Line Extensions and Brand Implosions

With the fall of the Tupperware titan, it can be hard to see where innovation ends and getting lazy with your position begins. Thankfully, Mark and Lorraine are here to weed through the mess of brand extensions — the good and the bad. Listen along as they discuss the rise of Lume deodorant and their battle with Dove, beverage companies expanding into the alcohol market, and how La-Z-Boy got its lazy back.

Spend 35ish minutes with Mark and Lorraine as they talk all things marketing, advertising, and of course … positioning!

Transcript

Mark Vandegrift
Welcome to the latest episode of the Brand Shorthand Podcast. I'm your host, Mark Vandegrift, and with me today is the A-1 of B-2-C, Lorraine Kessler. I wonder how many people will get that one, Lorraine.

Lorraine Kessler
I'm not sure I get it. 

Mark Vandegrift
The A-1 of B-2-C.

Lorraine Kessler
Business to consumer.

Mark Vandegrift
Yes, but it's A-1-B-2-C.

Lorraine Kessler
Okay. I got you. I also love B-2-B, and branding pertains to B-2-B as well, which we'll talk about today.

Mark Vandegrift
Yes, very much. Good. Well, speaking of brands here, let's get going right away because we are the Brain Shorthand Podcast. Did you hear the news about Tupperware? After eight decades, they filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy yesterday.

Lorraine Kessler
Yeah, it's always sad when you have a legacy brand like that. Now look, they've done everything right from a positioning handbook, right? They created a category. They are the first name that still comes to mind. I don't care if you buy Rubbermaid in the grocery store or Glad, you're gonna call it Tupperware. I put it on my list for my husband, pick up some Tupperware. He never gets the brand, right? They became the generic and they really did everything that you could. They used influencers. What was their way to market? They did home meetings, and the influencers were homemakers in the day. That's what they would call them. Better than housewives, but homemakers. And homemakers would suggest to other homemakers, and this is what you need. So what went wrong?

Mark Vandegrift
Innovation.

Lorraine Kessler
Innovation. Well, and I would say... they had a couple of problems. Innovation. They had every type of thing, but what they didn't have- what they didn't track was the changes in behavior, distribution. I mean, let's take a look at home meetings. Who wants to hold with time-taxed families, both spouses working? Who wants to make sure their house is tidied and clean and hold a home meeting? That's not me. It just isn't the way- the distribution was wrong. And they didn't migrate to the distribution that people find more convenient, which is in-store, in your grocery store when you're shopping, or online. So they didn't do those things quickly. And then I think they had some other problems. I think that people's behavior or their attitudes changed. the attitude, if Tupperware's definition of quality was, I mean, it still is the bomb, right? Super quality, it's not something you want to throw out. You don't want to dispose it. In fact, I recently went to a party and a woman gave me something, some leftovers in a Tupperware. And she said, please return this because it's real Tupperware. 

Mark Vandegrift
And it was probably 30 years old.

Lorraine Kessler
Well, here's the thing. People's definition of quality changed. They didn't- we don't want the highest quality, not, don't throw it out. We want disposable convenience at an affordable price. And I think Tupperware missed that really big. I think that was a huge miss for them. Then you have brands who come in and we're going to talk about this, who understand and have as part of their play to win playbook, distribution as a strength, distribution in grocery, distribution in mass market. Glad and Rubbermaid, Rubbermaid adapted, who now are in the grocery aisle. And so you think about making dinner for everybody. I'm going to have leftovers. I'll pick up some disposables because I'm here. So I think that they missed the changing times, what's going on in people's lives. Now, this reminds me of years ago, we had a furniture maker who sold principally to casinos and resorts. And if anybody's seen the movie Casino, they know how that whole business changed dramatically. And the business became a fashion business and it became a quick change business in terms of the style of the casino. So most casino operators like Steve Nguyen and what have you today want to change the interior every two years. And the second thing they want is they want a chair that a player would sit on. And we were even told this in research. was unbelievable that they would want that player to stay in that chair as long as possible. Because if they're in that chair, they're using money embedded, and even to the point where they pee in the chair. I kid you not. I kid you not. So, here we had a company who'd been selling to the casinos since the 50s and 60s when it first became the idea of Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel. And their definition of quality was a chair that lasted forever. A phone lasted forever. Well, you can't define quality- marketers cannot define quality based on what they think quality is. They have to define it based on the customer and the customer's definition of quality in that resort and casino business is I'll throw it out. I want the most comfortable foam, not the most long-lasting foam. And I feel like Tupperware made the same mistake. They were defining quality based on their heritage rather than on where the market had moved.

Mark Vandegrift
Well, let's change brands here. You sent me an article about Dove going head to head against Lume and I see Lume on everything. Now, granted, let's just say the Hallmark channel's on a lot, but I've seen it on other shows. Lume is doing a bang up job for being a... I don't know, she's a doctor, a gynecologist, I believe, that invented the product and started doing her own commercials. She just went right at it and said, "Women, you need this". And it is extending where it's applied, let's put it that way. So I've been impressed by Lume's advertising. As I said, I've seen it everywhere, but I won't ever be a Lume customer unless there's some kind of male product they come out with.

Lorraine Kessler
Lume for men. Well, first of all, we have to set the groundwork that in all marketing today, particularly in America, where we are such a consumer-driven capitalistic society, we're very sophisticated today. It's very hard to find any category that if it's going to catch on, doesn't become crowded with some very good competitors. It's kind of like the NFL, right? There's lots of good teams and lots of good coaches and players out there. So just so everybody's clear, Lume is a deodorant for not only the pits, but privates and beyond. right? And the lady you mentioned, I don't remember her name, but I think she is an OB-GYN. She does a pretty graphic job of laying that out. Her earliest commercials were a little shocking. But kudos to her. She invented the category. So she's first in the category. She has a very clear message about why you might need this product. That's fairly compelling. And she's using advertising with sufficient voice to gain top of mind awareness. And so all of that's really good. Kudos, kudos, kudos. Her goal should be to become the generic for the category, right? And then, kind of like Kleenex or Xerox, that kind of thing. But here's where the rub might be. Her distribution is limited as I understand it. There's a few mass market retailers who are beginning to show it. Target, think Walmart, maybe Meijer. But her migration into the distribution channel is new. It's mainly an online brand. So right away you have a limitation when you consider the competition who's jumped on this, right? And the competitor who jumped on this is Dove. I gotta say, Dove has just done an amazing job of stretching even my idea of what a category means. And I'll go back to April Dunford, who's written a great book on positioning. I think it's something "Absolutely Awesome" (Obviously Awesome) or something like that. I'm sorry, April, if I got the name wrong. But she talks about, have to make sure you define the category correctly. Now, our Lume people have, but Dove, you know, is a pure theoretical positionist, you know, theory. If you're going to be super rigid and orthodox, you might say, well, Dove is a beauty bar. And I would argue that because I think Dove has done an amazing job stretching the category to be body hygiene, anything body hygiene, even for men and women. And I didn't think the male thing was going to work at all, except in one of the rules of law- line extension is you can line extend if there's weak competition or weak advertising. There was in the male category and Dove has done a great job. And I think they've stretched the category definition to body hygiene. And they've jumped into this with lots of money and lots of cache building on their brand. And what they have going for them is distribution. They are leveraging when we look at what A.G. Laffley preaches in playing to win. He was the CEO of P&G. Dove is a Unilever brand, by the way. But what he preached was, you you have to play to win. And one of the things you have to leverage is your distribution. You have to really understand where you can win. And that's where they can win. It's not just how you play. It's where you can win. So Dove, now, if you're going up against Dove and you're Lume, you got a couple of things that would concern me in terms of long term. I whatever they've done now has been probably beyond their expectations and success. But long-term is where I'm saying they may be winning the battle, but there's a big war coming and they might lose the war, right? First of all, the name to me is a really bad name. I don't know what it relates to. All I know is in Northern Michigan, it's a franchise of cannabis shops. So maybe I'll take care of my pits and other parts when I'm taking care of my high, I don't know. So I think that's a problem. And I think a problem is it's gonna be about a war chest. Who is the greater war chest? I mean, you have a Unilever brand and they dominate this category. You can go into Meyers or Target or CVS or Walgreens, think of just name it. And you're gonna see that Dove commands the shelf and they can use that. Plus they have something else. They have enormous trust and reliability. The Dove brand has just been around and we know that because not only are they doing well in all the products that they have in the categories, but their stock continues to be kind of a winner. They're a super- to me Dove is a mega brand like Swiffer, like Lysol. They've expanded the category. It still fits within what you expect from a Dove. Now Dove hand soap, that's a really stupid idea. Okay. I don't think that works. don't know why I- well, I'm sorry, hand soap, eh- it's just not as good as the hygiene part in terms of taking care of the body. And that's not as dumb as ideas as if they did "Dove Surface" or something like that. So they've stayed pretty knitted to the body and taking care of the body. Anyway, that's my thinking on that. You'll be interested to see what anybody else thinks.

Mark Vandegrift
Well, when we think of brand extensions in an adjacent, like almost identical adjacent would be oral hygiene. And we've always talked about Crest going from a toothpaste to owning oral hygiene. So we kind of have a pattern for that because they've gone into mouthwash, they've gone to whitening strips, they've gone to all sorts of things for oral hygiene, body hygiene. Now, from the standpoint of line extension, where do you think that ends? Is there something beyond body hygiene that you can even think of?

Lorraine Kessler
Yeah, well, again, I think if it's going to be extremely medical, I'm not sure that's their take, Dove's take, like something that's really, really medical. And that might be an area where Lume can move because she's an OB-GYN. And then she could kind of have created this category and put a spin on it that I think would be hard for Dove to match because they're more mass commodity. And as I said, I think anything Dove surface or Dove cleaners or anything like that would be. That would be a line extension too far.

Mark Vandegrift
Well, it'll be interesting to see where it lands because I've seen no slowdown of Lume advertising. It's actually almost to a saturation point, which because I'm not a customer and never will be, you kind of don't want to see ads, but I look at it through the lens of being a marketer and I see how they keep changing it. So they're keeping it fresh. She's not in many of the ads anymore. In fact, I don't recall seeing one maybe in about three or four months, but they've had testimonials of other people doing the ads and they have a focus on different things. Their product seems to have, I guess, heightened in terms of perception with their packaging, because the original packaging was not as beautiful. Now it's a little bit better. So I think they're making strides because you wouldn't be investing in it in that level of investment if they weren't doing something well and having success.

Lorraine Kessler
Sure, and the question is how long can they sustain the war they started? I mean, you're against a really international global war brand that has powerful distribution. And if I'm a store, am I going to put Lume on the shelf or Dove? If shelf space becomes a choice between, I'm going to put Dove. I'm going to give Dove because I know that they have the long game on their side. So she's just gonna have to keep- what I would say is this battle is not over. She's really launched the first blast and found a core, unintended marketplace, a whole new need at the right time. She's done everything right to this time. The question is, what's the sustainability of her keeping up the fight? Now there might be investors I don't know about behind the scenes and some other things that are gonna help that. I think they have to migrate from online and influencers to real distribution where people make choices at the shelf. What is it, 76% or something of decisions are made at the shelf. So I think we need to see that migration.

Mark Vandegrift
Good. Yeah, and just to help our listeners understand brand extension a little bit more, line extension, a good classic one is IBM and Xerox. You might remember the Goliath IBM trying to get into copiers, and that certainly didn't go well. And instead of Xerox learning the lesson, Xerox tried to get into the computer market, and neither one of those worked. And it's because that ability to stretch the category wasn't there. We don't think of computers like we do copiers. Those are distinct enough use value to us that I would never use a copier as a computer and vice versa. So I think those are distant enough that we would never see anybody come in and own computers, copiers, printers, all of that. Because even printers, who do you think of?

Lorraine Kessler
Who do I think of? Printers? HP? Yeah.

Mark Vandegrift
HP, right? Yeah. They didn't come- HP didn't come out as a printer, but they found they could move into that market and now they own the printer side of things. So you have, I guess, technology within the office, but different brands owning those. So it's interesting.

Lorraine Kessler
Yeah, I've had some time to rethink this because I think, again, this is a rule that in this example is used quite a bit about Trout and we've used it a lot. But I do think we need to rethink it a little bit. I think there's a couple of things at play why the Xerox migration from copier to personal computers didn't work. Right. One, they used the Xerox name. Duh. That was bad because we had sat- they attached they were the generic and we attached the name to copiers. And we attached equally, unlike Lume/Dove. Lume's new, still nascent. We know about it, but how many people really understand if I said, what's a Lume? How many people would be able to answer that? I don't know. Probably not many. But if you said, what's an IBM? Most people in the day would know computer. So I think we're looking at a piece of history that defined kind of a principle. And it worked, but I think things have changed. And why I say that is what is IBM today? They've moved way past hardware, way past computers, right? To computing technology. And you have to keep in mind in the time that Xerox and IBM were fighting this out, even computers, personal computers were new. People didn't really quite know what you could do with them. You know, it's like the Newton. It was outside our frame of use and knowledge. so we've, the market's sophisticated today, the consumers, the users are sophisticated. And IBM now is, if I were to say what they stand for, it's computing technology. And so that involves hardware and systems that help my business be more successful. So I think Xerox made a really bad mistake by first using their name to try and migrate at the wrong time when people's knowledge was very fixed. There's computers, there's copiers, and others between me. But I think the second thing is they gave up on personal computing because they've been stagnant ever since. I mean, there's only so many types of photocopy machines you can make. Scanners and laser, and I think that they saw a big share of that eaten by HP. And so they've been stagnant. They've had some troubles ever since then. So I think it goes back to something that Dick will talk about often is the hedgehog and the fox, right? You have to know when to defend your category. I'm the copier guy, and I'm going to send quills into any defender who tries to eat my space. But you also have to know when to be slippery like a fox and how to navigate innovation and where the market's moving, not where it is, where it's going to grow. And I think if I look at this, it's a little more nuanced. think it's a good example if you're talking to certain brands, but we have to be really careful that there's a new context today for both the more sophisticated consumer public and a more nuanced branding world that we're in.
 
Mark Vandegrift
There's another brand extension that was sent to me by our producer, Denver. And have you heard of the product White Claw? I assume you have.

Lorraine Kessler
Yes.

Mark Vandegrift
Okay. So, you know, I'm not a consumer of alcohol, but White Claw has branded itself to be a softer, easier-on-the-stomach alternative to beer while not being as strong as liquors. So guess what they went ahead and did?

Lorraine Kessler
What?

Mark Vandegrift
They introduce White Claw vodka.

Lorraine Kessler
That's fine.

Mark Vandegrift
So now you have to ask, when you ask for a White Claw, it turns into a question of which kind. And that's kind of the opposite effect that we want when we're positioning clients. So give your take on this particular one. Is it okay to move this way or should they be watching out what they're doing?

Lorraine Kessler
I don't call this a line extension at all because White Claw is hard seltzer, sparkling water, with alcohol and flavors. And the alcohol that they use and the flavors they use change. It's part of- I would say that their real category is the spirits category. Okay. So it's the flavored spirits category in a can, if you will, that you can buy conveniently at your C-store. And that's really what they do. So I'm going to be the contrarian that this is a line extension. So it's lower alcohol flavored drinks in the flavored spirits- that's the category, flavored spirits. I think the mistake they're making is comparing it. I think this is an expand the market kind of advertising ploy to kind of compare it to beer. So trying to get people who drink beer to drink this. I'm not sure that's really smart and that's going to be very effective. Plus I think it confuses what they're about. They're very clearly a flavored spirit. So they could have vodka, they could have tequila, they could have rum. Anything that mixes well and they can do it in berry and pineapple and peach. I think people understand it. It's kind of a bubbly kind of alcoholic thing. I don't feel like- I think it's an SKU expansion. Now, all of sudden I go, I have vodka, I might have tequila, I might have gin, whatever they're gonna do. And that just becomes a lot for someone to look for and find. So, but I don't think it's so much line extension as it is SKU extension or confusion. So I just would not have gone after beer as my target and they may have some research. I could be totally wet on that or not wet. I'm wet. I'm wet in a different way than you are.

Mark Vandegrift
Well, we talked about Liquid Death, you know, and the way they're going with their different flavors. I mean, they started out as water, but you can get like a like a ginger tea flavor and different things like that. So you're looking at it as it's kind of like light spirit drink. So it's flavored spirits, but on the light side. So you're not getting hammered just when you drink one of them.

Lorraine Kessler
Right, right. And that's the category. And there's other brands in that category too. I don't know them all. This is the one I know the most because it's the one my kids most prefer. So we have it in the refrigerator at the lake, but I don't prefer any of those.

Mark Vandegrift
Yeah. Well, let's go the other way with it. There's some soft drinks. There's even Dunkin'. Mountain Dew has "Hard Mountain Dew". Monster has "The Beast". Dunkin' has "Dunkin' Spiked". It seems like there's a lot of non-alcoholic drinks that are now adding liquor to their drinks and they're just popping up out of nowhere. I don't know, maybe Mountain Dew with their personality, Hard Mountain Dew fits. Maybe Monster Works because of their personality. Dunkin', I guess, you know, there's a lot of people that like to put a little somethin'-somethin' in their coffee in the morning. So what are your thoughts on this?

Lorraine Kessler
Well, first of all, I think that the iteration of the Dunkin' slogan, "America Runs Drunk on Dunkin'", is not really a good place to go. And I want to hear from, you know, MADD on this one, Mothers Against Drunk Driving. I mean, I think that is a serious infraction of the brand. But I'll trademark that slogan if they want to use it.

Mark Vandegrift
Ha. I love it.

Lorraine Kessler
But yeah, I just think these are bad and desperate moves and should be killed before they're allowed to go much further. For all of them, I think for all of them.

Mark Vandegrift
Well, with all of these, we actually have an example of a long-term brand finding its focus again, to a certain extent, and that's La-Z-Boy. And I think if you said La-Z-Boy to most people, the one word that comes to mind is...

Lorraine Kessler
Recliner.

Mark Vandegrift
Recliners. I was reading AdAge the other day and I saw another word for it and it was "decliners". They have an AI version of the recliner that when you sit in it, your phone automatically syncs, and if anyone texts you, it responds with a note that says, "I'm currently enjoying my La-Z-Boy moment and I'm declining to answer your texts". So they're calling it the decliner.

Lorraine Kessler
That's genius. That's genius. That is just genius. Having fun with an old stodgy brand known for its clunky looking recliner. I love their new campaign. I think it's just freaking genius. It's been a transition. It's been an evolution and a logical one. But their new theme, just to cut to the chase, is "Long Live the Lazy", which, I'll talk a little bit about this evolution, why I think it's so smart. Because La-Z-Boy has always understood- they're in Monroe, Michigan, by the way, when I worked in Toledo, we long wanted to work for them. My husband was a supplier to them. So a lot of the coded goods that were on the recliners came from Gencor at that time, which was part of General Tire. What happened around 2007, they realized they had a problem in that they were stuck in this clunky kind of really mid-call furniture and people didn't know that they had more than just that classic recliner chair. And they wanted to move- have people understand that they had more. They had couches, they had sofas, they had other furniture. And I think they took a step- again, this is about a brand looking to the forward. And I just said that Xerox kind of failed seeing the full forward of the future of computing technology and where- as people became aware, what they'd be able to understand. In this case, La-Z-Boy almost took 10 steps too far forward, and they hired a designer who at the time in 2007 was pretty well known in designer circles, not by the average consumer, named Todd Oldham. And his products, if you ever look at his designs, they've caught up today. They're mid-century. They're the 50s, you know, the stuff we have in our little room across from my office. But look, it was like 2020 before that really became mainstream. So he was a little too hip, a little too out there. And what happened is that campaign, the consumer became super confused because they're like, it's almost like Old Co, Canoe Co. What did you do with the La-Z-Boy I loved, and what's this new stuff you're trying to sell me? I don't get it. But the worst part was dealers weren't- the traffic went way down, sales went really down. So this is where distribution really matters. Because if you're not pulling through the product for your dealers in the furniture business, you're dead on arrival. In three years, they got rid of Todd and they brought in Brook Shields, which was a really good move. Again, they never lost sight of their positioning word. "We're about comfort". This is all about creative moves to express that idea. And it shows how important the right creative is to understand your market and really connect, build relevance with your consumer. So in 2010, they rebooted with Brooks Shields and they had this slogan, "Live Life Comfortably". Perfect. Really nice. Really nice. Did a great job. The dealers were ecstatic because she just sold stuff and I think they continued to sell and I think they continued to stay with her through 2023. So really good campaign, but it was a great staging to what I think is the most fun, most defining. I mean, this is really now like saying with confidence, we own who we are. They made "lazy" the ultimate deferential virtue. It's okay. We're giving you permission to be lazy, right?

Mark Vandegrift
And now we have the decliner.

Lorraine Kessler
Right, and now we have the decliner, and they're using PR to support this idea. You know, I already said, and it's worth repeating the slogan again, "Long Live the Lazy". And if you not seen the TV ads, they're brilliant. They're fun. So because they're fun, you want- they're memorable and you enjoy it because they're making a joke about themselves, but also about you. Like, yeah, when I go home, I really just want to be lazy. I've been doing a lot of stuff. And I think it's perfect for post-COVID. So lazy now is a virtue in right doses. And I think that's great. But also I happened to catch after studying this that like on the Today Show, they did a whole segment, you know, in a Today Show where they have a band play in the plaza in the morning. Well, instead of that, they had Hoda and they had, what's his face, the weather guy, Roker, and the other young lady, all in La-Z-Boy recliners and doing their bits. And I think Al Roker said, "Long Live the Lazy" like six times. So I think this theme is the stuff of legend, and I applaud La-Z-Boy for a wonderful campaign.

Mark Vandegrift
Yes, yep. And we like to see that because it reinforces our position, which is positioning and the fact that the mind can only hold so much. I've been reminded, I don't know how many times this week, that minds don't forget. And we were talking about old brands and people are like, "Oh,they're not doing that anymore?" So it's just- if people can understand that once you've made that impression in the mind and you own the idea that you can keep stretching it, you can keep being creative with it, but if you own it, why let it go? And I think that ties us back to Tupperware where we may have another generation that still calls it that. And yet who knows if they'll even be around. So I think that's a good place to stop for today. Do you have any final thoughts on this?

Lorraine Kessler
Yeah, I would like to say to those who are listening that the positioning principles, for example, line extension, provide a really strong reference point for you to begin thinking about is this a good idea or is this a bad idea, right? If you're challenged with something, you're Tupperware and Tupperware comes to you and says, "we're having trouble with our sales". Well, you are the leader in this category. What should the leader do? The leader should be leading the market, not behind it. So you have a very old distribution model and that's no longer going to work. It's not tenable. And you also have a definition of quality that maybe doesn't fit with the definition of quality of today's users or buyers. So how do we take that name and apply it as the leader in leading the market? And it's really hard. We've seen this so many times that leaders get caught stuck in the past, talking more about their past and their heritage than talking about than leading the market into the next terrain. So that's really important. And the other thing is that these tried and true principles are all theoretical. I wanna make that clear. That you have to kick against them. You have to look at the context. What's going on in the greater world? What's going on in the buyer's mentality, how their attitudes changed. And those attitudes then change behaviors, what they're buying and why. And you have to avoid rigidity because circumstances change. Markets are dynamic, so marketers have to be dynamic too. So what you want to do is you have to make these decisions on what to hold on to and what to lose. What to hold on to, what to lose. Lose meaning "let go". And I think that's really hard for some companies to do, but that's where it's lived. It's in this understanding and constant re-evaluation of hedgehog and fox strategy.

Mark Vandegrift
Yeah, and that only comes through experience. I mean, you have to experience enough of marketing and advertising strategy around these brands to even know which principles to pull in and then which ones that you can bounce against and or stretch and or violate against better wisdom if you think that there's a reason to go do that. We've told clients many times, "hey, that's just not a good idea". They go do it anyhow, it fails. And you know, the one thing that you can't say is "I told you so", but you kind of knew back a long time ago and they're probably in the back of their mind realizing, "yeah, they told me we shouldn't do this, but we had enough, you know, chutzpah that we were going to break the idea".

Lorraine Kessler
Well, this is why you can't, and this is for anybody who wants to hire a good agency who understands positioning. This is why you can't have AI do this. Right?

Mark Vandegrift
Yeah. Exactly.

Lorraine Kessler
You can't have AI plug in these principles and then somehow magically spit out what you're to do because it really takes intuitive understanding and human understanding of what's going on in the market, who your competitors are, what does their war chests look like? What can and will they respond to? What will they not respond to? So these questions lead to the right position decisions. It isn't just taking the principle and overlaying it on a client.

Mark Vandegrift
Good. Well, let's end it there. And for our audience, if you haven't liked, shared, subscribed, or told your friends about the Brand Shorthand, please do. We are getting near the end of our second season here, just another month or so, and our subscriber base is growing rapidly. We just hope that you'll be part of that. So thank you for joining us, and until next time, have an amazing day.

Lorraine Kessler
And enjoy your decliner.