Speaker 1: When you have someone like Nigel Farage on your case,
Speaker 1: that might not be what they get. And certainly he's
Speaker 1: now talking about this as a crusade against the bank
Speaker 1: and against the wider banking industry. If history tells us
Speaker 1: anything is once Nigel Farash gets his teeth into something,
Speaker 1: he doesn't tend to let go quickly.
Speaker 2: I'm David Merritt and this is in the City Bloomberg's podcast,
Speaker 2: connecting you to the conversations at the heart of the
Speaker 2: City of London. And this week there is only one
Speaker 2: story in town, and that is the resignation of Alison Rose,
Speaker 2: the chief executive of nat West.
Speaker 3: It's the chief executive nat West Bank.
Speaker 4: That's Dame Alison Rose has resigned after admitting that she
Speaker 4: was the source for a.
Speaker 2: BBC story about Nigel Farage's bank details.
Speaker 5: He's already made it clear actually on Twitter k that
Speaker 5: he wants to see Sir Howard Davis, the chairman of
Speaker 5: nat West, step down as well.
Speaker 3: Dame Alison Rose been thirty one years climbing through the
Speaker 3: NatWest ranks from graduate trainee to first female boss of
Speaker 3: a major UK bank. It took just weeks for her
Speaker 3: career to crumble she.
Speaker 2: Has been brought down by Nigel Farage, the great disruptor
Speaker 2: of the British establishment, who has struck again. He's brought
Speaker 2: down the boss of one of the UK's largest retail
Speaker 2: and commercial banking groups. So joining me today to pack
Speaker 2: that story. I'm delighted to have Harry Wilson, Bloomberg's banking reporter,
Speaker 2: Paul Davies, Bloomberg opinion columnist covering banking and financing, Joe Mays,
Speaker 2: who is a reporter on our UK Thank Government team.
Speaker 2: Welcome to in the city everyone, Thank you. This story
Speaker 2: has been rumbling for a couple of weeks now, Harry,
Speaker 2: can you explain how this all kicked off and how
Speaker 2: we got to the point where the chief executive of
Speaker 2: NatWest has had to resign overnight.
Speaker 1: It's a pretty extraordinary story, and it started innocuously enough
Speaker 1: with Nigel Farage announcing on its Twitter that he'd been
Speaker 1: debanked and was perhaps going to be forced out of
Speaker 1: the country. Now, at that point we didn't know what
Speaker 1: the bank was, but it quickly became apparent that the
Speaker 1: institution in question was Coots, which is the private banking
Speaker 1: arm of nat West. Things escalated very quickly from there,
Speaker 1: apologies were issued and dossier was produced which showed that Forage,
Speaker 1: as he had insinuated, had indeed been dropped in part
Speaker 1: because of his political beliefs. But then things took a
Speaker 1: pretty crazy turn, which was that there was a BBC's
Speaker 1: story which came out and appeared to be immaculately sourced,
Speaker 1: which said that Forage had been dropped in fact because
Speaker 1: of him falling below a wealth criteria. Now that was
Speaker 1: disproved to a large extent by this dossier. Then came
Speaker 1: obviously the apologies I mentioned, but that wasn't enough. And
Speaker 1: following a sort of heady twenty four hours now in
Speaker 1: which NatWest apologized twice, Alison Rose, the bank's CEO, issued
Speaker 1: her own statement in the early hours of this morning,
Speaker 1: wrote herself stepped down after having previously admitted to a
Speaker 1: serious error of judgment, and now we are we have
Speaker 1: one a love largest banks in the UK with an
Speaker 1: interim CEO Andarage still on the warpath trying to call
Speaker 1: for the chairman to go now.
Speaker 2: So as we're taping this on Wednesday morning, Farage is
Speaker 2: calling for more people in the board of that West
Speaker 2: to step down. Earlier this week he called for a
Speaker 2: full parliamentary inquiry in this.
Speaker 5: I mean anybody, even down to a junior clark in
Speaker 5: a bank who've reached the confidence of a customer would
Speaker 5: have to go. This is a non part of his ansty.
Speaker 5: This is not left or right wing politics. This is
Speaker 5: about the British banking industry. It's about our financial services industry.
Speaker 5: It's about the biggest employer in this country at masses.
Speaker 2: He's kind of got his scalp now, hasn't he. Do
Speaker 2: you think this draws a line under the scandal for
Speaker 2: that West Or is Nigel Farage going to succeed in
Speaker 2: in persuading more of them at the bank to have
Speaker 2: to step down.
Speaker 1: If you said a week or so ago that Rose
Speaker 1: would go over this, I think a lot of people
Speaker 1: would have looked at you slightly as sconce And now
Speaker 1: it's happened and definitely has the wind in his sales
Speaker 1: now and also crucially he has an awful lot of
Speaker 1: political support. It it's not just that he is doing
Speaker 1: these things.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 1: There was a very much a briefing campaign overnight from
Speaker 1: Number ten, from the Prime Minister's office and from the
Speaker 1: UK Finance Ministry, both basically saying that Rose had lost
Speaker 1: their confidence and it's really that which seems to have
Speaker 1: kicked things over the line. And so with that in mind,
Speaker 1: you look at what the board did and I guess
Speaker 1: the question then is, well, they seem to think that
Speaker 1: they had this thing sussed yesterday afternoon with Rose agreeing
Speaker 1: to potentially cut her pay, but actually obviously that wasn't enough,
Speaker 1: and then that starts raise questions about their own judgment.
Speaker 1: It would be too early to say that this is
Speaker 1: a done deal. In for instance, the chairman Howard Davies
Speaker 1: can quietly get over this because he is due to
Speaker 1: be going anyway next year. But this obviously could hasten that.
Speaker 2: I mean, Allison Rose spent thirty years at that bank.
Speaker 2: There's rosen to become one of the most high profile
Speaker 2: female chief executives in Britain. But you mentioned the politics
Speaker 2: on this, and yes, on Tuesday, when it became clear
Speaker 2: that the Prime Minister that other members of the cabinet
Speaker 2: were losing confidence in Rome, then I guess her position
Speaker 2: became more untenable.
Speaker 3: The fact that Alison Rose was such a darling of
Speaker 3: the UK business community and indeed the UK government. Richie
Speaker 3: su nak Jeremy Hunt would constantly talk so highly of her. Now,
Speaker 3: she was brought in to run the government's entrepreneurship Review,
Speaker 3: she was on various business advisory councils. She was with
Speaker 3: Richie Stunac only last week in Number ten smiling at
Speaker 3: the Cabinet table, laughing together. And then for Number ten
Speaker 3: and Number eleven to really come up last night and
Speaker 3: brief so hard against her. It shows me the real
Speaker 3: political edge of this story and how the government has
Speaker 3: seized on this issue and is trying to use it
Speaker 3: as a wedge against labor, who's saying, you know, they're
Speaker 3: not standing up free speech amongst people who bank and
Speaker 3: so on. I think that that's just a re striking
Speaker 3: to note.
Speaker 2: To remember here, of course, that the UK government still
Speaker 2: is the biggest shareholder in that west. Nigel Farage has
Speaker 2: disrupted British politics now for decades. He of course led
Speaker 2: the exit of Britain from the European Union, arguably bringing
Speaker 2: down various Conservative prime ministers in his way. How is
Speaker 2: he still able to disrupt the British establishment so effectively In.
Speaker 3: Terms of Nigel Farage, I think that part of what's
Speaker 3: going on here is that Richie Sunak knows that he
Speaker 3: has a slight vulnerability on his rights on the right
Speaker 3: flank of the Conservative Party, and there are still influential
Speaker 3: figures within his party. You have David Davis, Prime Minister.
Speaker 6: Back to the question raised quite rightly by biragical Friend,
Speaker 6: the Member for Northeast Somerset. The opposition politicians referring to,
Speaker 6: of course, with Nigel Farage, whose bank account was closed
Speaker 6: not because he was a PP, not because of commercial reasons,
Speaker 6: but because it's views did not align with the values
Speaker 6: of Foot's bank, a thinly veiled political discrimination.
Speaker 3: Jacobrey Small not for public figures.
Speaker 4: I don't think we should be protected by them. But
Speaker 4: you are entitled privacy by people with whom you have
Speaker 4: a specific commercial relationship in your bank, and doctor must
Speaker 4: be two of them, and if she has broken that code,
Speaker 4: she is not fit to run a bank.
Speaker 5: We could find out who.
Speaker 3: Have spoken very vocally on this issue, and which is
Speaker 3: you needs to keep those people on side, and that's
Speaker 3: why I think he has kind of weighed in so
Speaker 3: strongly on this issue and yes effectively put that extra
Speaker 3: pressure on Rose to go and made this a big issue,
Speaker 3: perhaps more of an issue than the public might think it.
Speaker 3: You know, warrant's important. We're talking about a relatively small
Speaker 3: number of people here who are losing access to accounts.
Speaker 2: In case anyone doesn't know who Coots is or who
Speaker 2: they are, they are bankers to the rich and to royalty.
Speaker 2: King Charles's bank account is with Cutes, and they do
Speaker 2: have rules about how much cash you've got in order
Speaker 2: to have a bank account. And so you know, that
Speaker 2: defense that they initially made on removing his bank account,
Speaker 2: or the story that he didn't have enough funds, on
Speaker 2: the surface, could be entirely believable. But in fact, if
Speaker 2: it's the politics here that has taken over, I mean
Speaker 2: paul is Allison Rose really just a victim of the
Speaker 2: political backdrop here. Rather than say for what she did,
Speaker 2: should she have lost her job.
Speaker 7: I mean she's lost her job for admitting to explicitly
Speaker 7: speaking about an individual a client of the bank, which
Speaker 7: obviously you really shouldn't do. Throughout Deutsche Bank's troubles with
Speaker 7: banking President Trump, they were very stern about not making
Speaker 7: sort of major statements about Trump or why they banked
Speaker 7: him or how they banked him, and so on and
Speaker 7: so forth, And I think she crossed the line there,
Speaker 7: which was a terrible mistake and part of a much
Speaker 7: bigger mismanagement of this whole situation, which meant she had
Speaker 7: to go. But the problem for nat West here is
Speaker 7: that they've been fighting this battle which has become a
Speaker 7: political battle, but to my mind, isn't really about the
Speaker 7: politics at all, certainly not about Nigerl Farrag's politics with
Speaker 7: one hand tied behind their back, because they can't reveal
Speaker 7: a lot of stuff about what the profitability of Nigel
Speaker 7: Farag's banking relationship with Coots looked like, either before he
Speaker 7: repaid his mortgage, which was the kind of the precursor
Speaker 7: to ditching him as as a client.
Speaker 1: Or after.
Speaker 7: And I think Farag has like people have asked him
Speaker 7: to say that they can release some more details about
Speaker 7: his account his banking with them, to kind of show
Speaker 7: more detail about the story, and he's refused that. Obviously
Speaker 7: the bank can't do it of its own accord, So
Speaker 7: we're left with sort of half the story really from
Speaker 7: that West points of view, but really from the point
Speaker 7: of view of Alison Rose and the board and how
Speaker 7: they handled this, they made some fundamental errors of judgment.
Speaker 7: They knew that ditching Farrag as a client was going
Speaker 7: to create a massive media storm, and they've stumbled blindly
Speaker 7: into this as if they had no idea it was coming.
Speaker 2: How is it allowed to rumblong for so long? Obviously
Speaker 2: Alison Rose knew what she said to the BBC journalist,
Speaker 2: and then for the bank to deny that that was
Speaker 2: the case. It was always going to come out in
Speaker 2: the end, wasn't it, Harry.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's one of those classic things. It's not
Speaker 1: necessarily action, it's to cover up, and in this case
Speaker 1: it looks like they've fallen into that classic trap there.
Speaker 1: It's interesting that in the report itself which Farage is released,
Speaker 1: one of the things that comes across again and again
Speaker 1: is the bank actually knowingly stating and there that dropping
Speaker 1: him will be a big issue for the bank. And yet,
Speaker 1: as Paul says, they seem to have been incredibly naive
Speaker 1: when they did it. The expected on the one hand,
Speaker 1: as he would cause a lot of trouble and would
Speaker 1: make a media storm about it, but then don't seem
Speaker 1: to be prepared for it, which is quite remarkable. And
Speaker 1: I mean, for that sort of media management alone, you
Speaker 1: just have to think this level of incompetence going on
Speaker 1: there is quite staggering. I admit they probably didn't expect
Speaker 1: it ever to get like this, and maybe even Nigel
Speaker 1: Farage didn't, but once it happened, they just seemed pretty clueless.
Speaker 2: It's slightly astonishing when you step back and think about
Speaker 2: the motivations to make that move to remove his bank out.
Speaker 2: As you said, there was an internal debate clearly at
Speaker 2: COOTS about the fallout from this, and yet they did
Speaker 2: it anyway. What possible motivation do you think internally at
Speaker 2: NatWest could there have been for this? How could they
Speaker 2: score such a spectacula own goal?
Speaker 7: Paul Well, I think what's clear from all of the
Speaker 7: reporting around the details that have been released about this
Speaker 7: reputational risk report, how Farrage was assessed and what they
Speaker 7: thought about him, is that, Okay, so there's a lot
Speaker 7: of pretty colorful language in there about how he's xenophobic,
Speaker 7: and lots of things about his politics and even some
Speaker 7: of his business dealings, which is very unwise stuff to
Speaker 7: include in a corporate report, almost certainly, but it strikes
Speaker 7: me that the main thrust of what is going on
Speaker 7: here is the bank talked about its values now call
Speaker 7: me cynical, but I think of corporate value the set
Speaker 7: of corporate values, as being about the brand and the
Speaker 7: image that they want to present. It's not about deeply
Speaker 7: held religious or beliefs or anything like this. And what
Speaker 7: they're really worried about with a very high profile campaigning
Speaker 7: media provocateur as a client is that he's going to
Speaker 7: say a bunch of things which is going to reflect
Speaker 7: badly on their reputation with all of their other customers
Speaker 7: and their staff, which is a very common and ordinary
Speaker 7: assessment that lots of companies make all the time. Banking
Speaker 7: is slightly different because you have to provide basic banking services.
Speaker 7: But this wasn't about basic banking services. Wasn't about an
Speaker 7: ordinary person sitting in their bedroom and saying some unfashionable
Speaker 7: things on social media. This is about a media provocateur
Speaker 7: who was known to be a client of Coots and
Speaker 7: the reputational risk entailed for the bank, and also the
Speaker 7: fact that he'd repaid his mortgage and was therefore bringing
Speaker 7: in less revenue while still being potentially high cost.
Speaker 2: He really is the arch media provocateur of Britain. And
Speaker 2: as I said, you know, the disruptor of the establishment,
Speaker 2: and he was making the argument in recent days that
Speaker 2: you know, the establishment was trying to throw him out
Speaker 2: of Britain by debanking. I mean, presumably he could have
Speaker 2: just gone along, trotted along to Lloyd's or HSBC and
Speaker 2: opened another bank acount. I'm not sure you need a
Speaker 2: Coots bank account perhaps to stay in Britain. But Joe,
Speaker 2: what does Ferrage do next? How do you see his
Speaker 2: next move on the great media stage after this victory
Speaker 2: that he's had.
Speaker 3: I mean, on your last point, David, you kind of
Speaker 3: wonder if you're a bank today and Nier does come
Speaker 3: and say please can I have an account? You look
Speaker 3: at all this and you think, oh, I might not
Speaker 3: be We might think twice at whether we want to
Speaker 3: take this person or as a client because the reputation
Speaker 3: or risk that that Paul just talked about. It does
Speaker 3: what Nigel Farage does next, It's always an open question.
Speaker 3: Will he set up another party, Will we have another
Speaker 3: go at trying to become an MP and leading that
Speaker 3: movement again? We know he has support in that world,
Speaker 3: as you say, a very influential figure in that regard.
Speaker 3: He is always keeping us guessing. Nigel faraes he has
Speaker 3: that media profile, that personality, but it's hard to say.
Speaker 3: I must say Richard Tyson and running a reform could
Speaker 3: nudge Faris come back there to see.
Speaker 2: We're going to have an election in Britain next year
Speaker 2: and as you mentioned earlier, Joe, part of the government's
Speaker 2: maneuvering on this is to try to plicate the wing
Speaker 2: of the party or their supporters who are a bit
Speaker 2: more sympathetic to Nigel Farage's politics. Is he going to
Speaker 2: play a bit of a bigger role perhaps in the
Speaker 2: election that is coming than perhaps we previously thought.
Speaker 3: I would not rule that out. I mean he's affectedly
Speaker 3: done it at the last two to three general elections
Speaker 3: and no, Richids Unit is in a difficult position in
Speaker 3: the polls and so and he cannot afford to have
Speaker 3: a stroke effectively, very right wing party contesting seats up
Speaker 3: in the red wall across the UK, they would lose votes,
Speaker 3: the consertive body would and that would cost them. So yeah,
Speaker 3: that's why it's Unaike is so concerned about this, Harry.
Speaker 2: What next then? For nat West it's one of the
Speaker 2: biggest brands in banking in Britain. It's now without a
Speaker 2: full time chief executive. They've appointed an interim CEO, but
Speaker 2: what does the next year hold for nat West and
Speaker 2: who is most likely going to sit in the chair
Speaker 2: as the chief executive from here on.
Speaker 1: Well, in banking and many sort of businesses, the interims
Speaker 1: do have a habit of becoming permanent CEOs. And so
Speaker 1: you know, we saw the same situation at HSBC not
Speaker 1: so long ago when they got rid of their CEO.
Speaker 1: The the interim ultimately became the permanent CEO. So Paul Faite,
Speaker 1: who's replaced Alison Rose, on an interim basis, would look
Speaker 1: pretty set fair as long as he does a reasonably
Speaker 1: decent job of probably becoming the next CEO, certainly in
Speaker 1: part because banks, like all businesses, want to minimize the
Speaker 1: amount of disruption, so you don't want to really have
Speaker 1: three CEOs in one year. So if you can keep
Speaker 1: it to two, and if Fait bruce up to the task,
Speaker 1: then I'd say he's in with a very good shout.
Speaker 2: Yeah, what do we know about Porthwait? It's probably unknown
Speaker 2: to most people listening to this.
Speaker 1: Well, frankly, he's pretty unknown to me before today. But
Speaker 1: he basically he's a commercial banking guy, so he's ahead
Speaker 1: of their commercial banking and institutional banking business has been
Speaker 1: since twenty nineteen, when he took over effectively Allison Rose's
Speaker 1: old job when she got promoted to CEO. Before that, Actually,
Speaker 1: there isn't too much on his CV that we actually
Speaker 1: sort of know about. It seems like he might have
Speaker 1: been in transaction banking, but us going back before then,
Speaker 1: it's a bit of a sort of a black hole
Speaker 1: moment which obviously we will hope to fill in over time,
Speaker 1: and which presumably now West will want to fill in
Speaker 1: if they want to make the case that he should
Speaker 1: be their next CEO.
Speaker 2: Paul, are there any wider ramifications for banking in Britain
Speaker 2: after this?
Speaker 7: You know, the Farrage versus Coots case is really not
Speaker 7: very widely appickable because it's about, you know, high value,
Speaker 7: high cost services to a high visibility, high profile client.
Speaker 7: The vast majority of people that are not in that
Speaker 7: sort of situation at all. There is a problem with
Speaker 7: some people not getting the access to the banking services
Speaker 7: that they require in the UK as there is in
Speaker 7: the US, and a lot of that is to do
Speaker 7: with people being just too poor or lacking financial education,
Speaker 7: and this sort of thing. Some politicians have claimed that
Speaker 7: ordinary individuals are being kicked out of banks for saying things,
Speaker 7: even just on social media, that somehow we're all being
Speaker 7: tracked for our political views. I mean, I've seen literally
Speaker 7: no evidence of this anywhere in any kind of news
Speaker 7: reports that I can think of, or in any kind
Speaker 7: of like regulatory reports or any even sort of you know,
Speaker 7: zones of investigation that conduct regulators are thinking about digging into.
Speaker 7: I mean, I guess they'll look at it now. There
Speaker 7: might well be a whole bunch of people who come
Speaker 7: forward and make these kinds of claims now, and if
Speaker 7: there are, then it's worth investigating properly. But I don't
Speaker 7: imagine that many banks are really expending that much time
Speaker 7: and money on researching, you know, my mum's social media
Speaker 7: account to work out whether or not she might be
Speaker 7: a bit mad or say some crazy things, you know.
Speaker 6: Right again.
Speaker 2: In that tweet, though, far shays we need both cultural
Speaker 2: and legal changes to a system that has on fairly
Speaker 2: shot down many thousands of innocent people, and I will
Speaker 2: do my best to be their voice in the Brexit debate.
Speaker 2: Of course, he managed to tap into this feeling that
Speaker 2: people have been left behind by the current system. He
Speaker 2: seems to be trying to drive another wedge in the
Speaker 2: system here again on this particular issue, and at least
Speaker 2: for now, the government has seemingly agreed. You know, we've
Speaker 2: talked a lot on this podcast about the different tone
Speaker 2: from the Rishi Sunac Jeremy Hunt administration in terms of
Speaker 2: friendliness to business. Joe, might this be a bit of
Speaker 2: a turning point in terms of kind of the political
Speaker 2: battle lines being drawn for the election, This idea of
Speaker 2: kind of the system and who is standing up for
Speaker 2: ordinary people against say the City of London.
Speaker 3: He talk about lessons learned, David. We had Andrew Griffiths
Speaker 3: on our UK Politics podcast and he made exactly this point.
Speaker 8: Clearly, this was a very serious matter in a democracy.
Speaker 8: It's fundamental that people can have for confidence that they
Speaker 8: continue their banking relationships, regardless of what they say or
Speaker 8: the political views or party that they support, which is
Speaker 8: why it's important that the board acted. That change has happened.
Speaker 8: We now need to go forward and make sure that
Speaker 8: we can learn those lessons and make sure importantly that
Speaker 8: this does not happen again.
Speaker 3: He was really leaning into it. He was saying letters
Speaker 3: needs to be learned across the whole financial sector want
Speaker 3: banks to look at themselves and ask themselves, are you
Speaker 3: denying services based on free speech? So it's definitely something
Speaker 3: where the government is trying to create a wedge, and
Speaker 3: if anything, we pick up a sense from within the
Speaker 3: Conservative Party that their move at this point to give
Speaker 3: themselves the best chance of winning the election is to
Speaker 3: really lean into these wedge political issues that they can
Speaker 3: kind of make hay out of, where it's not really
Speaker 3: about public so or the NHS or cost of living
Speaker 3: or you know, these issues that you might think are
Speaker 3: kind of bread and butter realities for the public. It's
Speaker 3: instead taking political dividing lines such as the war on
Speaker 3: woke for example, or these kind of cultural issues and
Speaker 3: really trying to kind of paint yourself as a complete
Speaker 3: opposite to labor and on the side of working people
Speaker 3: and what the kind of common sense view of politics is.
Speaker 3: That really is a strategy we can to seem more
Speaker 3: and it's not sun acts. I don't think he's naturally
Speaker 3: comfortable with doing it, but he recognizes that they do
Speaker 3: something to try and turn this pole gap around, and
Speaker 3: that's why we're seeing this kind of more aggressive stance
Speaker 3: they're taking on these issues, and this is this is
Speaker 3: a perfect one form that they've made this about free speech,
Speaker 3: when really it probably isn't too much about free speech,
Speaker 3: and we've talked about but they wanted to make it
Speaker 3: like that, and that suits them.
Speaker 2: Politically, I guess also chief executives up and down the
Speaker 2: country we'll be looking at this and thinking, if I'm
Speaker 2: sat next to a journalist at a dinner, maybe I
Speaker 2: shouldn't talk to them very much. I mean, Harry, isn't
Speaker 2: this really just a story about somebody misspeaking and being
Speaker 2: a little bit too loose lit when sitting next to
Speaker 2: a busines this reporter.
Speaker 1: Well, I suppose the point to make is actually the
Speaker 1: way Rose has left the bank isn't so much the
Speaker 1: sort of exception but rather than rule. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: an awful loss of bank CEOs don't leave banks by
Speaker 1: their own volition. You just have to look in the UK,
Speaker 1: for instance, Barclays, where you know barely any CEO has
Speaker 1: ever sort of left that place of their own volition,
Speaker 1: and you know equally the same could be true of
Speaker 1: many other banks. So frankly, you know, if the old
Speaker 1: saying is every career in politics ends in failure. Well
Speaker 1: in banking, it's sort of somewhat similar for CEOs. It's
Speaker 1: kind of like football management. You know, people rarely see
Speaker 1: out their time and sort of have Alex ferguson s career,
Speaker 1: you know more than likely you sort of more we're
Speaker 1: going to be in the sort of Jose Marino sort
Speaker 1: of constant turn.
Speaker 2: On that note, I think we'll wrap it up. Thank
Speaker 2: you so much to Harry, Paul and Joe.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thanks for listening to this week's in the City. We'll
Speaker 2: be back next week, but in the meantime, if you
Speaker 2: like our show, please head on over to Apple Podcasts
Speaker 2: or wherever you listen to podcasts and rate, review and subscribe.
Speaker 2: This episode was hosted by me David Merritt. It was
Speaker 2: produced by Somersadi, with additional editing by The Lake Maples
Speaker 2: and special thanks to Harry Wilson, Paul Davies, and Joe Mays.