Claire was invited to take part in a ’round table’ debate by ‘The Negotiator’ magazine over lunch upstairs in Greek Street’s L’Escargot. Also present were representatives from leading Estate & Letting Agents including Spicerhaart, Andrews, Martin & Co and the Guild of Professional Estate Agents.
Claire from Daisylets 'round the table'
The topic was ‘Technology in a traditional agency world’, whilst we don’t consider ourselves traditional at all, they considered our opinion and experience as a smaller agency was of interest to their readers and we’re glad to say we are keeping up with the Jones’s as far as our approach to technology and web/social media goes.
Claire from Daisylets getting animated!
Web version of the article can be found here: http://www.negotiator-magazine.co.uk/article/it-special–estate-evolution-1744
Or the full 7 page article is below:
IT SPECIAL: Estate evolution
Agents vary hugely in their choice of software and usage and their investment in the latest technology, but how does this impact the way they do business? Clare Bettelley gathered a diverse group of agency representatives in London to find out, in association with VTUK.
Guests
Clare Bettelley, editor of The Negotiator;
Jayne Codling, marketing director at Martin & Co;
Richard Combellack, head of international homes and new homes at Fine & Country;
Jenni Critchlow, operations manager at Homes4U;
Claire Empson, managing director of DaisyLets;
Andy Ferrington, IT director at Andrews & Partners;
Tim Foulkes, principal of Howard Cundey;
Peter Grant, managing director of VTUK;
Steve Lamb, IT director at Spicerhaart;
Mark Manning, director at Manning Stainton;
Mike Reed, head of IT at Douglas & Gordon.
The Negotiator: What software do you use?
Jayne Codling: We have 170-plus offices and have developed our IT and web support based on CFP.
Richard Combellack: We have over 600 Guild members and 140 websites. We don’t have in-house software – we purposely stayed away from it. Instead, we have focussed on marketing and websites and new web technology. In doing so, we’ve purchased 50% of an IT company, PropertyLogic, to bring it in-house.
We have a different model in place to the upfront fee model for website building. We went with a monthly fee model after noticing a lot of agents getting quoted extortionate amounts of money to build a website, which lasted them three years, and then they had to pay it again.
In theory, a website should be something that’s quite cheap once you’ve built the code for it. We’ve bought all the cost of building the technology in-house, so we can white-label it out for members in a format that suits them. And we have more control because we own 50% of the IT business.
Claire Empson: We opened last January and were virtual until then. We have our own website, which I built myself – I have a background in design and IT – which was a significant cost saving. I manually uploaded properties myself when we first started using basic Dreamweaver. As the business has grown to manage 70 properties, we’ve had to up our game as far as software’s concerned.
I looked at a lot of software about four years ago when we started up and, obviously, cost was a major consideration. We changed our software about a year ago after a year’s worth of research.
We’ve gone for a cloud-based system because we use Macs and nothing else seemed to work on them at the time. One of the criteria for us was to get a system that uploaded properties directly onto our website, and not many would do that. I almost signed up for one at vast cost, but at the last minute backed out of the talks, as I just didn’t believe what the firm was telling me.
We decided against going with Eurolink Software and use LetMC and Domace. We still use Domace for marketing; it’s good for that. It sends out automated emails and matches properties with applicants.
How has LetMC changed the way you do business?
CE: We migrated to LetMC a year ago. I would have done it two years ago if hadn’t had a really terrible accountant who talked me out of it, saying he could do the client accounting, which was a really bad idea.
All our invoices and statements are now generated automatically. And it allows us to log maintenance jobs as they come in.
You can input where it is, if it’s been assigned to a handy man and check what stage it’s at. And it automatically generates a report with this data with our landlord statements whenever we make a payment, so we don’t have to communicate this ourselves. It saves us a lot of time on small things, so landlords are more confident now that we’re actually doing a job we’re being paid to do.
Previously, we had a lot of feedback from landlords asking why we were charging so much a month, which they considered to be money for old rope. They couldn’t see us doing anything, whereas we are always very busy, often fielding calls from tenants about really silly things they need advice on.
Now I make sure everyone goes on to the system and logs even the stupidest little things they come across, so clients can see we’re working for their money. Of course, they can also see if we haven’t dealt with something, so it could work negatively if you weren’t doing your job properly. In this sense, it makes us work more efficiently because we know we’re more accountable.
Mark, you’re also using off-the-shelf systems from CFP and Reapit, to which you ungraded a few years ago. Why did you switch supplier?
Mark Manning: We were with Vebra some years ago, but as the business grew, we found a lack of reporting ability, so we moved to Reapit in 2006.
To what extent does Reapit cater for your current needs?
MM: We started using Vebra in 1998. As a front-end user, we found its Homeview system quite good, and it did what we needed it to do when we had three or four branches. But as we expanded the business, we found an inability to centralise letters and generate reports, which is what drove us to change. Reapit provides us with the vast majority of the things we need, and we looked at a lot of different systems before choosing this one.
What was your key objective?
MM: To be able to centralize things into head office, so we could roll them out across the business.
For example?
MM: We wanted a faster system. The Homeview batch process system took a minimum of 24 hours to update our website, which is too long. Our systems are now live. And we’re actually moving away from the way we communicate, and moving our servers back in house and moving onto a MPLS (Multiprotocol Label Switching) network – a technique used to route traffic around network failures – which provides us with a lot more security and makes the whole system a lot more robust than what it is at the moment.
What are the software’s shortcomings?
MM: The only thing we could perhaps pick holes in is its reporting systems, which are somewhat limited.
What’s the solution?
MM: We use Crystal Reports as a tag on to our database.
Which reports does this solution enable you to generate that Reapit doesn’t?
MM: Reapit will produce a vast array of general management reports that we can check pipelines with, but it doesn’t enable us to drill down into detail. For example, we wanted very recently to look at the asset management business we have and how much we were getting from Spicerhaart and MoveWithUs.
We also wanted to look at the asset management businesses we use and who uses us. We couldn’t do that with Reapit, so we had to use the separate reporting facility.
Andy, conversely, you’re just rolling out your new, bespoke system. Can you talk us through implementation and the way it’s changing the way you do business.
AF: We have around 55 offices and manage 74 sites and use a mixture of solutions, but for estate agency and lettings we use a bespoke system based on MS Dynamics, which we have rolled out to all lettings branches and the majority of our estate agency branches. The biggest change is that it is linked through to our offices.
The system, which we’ve now linked to our new website, enables clients to make offers, book viewings, and book valuations directly into branches system. Allowing customers to interact with branch systems has been a big change for us – we’ve gone from a system where branches had compete control over absolutely everything to all of a sudden things being booked in a negotiator’s diary by customers.
Mike Reed: So negotiators can book an appointment in your negotiators’ diaries and they don’t kick and scream about that?
AF: Correct.
MR: Don’t you get a lot of cancellations and conflict when suddenly they’ve got an appointment for which they hadn’t planned?
Steve Lamb: We did something similar back in 2003, whereby we gave diaries of listers and our financial services staff out to customers, which they were able to book directly into. We very quickly came away from that and will never go back to it again.
It wasn’t that customers were a problem, but other agents in terms of fake appointments; it was sabotage due to interest and intrigue. Customers can still input when they would like an appointment, but the system doesn’t put it in the staff member’s diary.
The request goes to the call centre now and that centre’s responsible for qualifying people, confirming the appointment, ensuring that the person’s genuine and that we can get hold of them if we need to.
AF: So far, agents have managed to cope with requested viewings. They can always change it. The structure behind the booking process awaits confirmation from them.
A quasi-virtual agent, then?
AF: This is a new area for us, yes, but we’re not trying to be an online estate agent; definitely not. It’s about capturing lost opportunities online and driving customers through to the branch and negotiators, who are knowledgeable, talented sales people who can deal with customer queries.
What’s been the biggest challenge with the new system?
AF: Training and educating staff on what the system changes mean. And our business process analysis has taken on a whole new dimension. We’ve always looked at how viewings and evaluations work, but always within the business. Now we’ve had to extend our analysis right into clients sitting in their houses or via their mobile devices.
Tim, you work with a software provider on a bespoke basis. Can you talk us through your experience.
Tim Foulkes: When I started with Ibbett Mosely it didn’t have a system at all, so I looked at software that could be linked in with all properties and applicants. We used PropertyPro, but we needed instant uploading, which was when we realised we wanted a web-based solution. We talked to Evolvin and have been with the firm since 2005.
It has helped us build a bespoke system, which provides our websites, email and internet. We’ve just upgraded to a new system and been doing training over the last couple of weeks.
What improvements does the new system offer?
TF: Sales functionality. We looked at the speed of the system, diary access, the ability to book multiple viewings in more than one place and management reports. My IT chap and I wrote what we wanted in collaboration with Evolvin.
Steve, what software do you use, and what challenges are involved in being a multi-disciplined national agency?
Steve Lamb: We have a multi-brand business, which is a big part of the challenge we have. We’re operating the same systems but with different outputs. We have 190 estate agency offices and 50 lettings offices, some of which are within our estate agency offices, and other parts of the group exist around these, including repossessions, corporate sales and asset management, our auction company, financial services and surveying.
Our core estate agency business runs on a bespoke system written in-house, for lettings we use Eurolink’s Veco system, for surveying Quest and Xit2 and for financial services, Sesame.
We’ve been developing our bespoke system since 2001. All systems run on Sequel, which creates a common platform for data sharing across the business. While we have different products at the front end, we always insist on customer feedback, which we put back into the Sequel database, so we can understand where that customer’s touched the business.
How big is your IT team to help manage this structure?
SL: We have 25 IT staff.
iSold is the latest addition to your agency stable. What are the system demands for this?
SL: We had to harness some different technology, so we could ensure we genuinely knew the person before an agent went to their house, but could book the appointment directly with no interaction from the agent at all. It is a matter of being able to get hold of them and validating them to ensure they are who they say they are. We’ve built a bespoke system, which is a dynamics-based CRM system that uses a number of checks available online to prove a person’s identity. To become an applicant and register your interest in viewing our properties, the system will ask you for information like passport and credit card details.
MR: People give that to you online?
SL: They have to if they want to go through online, and they do. We collect names and addresses, but not all in one go – we collect them at different stages in the process. It’s about collecting at the right point in time.
Customers can also refer to our call centre. They can opt to drop out of the online process and go to the call centre environment where they’ll be picked up from behind the scenes using more traditional agency methods.
RC: How many people drop out of the online process?
SL: Over 50% don’t go through all the way. They want to talk to somebody, often when we start asking them for credit card details.
So, you’re continuing to roll our iSold despite the fact that over 50% of users drop out because they want to talk to someone?
SL: They are still happy to go through with it, it’s just that they want to talk to someone.
But surely this completely undermines the whole idea of the virtual agency.
SL: It does, although not the whole idea; half of the idea. It’s a fee piece. The fee has increased a result of it. Whereas we really wanted it to operate at a £999 model, if you look at it these days, you’ll see it’s running at a £1,500 fee model. Plus, it’s an emerging brand and only been out for 12 months.
So, the iSold brand is an issue?
SL: Brand awareness is an issue. Had we launched it as haart, it would probably be a different story.
TF: Some of feedback we’ve had is that some of our customers don’t want to go online because they’ve been sold down the third party route because they’ve given all their information online.
SL: That’s not one I’ve had back.
What are the shortcomings of your core agency system?
SL: Client Relationship Management. The systems have evolved over the years, so each division has its pot of data and we cobble together a group view of customers from that. But it is done through batch routines in a data warehousing style, and needs to evolve into a more intelligent CRM system. This is very firmly on our agenda for this year.
Our other challenges are the websites. Ours are getting old again. It’s a cycle for us – five core estate agency brands means that by the time you finish the last one, you need to start the first one again. We’re just starting the haart cycle again.
Jenni, you’re a four-branch, Manchester-based agency and comparatively small, but have still committed to building your own lettings system, PULSE. How does your experience compare?
Jenni Critchlow: We hunted around for a new system for quite a while and looked at different services, then had a chance conversation with a web guru working on our website. He said he could build what we wanted, so we worked very closely on that and came up with our own bespoke system.
It’s still in development for every element of full property management, but is operational for lettings. In the interim we’re using Vebra Premise and Resource Techniques through our Team membership.
What functionality does it offer?
JC: Inter-office communication and simple reporting functionality, plus a full matching and accounting package.
Mike, you’ve invested around £400,000 in developing a bespoke software system. Can you talk us through your approach.
MR: We’ve built a bespoke system for sales and lettings and use Trace for block management. We’ve developed everything in house for the last couple of years. We’re on our third iteration of the internal system EDGE, which has been running for just over a year, and it enables us to mould or adapt it as we need to.
As time changes, new technology becomes available, and if you’re sticking on what’s old, you’ve had it. You need to constantly evolve.
Why did you feel the need to build your own system?
MR: We don’t like white-labelling anything, it’s not who we are. Further, when we decided to scrap everything we had and build our own system, one of the key drivers was a single contact, single property approach. We don’t want two John Smiths. It was a huge issue for us, which we got round in the end. Our system doesn’t allow you to put in the same name with the same phone number and email address.
That said, while there are rules, with every rule you have to bend it a little bit, such as when someone wants to use their partner’s mobile number instead of their own, so we need to do cross checks as we go.
What’s the starting point for identifying your firm’s needs?
MR: Listening. We get the constant ‘we can’t do this, we need to do that’, but within IT, we get to look around and see where processes are taking a long time and where we can enhance things. For example, we know a lot of personal assistants are overworked because they’ve got so much to do.
It’s small things, like dealing with printed property details. We had a template which we liked people to stick to using a photo and text in Word, which allowed people to move things around. But they’d put the wrong size picture in and the wrong quality, which meant it was getting stretched, so there were constant pains.
We thought there were better ways of doing this, so when we were building the new system, one of the key things was to ask why are we even using Word and buying Word licenses when this can be generated automatically. This is when things get looked at a bit deeper and we consider what we need to be able to do this, what technology is available to do it, and we spend a bit of time looking in to it, proving the concept.
We still have Word, but all letters and details are generated by the system, not people. If someone wants to change a client name, they have to change it at the system source, so everything around it flows a lot easier.
What have been the biggest improvements to your upgrade, Tim?
TF: We’ve improved the time it takes us to put houses on the market and the time it takes to market them. It’s difficult to quantify, but in terms of processes and simplicity and efficiency, it’s off the Richter scale. A lot of staff can put a property on the system themselves. We do all do our own letters, so it’s helped us with time management.
MM: That’s a good point, in terms of uploads. This market has made people become hugely expectant of our ability as agents to deliver very quickly. If someone gives you an instruction, they expect it to be on the portals immediately. A couple of days is typical.
JC: In lettings it’s even more of a challenge because property moves much quicker, and we now feed to 24 portals.
But presumably the rental property particulars aren’t as extensive as they are for sales?
JC: As the market has changed, the expectation of potential renters is incredibly high. By nature of what they’re expecting from agents and landlords, they’re expecting to see much more information, so you may well find now that particulars for rentals are actually as extensive as they are for sales.
How have adapted your system to meet these needs?
JC: We’ve always used our website as the core hub, so all data is fed into that and from there all portals are fed with our relevant data.
TF: CFP doesn’t really have that functionality. We use them just for property management.
MM: We do, too.
TF: But it’s not very good for lettings.
In what way?
JC: It’s good at property management, the database side of things is reasonable and the client accounting package is good, but integration with other systems is generally poor, partly because it is not a web-based solution. And we were feeding to Twitter long before CFP was.
We use an email marketing system, which talks to our website but not to CFP. We are finding more and more systems that we are integrating are communicating with our website, and we’re looking at how CFP can support that rather than using CFP or any other software package to drive that integration.
Is this part of long-term strategy to build your own system?
JC: Yes.
Claire, how can you build further on your progress to date?
CE: There is a change you can integrate, so landlords can sign in to the system and get their own reports and statements. Although the system sends out statements now, I don’t think a lot of landlords are actually saving them, as we still gets calls at the end of the year asking for them, which is why I’m thinking of implementing this. Tenants can log into it too.
SL: We did a trial with 100 offices, offering landlord statements and tenant reporting online. The average landlord take up was 85%; for tenants it was just under 20%. Tenants were saying they actually preferred to report a job to someone whereas landlords were quite happy to go online and check their accounts.
Peter Grant: I think it’s a regional issue. If you go to somewhere like Portsmouth or Aldershot where there are lots of landlords absent because they’re in the armed forces, for example, they love having statements online. The same applies to expats.
New technology
How are you incorporating new technology, particularly mobile technology, into your businesses, and how is it changing the way you do business?
RC: Without giving any of our secrets away, we’ve identified a number of things from overseas that we’re rolling out across the networks, which incorporate mobile technology.
Can you share one example?
RC: Quick Response codes are an interesting one. We’ve linked them to some features we’ve already got. Rather than using them like everyone else and directing them to the website, we’re directing them specifically into a videoette, an audio tour.
You mean the code links directly to the tour?
RC: Yes, so within a minute of someone taking a photo of the code, the videoette of the property and surrounding area will start playing. We produced 500 videoettes last week, of which over 50% were for Guild members.
TF: Videoettes are good listing tools.
CE: I find them really annoying – I hate sounds on phones.
RC: They’re very easy to stop. The code can be directed into wherever we want it.
AF: We’re looking at flexible working for staff.
How?
AF: Through using iPads in the field. The iPad itself is a bit of a gimmick, so we’re still working out exactly what it can be used for and why staff need to access their desktop when out of their branch, but we will see. It’s a bit of an experiment for us.
CE: We’ve got iPads and people like them. We can take details and email them straight to the office, so people can get on with the details immediately, which is great because we use really extensive property descriptions, like those used in sales particulars.
What about iPhone apps?
CE: Locally, most people will come to us via Rightmove and FindaProperty, so who would want a Daisylets app, when we have relatively far fewer properties?
JC: That’s why it’s on my nice-to-have list.
RC: But the stuff you can build into apps for landlords will be better built into an app than the site itself. That’s when a letting agency would see the value in apps.
MR: But how are you supposed to cope with app development when you get 40 different styles of tablets with different manufacturers and different resolutions? Have 40 different developers?
RC: You’ve got to prioritise and ensure that your build is based on your usage. We use Google analytics, and are astonished to note that 10,000 people hit the Fine & Country website in the last three months from their PlayStation 3 browser.
We never thought about making our website compatible with a PS3 browser, but we will now optimise our website for that.
What lessons have you learnt through experimenting with new technology?
TF: When we launched Howard Cundey TV we had a separate website. We went down the iPad route, but for the number of offices and listers we’ve got, it was really expensive to do. So I bought some tablet DVD players and went out to clients with a two-minute DVD presentation, which is very effective and cost effective, too.
We tried the iPad route, and it’s all very fancy, but some of the staff were not as receptive to the technology as others. However, getting them to press a button on the DVD player worked wonderfully well. It’s about trying different things – some work, some don’t.
Andy, you also mentioned training being a challenge. Can you talk us through how you managed it with the new system?
AF: It was easier with the website than with the branch system. We got everyone in one place for the day and presented and demonstrated the website. We spent time explaining why we had developed it the way we have. We involved an agency in the design and got them along to talk about it.
We also had machines for staff to try the system on, so it was very much about immersing them into the whole site for the day, which is great, but with lots of follow up afterwards.
That’s a very thorough training strategy. Is this a result of a previous oversight?
AF: When we rolled out our software we made a mistake in that area managers said they would train the software in the field, so we would roll out the induction of the software in branches and they would roll it forward. It didn’t work at all, and we ended up employing trainers specifically to go round and do ongoing education and training and change this as the system evolved.
We’ve got a dedicated lettings and management person to ensure the system is being properly used.
It was a lack of understanding by area managers about how difficult it would be to continually train the product.
Steve, how have you tackled training across the group?
SL: We have 1,500 staff in agency, so it’s about getting them all briefed on the changes we’re doing. The general tact is via major releases and coordinating with the training department, which cascades that information out to the branches, and trainers in turn call in to branches and do training sessions for them. We have online training rooms dotted around the country.
MR: With each release we release notes, which no-one reads, obviously. But it’s not so much training that’s an issue but getting staff to do what you’ve told them to do. Training needs to be constant – it’s about enforcement.
How do you balance development costs with the true needs of your business?
JC: We are a small operation and haven’t got an endless IT budget. The challenge is to keep moving with everything, but to focus on one thing at a time; it’s very easy to get caught on to the next thing.
AF: It doesn’t matter how big you are, cost is always a problem. We were clear from the outset what we wanted to achieve because we had a budget for each part of the project, which we kept to at almost every stage.
It was about ensuring that any changes, whether bespoke or online, were tight and reviewed before a committee before they went ahead, so there were no arbitrary requests. There has to be a sound business reason for developing something.
And the software used?
AF: We used Prince 2 [a method-based project management programme] and a couple of developers.
But how can you focus on one thing while ensuring you don’t over-spend at the same time as keeping up with technological advances?
MR: You need to be very careful. Each situation will be different because somebody might bring along a change, which you realise you can’t wait until release for because by then it’s too late and you’re too far in.
AF: We’ve got a term we call ‘feature creep’, where if you’re not careful, particularly with your website, there are always news things coming out, which are more often than not a bit of feature rather than an architectural driver for change. You should try to avoid these until either you have had your schedule review or your project’s finished.
Such as?
MR: Apps.
JC: We don’t have an iPhone app. We will have one, but we don’t want to go down the white label route either. We’re not going to copy some of our major competitors. We need a site that’s stable and mobile-friendly, and one that’s going to be generating leads for us in terms of tenants and landlords.
Once we’re in a situation where it’s income-generating, then we’ll be looking at how to add an app on. We are, though, looking at the barcode generator [QR codes], and that to us far more innovative and lower cost.
How do you balance traditional agency with technological advances?
MM: Technology’s fantastic and can really aid in what we’re doing as it does speed things up, but it can only take us so far. We’ve bought back whiteboards to put on new instructions.
Why would you use a white board alongside your comprehensive IT system?
SL: Why would you replace that board with a screen fed by Reapit when the board costs £100 and a decent screen costs you £2,000? Sense says that if you put a white board up, there’s an incentive for staff to get up and write their sale up on the board. There’s a place for technology and a place where it shouldn’t be.
RC: We sit there and watch managers all doing their emails and the phones start ringing and they shout at their secretary to answer it and deal with it because they haven’t got the time to talk to that person. Well, that’s your customer, but now you’re doing the admin and telling your secretary to look after customers. It’s so backward.
MM: I think it’s important not to forget that there’s still a huge human element involved in selling and letting a property, so it’s important not to get carried away. It’s interesting to note the 50% drop-out rate on iSold. Clearly, people are craving the ability to speak to someone over the phone, too. It just shows that the human element has not been removed from our business at all.
MR: But at 11pm you want to be able to book an appointment and know the next day someone’s going to call you.
MM: We have call centres open until 8pm on the evening. There’s only so much we can do; it’s about keeping that balance.
MR: You can use technology for your gain. We use it for feedback. When a property becomes sold or let, we email the individuals involved and ask for their feedback, which is vital because if it comes back and is below a certain statistic, it goes straight to the relevant director, who will address that. It’s really important because it can identify trends.
Due diligence
What advice would you give peers about the due diligence process required to ensure a sucessful switch to a new software provider?
SL: You should go out and see them and see some of their customers with their products in operation. You may have to take a flyer on it if it’s new product, and then you’ve got to understand the development team and their capabilities. Are the developers capable of delivering what you think they should be?
PG: But then a couple of weeks ago our helpline suddenly went mental one morning, because there was a problem with Rightmove feeds. The point is, even a huge supplier can make mistakes.
TF: You become wiser and learn from experience. When we went to PropertyPro, we first attempted to link all our offices, but soon realised it was taking two days to replicate our data so branches could market each other’s properties.
It was only then that we realised we needed a web-based solution. You get wiser in terms of how you use your system and what you need for it.
JC: I’ve learnt to talk to providers as much as possible, and to ask more questions of each. I wouldn’t say we made mistakes, but there are definitely areas where I would have asked more questions.
Merging section 21s is a case in point. An overhead projector shows it can be done, but what you don’t realise until later is that the system will only do an individual one for every tenant in the house and it’s a 10-bed house in multiple occupancy, which isn’t ideal, as you’ve trebled your costs because you’ve got to send 10 letters instead of one.
PG: But when you buy a system it’s only one moment in time. A week later what you need might be completely different, so it’s actually about evaluating that there’s a road map and there is a development process and there are releases along the way.
For example, Microsoft isn’t supporting sites written in Visual Basic – a programming code – at the end of the year, which is massive thing. It has cost us £800,000 this year.
SL: As soon as you decide on a bespoke system, it has an ongoing cost; it’s not a one-time investment. When I started with the company it had nothing, so for the first four or five years, I built what I thought were quite good systems in VB.
In subsequent years, a lot has been replaced, but the core is still there today, and I’ve spent two years so far working to extract it. It will probably take me another two years to repeat the cycle, because systems become so embedded and integrated.
It’s a painful and very costly process. Certainly, extraction costs will be equal to our development costs by the end of it.
