASuccess Ep 011: How Launching An Advisory Business Can Be Safer Than Working In One with Alan Moore

March 14, 2017 07:00 am 3 Comments CATEGORY: Financial Advisor Success Podcast

Welcome back to the eleventh episode of the Financial Advisor Success podcast!

My guest this week is Alan Moore. Alan and I co-founded the XY Planning Network in 2014, but the reason I invited him to the podcast has little to do with XYPN itself, and everything to do with his own fascinating path as a financial advisor, business owner, and successful entrepreneur.

Because Alan started out his career as most of us are taught from the days we’re young – to go out and try to find a stable job with a steady income, and move up the ladder over time. Except Alan realized barely 6 months into his first job that it wasn’t going to be the right fit. Only to change to another job… from which he got fired in another 6 months. And so, realizing that perhaps being an employee just wasn’t the right fit, Alan decided to launch his own advisory firm. From scratch. At age 25.

These early experiences led Alan to the counter-intuitive conclusion that perhaps the traditional view of trying to find a job with a steady income is wrong, and that it can actually be more stable (at least in the long run) to build a business from scratch. Because as a business owner, even your best client firing you might only cost you a 2% to 5% of revenue… which is a lot “safer” than relying on a single boss who can take away 100% of your income in a heartbeat by firing you!

In this podcast episode, we talk about Alan’s journey from financial planning college student, to getting involved as a volunteer with NAPFA and its young-advisor group Genesis, to his path from employee to (young) entrepreneur of his own advisory firm, how he later launched a second business (XY Planning Network) as well, and how and why he ultimately made the decision that he couldn’t keep both a B2B and B2C business and would have to wind one down to fully focus on the other.

And be certain to listen to the end, where Alan talks about the rut he got into that almost led him to leave his rapidly-growing business entirely after a particularly bad month, and what it took to turn everything around and re-energize him in the business again.

So if you’re thinking about making the switch from employee to entrepreneur, or perhaps are an advisory firm business owner wondering how to better keep your young entrepreneurial employees, I hope you enjoy this latest episode of the Financial Advisor Success podcast!

12b-1 Fees: It Is Time To Bid Them Farewell?

March 13, 2017 07:01 am 0 Comments CATEGORY: Investments

From its start in 1980, the 12b-1 fee was controversial – a distribution charge assessed against current mutual fund investors, that the fund company can use to market the fund to new investors. In other words, the mutual fund got to use investor dollars (rather than its own money) to grow the fund’s assets under management (AUM).

In theory, this use of the mutual fund investor’s own money to market the fund company’s products was supposed to be good for the investor, because it would help grow and scale the fund and bring down its operating expense ratio. However, several decades later, subsequent analysis is finding that while mutual funds that charge 12b-1 fees are successful at incentivizing salespeople to bring in more assets under management, the 12b-1 fee isn’t living up to its promise of helping to scale up and bringing down the expense ratio as the mutual fund grows.

At the same time, the reality is that investor behaviors are shifting as well. A growing number of consumers are purchasing their investments directly, avoiding the 12b-1 fee altogether by eliminating the mutual fund salesperson middleman. And as more and more financial advisors become affiliated with an RIA firm and get paid an AUM fee on an advisory account, the 12b-1 fee is less and less of a driver to incentivize financial advisors anyway.

In fact, the entire shift of financial advisors from being mutual fund salespeople (compensated by upfront commissions and ongoing 12b-1 fees) to operating as actual financial advisors instead (compensated by fees directly from their clients) raises the question of whether the 12b-1 fee is still relevant at all. Especially given the 12b-1 fee’s controversial roots, and the misalignment it creates between who pays the marketing and distribution costs, and who actually benefits from it.

Of course, the reality is that financial advisors, custodians, broker-dealers, and product providers still need to get paid for what they do, which means eliminating the 12b-1 fee still won’t necessarily bring down costs for the end client. Instead, it would likely just shift where and how financial advisors and their platforms get paid. Nonetheless, given the 12b-1 fee’s implicit conflicts, and their declining relevance, arguably it’s time to create a more appropriate pricing structure for the realities of today’s investment marketplace!

Weekend Reading for Financial Planners (Mar 11-12)

March 10, 2017 02:56 pm 3 Comments CATEGORY: Weekend Reading

Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" – this week's edition kicks off with a reminder that while most regulatory attention has been focused on the Department of Labor's fiduciary rule, the Treasury's FinCEN group is actively working on a new set of anti-money-launching (AML) rules that could impose new compliance burdens on RIAs (akin to what broker-dealers and banks already have to deal with for AML compliance). And in the DoL fiduciary news itself, the buzz this week is that with a potential 60-day delay on the table, asset managers have been slowing their development efforts on the new T-share class, at least until the dust clears.

From there, we have a number of articles this week about marketing and business development for financial advisors, including: how to think differently about crafting a (more unique) value proposition for clients; a structured process for trying to create and articulate your value proposition; some new research on why clients leave advisors (and how to start conducting exit interviews to understand for yourself why your ex-clients left, and what you might need to change); and an interesting article about whether in the world of digital marketing, it's better to stop thinking of potential new clients as "prospects" to sell at all, and instead think of them as an "audience" to engage instead.

We also have several articles specifically on how to create better engagement with clients and prospects, from how to create a "client persona" in your marketing to further refine your messaging and improve engagement with prospects, to the latest research about how people have different engagement styles, and the importance of adapting your own communication to match the client's style, and why it's so crucial to not just answer a prospect's questions but ask them questions and get them talking in a prospect meeting (as it better engages them and leads to deeper rapport).

We wrap up with three interesting articles that challenge conventional thinking in the industry: the first is an analysis by Wade Pfau, building on a prior article from this blog, about how the DALBAR behavior gap study is actually fundamentally flawed in the way it compares investor to market returns over 20-year time periods (as DALBAR compares investors to the returns of the market invested with a lump-sum all at once, even though most people didn't have all their wealth to invest 20 years ago); the second raises the question of whether the whole "passive revolution" is overstated, and whether the phenomenon is simply that investors (and advisors) are no longer stock-pickers and instead are "asset pickers" (for which index funds and ETFs are simply convenient active building blocks); and the last raises the question of whether, as robo-advisors continue to evolve, if eventually financial planning will be given away for free by robo-advisors... or whether the ongoing lead generation, engagement, and self-onboarding tools of financial planning software means eventually it will automate itself to the point that it doesn't need a financial advisor anyway (or at least, that the advisor has to provide a value proposition above and beyond just the software analysis itself!).

Enjoy the "light" reading!

How The Advisory Industry Has Stifled #FinTech Innovation

March 9, 2017 07:24 am 5 Comments CATEGORY: Technology & Advisor FinTech

Our whole world is currently being changed by technology. From smart appliances powering our homes, to the apps and software that help us manage our daily tasks, to the rise of autonomous vehicles that may eventually reshape how we travel... change is all around us. Yet, while technology has come a long way over the past few decades, the unfortunate reality is, for financial advisors, our technology solutions have lagged other industries.

In this week’s #OfficeHours with @MichaelKitces, my Tuesday 1PM EST broadcast via Periscope, I discuss how it has been the advisory industry itself that stifled its own #FinTech innovation, and how our industry's structure and standard practices have caused advisor technology to lag so far behind other industries.

The first problem in the financial advisor marketplace is that we are incredibly fractured. By some estimates, anywhere from 80% to 90% of advisory firms are either fully or quasi-independent, which means that it is really hard for advisor technology firms to gain traction when they have to sell to each firm one at a time. Advisor tech firms do have the option of going through independent broker-dealers and custodians to try and reach a critical mass, but even then, the reality is that advisors aren't forced to use new technology, so firms must still convince advisors that adoption is worth the time and hassle... which is not a strategy that generally leads to fast adoption!

This dynamic wouldn't be so problematic if advisor tech firms had a good way to reach advisors en masse, but unfortunately, they don't! The most logical way to try and do it is to reach advisors through conferences as an exhibitor, but even this isn't feasible for most startups given the high cost of renting a booth at the typical advisor conference. Because the reality is that these startups must bid for booth space against huge financial product manufacturers (asset managers, insurance companies, etc.), which ultimately prices most startups out! And this dynamic is unfortunate not just because it means it's more challenging to launch new advisor tech firms and develop great technology, but also because it fills exhibit halls with companies that sell through advisors (to reach our clients) rather than selling actual solutions to advisors, meaning that advisors have little interest in talking to most exhibitors anyway!

The last problem worth acknowledging is that enterprises, such as large broker-dealers and RIA custodians, arguably control too much of the development of advisor technology. That's not to criticize these companies necessarily, but the reality is, they're in the business of getting and investing client dollars, which means that software they help develop ultimately focuses too heavily on those activities (gathering assets and selling products) rather than real financial planning advice. Thus why financial planning software hasn't developed great budgeting, cash flow, debt management, or dynamic retirement models; because ultimately, those are important for delivering advice, but not very relevant in gathering assets and selling financial products. Yet, to reach any level of scale, advisor tech companies have historically needed to work with these companies, but as they do, they become beholden to the enterprise companies focused on the old way of doing business, and innovation that would provide real planning value gets stifled.

The good news is that things are starting to change. Venture capital firms like Vestigo Ventures, which is specifically willing to fund startup advisor technology solutions, are beginning to emerge... companies are finding ways to grow through independent RIAs and pivot to enterprises and scale up... conferences are beginning to adopt more flexible exhibiting pricing that opens the doors to startup companies... and even some enterprises are becoming more flexible in their approach to advisor technology. But ultimately, the combination of these factors is why advisor technology has lagged, and we have not seen the technology growth that other industries have experienced.

Why Congress Should Allow Financial Planning Fees To Be Paid From A Retirement Account

March 8, 2017 07:00 am 7 Comments CATEGORY: Planning Profession

Acknowledging the need for and value of professional guidance in the long-term management of investment assets, the Internal Revenue Code allows investment advisory fees to be deducted as IRC Section 212 deductible expenses. Additionally, tax law also allows for Section 212 deductible expenses to be paid directly from the retirement account which accrued the expense, without fear of being treated as a taxable distribution (potentially subject to early withdrawal penalties) or a "prohibited transaction" (which could otherwise disqualify the entire account). However, while the benefits of investment advisory services are implicitly acknowledged in current tax law, the same is not true of financial planning services; unfortunately, financial planning fees cannot be paid from a retirement account without triggering the aforementioned adverse tax consequences... even though they may be equally (if not more) important in helping someone accomplish their long-term financial goals!

In this guest post, Derek Tharp – our new Research Associate at Kitces.com, and a Ph.D. candidate in the financial planning program at Kansas State University – delves into why it's problematic that financial planning fees can "only" be paid from after-tax accounts, the behavioral advantages of being able to pay financial planning fees from a retirement account instead, and explores how modifying current tax rules could allow more consumers to access financial advisors (while also creating better incentives for all advisors to be able to give advice that aligns with the clients' best interests).

The reason why the source of financial planning fees matters is Shefrin and Thaler's mental accounting framework, which finds that consumption is broadly divided into three buckets: current income, current assets, and future income (or the assets that support future income). We know from behavioral research that people treat these "buckets" of money differently, where certain purchases are more or less likely to occur from one bucket versus another (depending on the nature of the expense). When it comes to financial planning services in particular, which is generally associated with "long-term" planning, mental accounting alignment suggests that consumers would be most comfortable paying such expenses from the "long-term" (i.e., future income) bucket. However, as noted earlier, paying financial planning fees from a retirement account isn't permitted... unless the financial planning services are bundled into a primarily-investment-management AUM fee, or a product commission paid with IRA dollars, which isn't always feasible or desirable.

There are alternative options that could be considered for giving consumers more control over their future income assets, though. One simple solution is to allow consumers to write checks or transfer funds to licensed financial advisors directly from their retirement accounts, and make the expense permissible (without adverse tax consequences) as long as it's paid to a (registered?) financial advisor. Other possibilities include giving consumers greater flexibility to roll money out of employer-sponsored retirement plans (similar to current HSA rules), or opening up paths for consumers to pay for services without rolling their funds out of employer-sponsored plans in the first place. Though, perhaps the simplest solution of all is to modify IRC Section 212 to recognize financial planning fees, which would both allow financial planning fees to be deductible when paid from an after-tax account, and also to be "safely" paid pre-tax from a traditional qualified account (perhaps with a complementary safe harbor under Section 4975 to make it clear that "comprehensive" financial planning fees are not prohibited transactions).

But ultimately, if the aim of tax policy is to facilitate better outcomes for consumers, it's worth acknowledging that the current framework unintentionally exhibits poor behavioral characteristics by limiting the ability of consumers to pay for long-term financial planning advice from accounts that are ear-marked for long-term goals (or forcing those financial planning fees to be bundled with AUM fees or product commissions that may not be practical or feasible in all situations)!

#FASuccess Ep 010: From Unpaid Intern to Advisory Firm CEO and Successful Succession Planning With Eric Hehman

March 7, 2017 07:00 am 0 Comments CATEGORY: Financial Advisor Success Podcast

Welcome back to the tenth episode of the Financial Advisor Success podcast!

My guest this week is Eric Hehman of Austin Asset, who over the past 20 years has completed an incredible journey from being an unpaid intern for the founder John Henry McDonald when he was still a solo practitioner, to now becoming the successor owner and CEO of what is today a successful independent RIA with $750M of AUM.

In this podcast episode, Eric gives us some background about Austin Asset today and its incredible growth since he started working for the founder in 1997, from how the firm established itself as an early fee-only pioneer in the Austin area, to how it adapted its business model from standalone financial planning fees to charging on AUM (and why the firm still often charges separately for a financial plan as well), the way the firm develops its younger financial planner by having them work with smaller clients to gain experience and confidence, and the firm’s current structure today with 16 staff (including 12 CFPs) serving about 300 affluent clients.

What’s fascinating about this interview with Eric, though, is not simply the story of Austin Asset’s growth, but how its succession plan unfolded over time, as told from the perspective of the successor. Eric details why the founder was willing to sell him a 10% stake at just 1X revenue, how the founder transitioned his own role away from client relationships and out of management over time, and the way ownership and salary was transitioned to maintain the founder’s income at a steady level for a period of time.

And be certain to listen to the end, where Eric discusses what led him to ultimately write a book about his succession planning experience – aptly called Success and Succession – and why it is that notwithstanding the industry’s focus on the crucial financial and management transitions of a succession plan, it’s the emotional issues that ultimately drive (or can ruin) the outcome.

So whether you’re simply looking for ideas on how to grow a large financial planning firm, or are specifically looking for perspective on succession planning – as the founder, or the successor – I hope you enjoy this latest episode of the Financial Advisor Success podcast!

The Latest In Financial Advisor #FinTech (March 2017): Takeaways From The T3 Advisor Tech Conference

March 6, 2017 07:00 am 7 Comments CATEGORY: Technology & Advisor FinTech

Welcome to the March issue of the latest news in Financial Advisor #FinTech – where we look at the big news, announcements, and underlying trends and developments that are emerging in the world of technology solutions for financial advisors and wealth management!

In this month’s edition, we recap the recent Technology Tools for Today (T3) Advisor Technology conference – the best dedicated FinTech conference specifically for financial advisors. Overall, the major themes of the conference – most of which were highlighted in the opening keynote session by Riskalyze CEO Aaron Klein talking about the “Advisor of the Future” – include the ongoing shift of “robo” tools to serve as the technology automation infrastructure of an advisory firm’s back office (allowing the advisor themselves to spend more client-facing time than ever!), to the opportunities in using technology for lead generation and a prospect engagement tool (though it remains unclear whether most advisory firms have the marketing savvy and resources to use them effectively!). And Riskalyze’s own rapid growth in recent years seems to have boosted “risk tolerance assessment tools” into a highly competitive category of its own, with almost half a dozen competing tools represented at T3 Advisor (whereas 6 years ago, Riskalyze was one of only two!).

Other major conference highlights included:

Riskalyze debuted a new Riskalyze “Premier” solution (with a new client dashboard and more digital account opening and onboarding tools)
MoneyGuidePro highlighted the recent growth of its MyMoneyGuide Lead Gen solution, and a new study suggesting that clients may find virtual financial planning meetings less stressful
eMoney Advisor announced its own new Lead Gen capture tool and more Advisor-Branded Marketing coming in Q2
Schwab announces it will be integrating eMoney Advisor into OpenView Gateway, alleviating concerns eMoney would become a Fidelity proprietary product
AdvisorEngine (fresh off its $20M round of capital and rebrand from Vanare) acquired advisor prospecting tool Wealthminder
New client engagement tools, including a safe withdrawal rate illustrator (Big Picture App), and an advisor-specific solution to facilitate mind mapping in the data gathering meeting (Asset Map)
The debut of two new risk tolerance assessment tools, Tolerisk and FinMason
A software developer called Chetu that can work with financial advisors to build their own software solutions
And the T3 Advisor Conference itself released the results of a major new survey of advisor software adoption (including both what’s popular, and how advisors actually rate the use of the software itself!).

You can view the analysis of these announcements, and more trends in advisor technology, in this month’s column, including highlights of the other T3 Advisor conference newcomers (from new robo tools, to software that helps clients maximize the yield on their “idle” bank accounts), how major custodians are responding with their own technology initiatives, and the emergence of new technology consults who can work with financial advisors to help them evaluate their own tech stack.

I hope you’re continuing to find this new column on financial advisor technology to be helpful! Please share your comments at the end and let me know what you think!

*And for #AdvisorTech companies who want to submit their tech announcements for consideration in future issues, please submit directly to [email protected]!

Weekend Reading for Financial Planners (Mar 4-5)

March 3, 2017 02:49 pm 0 Comments CATEGORY: Weekend Reading

Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" – this week's edition kicks off with the details of the latest proposal to delay the DoL fiduciary rule by 60 days... which is shorter than the prior rumors that there would be a 180-day delay, and notably, is still only a proposal, that has to go through a public comment period and could take another month to be affirmed (which means a prospective delay in the April 10th applicability date may truly come down to the wire!).

Also in the news this week were a number of additional big announcements, including: a pricing war that erupted between Fidelity, Schwab, and TD Ameritrade, with each firm "voluntarily" imposing upon itself a 29%+ price cut in the cost to execute stock and ETF trades (down to $4.95 - $6.95 per trade); new guidance from the SEC on Standing Letters of Authorization (SLOA) and when they do and do not trigger custody or surprise audit requirements; an indication from the SEC that it may get more aggressive on trying to roll back the Accredited Investor requirements for private placements (kicking off a debate about whether limiting access to private placements is "unfair" to less affluent consumers who want to take some investment risks, or whether the bar to determine "financial sophistication" to invest in such opportunities should actually be higher); and a look at how the IRS is shifting its audit resources to increasingly focus on those with ultra-high incomes (e.g., $1,000,000+), in addition to doing far more correspondence-mail-based "lite audits" to ask for proof substantiating questionable line-item credits or deductions.

From there, we have a few more technical articles on financial planning topics, from a look at using Funded Ratios to evaluate retirement readiness, to how today's low-return environment can drastically increase the amount of savings prospective retirees need (or how much accumulators must save to get there), the important differences between arithmetic and geometric means (and how to calculate them), and new IRS guidance to 401(k) plans on hardship withdrawals that some fear will make it even easier for people to take advantage of the rules by simply being able to "self-attest" that they really had a hardship (and gamble that they won't be audited later to prove otherwise).

We wrap up with three interesting articles about supporting the success of younger financial advisors, including: ways to grow the financial planning talent pool, given that even with its recent growth, only about 6% of all four-year degree-granting institutions have a CFP Board registered program; career path advice for young financial planners trying to figure out how to put the right foot forward and get ahead (even while still a student); and a look at how just as financial success entails making investments for your future, advancing your financial planning career involves making investments into yourself, from advancing your formal and informal education (from CFP studies to post-CFP designations to reading books and industry news) to being certain that your own financial house is in order (both to ensure that you "practice what you preach" as a financial advisor, and because your personal financial stability is important if you want the flexibility to make job changes or someday launch your own advisory firm!).

Enjoy the "light" reading!