Unprecedented CTR Study from SEO Clarity

We asked the folks at SEO Clarity to join us to discuss the extensive CTR study they recently concluded. To say they shared some surprising and eye-opening results would be an understatement. We suspect you’ll be equally surprised at some of the numbers.

Mark Traphagen and Mitul Gandhi shared with us how they managed to conduct their study, addressing the most massive sample of any CTR study we’ve ever heard of – 750 billion impressions, 30 billion clicks across 17 billion unique keywords… a very respectable sample size. You’ll want to take a look at their findings – there are some surprises there.

Check out the video to hear the nitty gritty (there’s also a transcript below).
You’ll also find plenty of valuable info on their site, at https://seoclarity.net – and be sure to check out their studies at https://www.seoclarity.net/client-case-studies. You’ll also find some valuable free tools at https://www.seoclarity.net/resources/free-seo-tools. The CTR study we’re talking about today can be seen here: https://www.seoclarity.net/mobile-desktop-ctr-study-11302/

Transcript of DeepSEOCon’s Webinar on SEO Clarity’s CTR Study

00:00 Steve Hello, everyone, and welcome to the Deep SEO Conference Webinar Series. I’m Steve Gerencser. And my partner over there is Doc Sheldon. You know both of us. Today we are presenting the seoClarity click-through rate study that was done by Mitul Gandhi and Mark Traphagen over at SeoClarity. And to say the least, some of the results they found in their study were dramatic, and we’ll kind of let them start off and we’ll ask them some questions along the way and see what they’ve learned. Mitul, go ahead and take off.

00:41 Mitul Sure. Thanks, Steve. Thanks, Doc. I’m really glad to be here. I think for most of the audience, they may have already seen the study. If they have not, it’s all over. We’ve published it on Twitter. You should be able to find it pretty easily on our website, too. What makes this study different from any other study before is just the breadth and scale of data that we analyze. Most of us in the SEO world have seen, over the years, many different CTR studies all the way back from the AOL one that was based on about a few dozen million rows of data. And over the years, people have used different data sources, especially Search Console data, and so on.

01:22 This is the first study in our knowledge that looks at extreme data and understanding click through rates from the rest of the raw data that is available, which is ClickStream; actual people doing searches on Google. But that’s not just it. That’s not just the source of data. It’s the breadth and depth of data. We looked at over 750 billion impressions that’s Billion — with a B — impressions; 30 billion clicks across 17 billion unique keywords. Just a number of factors greater than any of the most recent studies that have been done. And it wasn’t just the size of the data, I think what’s really key about this is how you get a very different perspective of what’s happening in search when you are able to zoom out. Nearly all studies, including the one we did – and we’ve been doing for a couple of years, nearly all of these studies – have been very, very focused. They’ve been much smaller. That means that the ability for that sampling error – to shift our perspective – has been much greater. And this study is the first one that actually blows it away in terms of how large of a population sample we looked at. So that’s just my long introduction to the study itself

02:36 Mark I think the usefulness of the study, also to add one thing, is that not only did we look at far more data and far more actual data, again, from actual users doing real searches, but also segmented I think, far more useful ways than others had in the past. So most of the click-through rate estimates that you get, or studies that you get in the past, kind of generalize very broadly. We’ve dug down into a lot of different segments that we can get into over the course of the show here that showed some interesting differences depending on the vertical that you’re in, where you are geographically, mobile versus desktop, all kinds of things like that.

03:20 Doc It’s a massive effort. And I was first blown away by the numbers. 750 billion impressions! So the first question that comes to mind, from my standpoint, was how in the world did you harvest that?

03:36 Mitul So this data has been aggregated over the last two years. So we have data going back to roughly the start of 2019. And the beauty of our clarity grid infrastructure is that it can aggregate all of this data as it comes in and collect i, pivot it, be able to analyze it, query it, all of that. And it was a massive effort. This was three-plus months in the making with our data science team, to crunch all this data. And it is a good way to flex our data science muscle too

04:11 Mark SeoClarity is an enterprise platform, almost all of our clients are enterprise-level clients, some of the biggest brands in the world. So we have to have that kind of capacity, that kind of ability to crunch that level of data on a massive scale.

04:25 Steve So more than just a Google Data Sheet.

04:33 Mitul I love my Google datasheets too.

04:35 Steve So 17 billion keywords over two years is a staggering number. I mean, that’s hard to wrap your brain around. And I saw in the study, you were able to break this down into different categories, different niches, verticals, however you want to talk about those. Was there one niche or vertical that stood out to you as just never would have expected that?

05:08 Mitul Yeah, I would say there were a lot of interesting insights for a lot of the niches that we look at. We are particularly fond of e-commerce and travel because that’s where a lot of our clients are. And we, at the high level, what was stunning for us, was just the precipitous drop in CTRs across the board. And even if we looked at the last study that we did or even the recent studies that others have done with different data sources, the click-through rates’ declines were across the board, on desktop, and mobile, and in nearly every industry. So it goes if we look at apparel, fashion, e-commerce travel, we’ve known for years that travel has seen rapidly declining click-through rates, because of Google flights and Google hotels, and all of these very specific monetization assets by Google to enter that market.

06:03 But it was really interesting to see that it’s not just travel that is suffering. Real estate has a very similar problem where Google Local is eating a lot of the real estate lunch in some cases. But also other e-commerce categories, like beauty and fashion, and even finance, and business and industrial. There are little tidbits in every one of them, depending on which industry you are focused on.

06:30 Steve So looking at this, just to give some perspective for some people who haven’t read the study yet. I seem to recall most of the number one spot click-through rates were sub 10%.

06:42 Mitul That is exactly right. I think the highest we found was in industry… if I’m recalling correctly. In one particular industry, it may have gone up to nine and a half per cent. But I think it was finance, and which would make sense because for most finance keywords, unless it’s a stock quote, or if it’s a company information where Google can present a quick answer, most of them still are very pure results. And with just less pay per click and less other SERP features than most other e-commerce related industries.

07:15 Mark And then overall, something that many, many people have been commenting on the study is just when you look at the aggregate numbers across everything, the average of everything, how much lower than previous estimates the CTR is. For desktop, it’s like a little over 8% for position one. And for mobile, little under 7%. We’ve had people tell us that they’ve been using models or tools that they use models that are still based on up to 40% on position one. And it’s obvious to us now that that’s way, way out of whack.

07:50 Doc Yeah, I think that was the thing that struck both of us the most surprising; the number one slot having such a low CTR almost universally. Geo or device or niche notwithstanding, if you got anywhere close to 10%, you were at the top of the heap. That blew me away.

08:13 Mitul And this is a really interesting thing to understand about the data. Most studies because they’re based on Search Console data, and they’re based on clients Search Console data, which includes our own CTR study that we did prior to this one. Prior to this one, when we looked at CTR, we were always looking at large enterprise clients GSC data and trying to extrapolate from there.

08:41 What that meant was there is a natural bias, because these are large enterprise brands, they have a large brand percentage of traffic, 30, 40, 50% of their traffic could be brand related, which is hugely skewed from the reality of the internet. On the web, this brand searches, if you look at overall searches of everything that happened, they are a minuscule part of the total number of searches that happen. That’s why this was so interesting. And to your point, Doc, when you see the click-through rates decline, it’s more so that we think it’s a more accurate view of what the click-through rates really are when you look at everything in aggregate.

09:23 But the key here is — and this is important for the audience to take away — there is nothing that replaces calculating your own click-through rate curves. So we presenting this whole research study as a way for companies and for individuals and for SEOs to use as a benchmark to see an average, on average, in aggregate, what the click-through rates in each rank position are, globally. But then it is super important to run the click rate curves based on your own data, based on non-brand data, especially your non-brand keyword data and compare it to these benchmarks to really tell If you’re doing better than the benchmark or worse.

10:02 Mark Just something that we offer to people for free is if you search seoClarity CTR study on Google, you’ll find our landing page. And the landing page is a link where anybody, any business can go in and ask us to calculate their individual CTR for them. That’s absolutely free.

10:23 Doc That’s very nice. Because one of the first concerns that come to my mind is okay if I’m using some third-party tool that’s been consistently telling me, I’m hitting 23%, 26%, 27% CTR, and then I see your study, my inclination may be that, hey, I’m sitting on top of the world, I’m doing great. Let’s not take that for granted. Because these numbers are not at all… I don’t think… what anybody is expecting to see.

10:50 Mitul Yeah, I 100% agree. And I think one of the other data analysis pitfalls or mistakes that some people make is to look at CTR, in aggregate, even for their own data. It is really important to separate out your brand versus non-brand keyword intent. And if you can go even further than that, if you have multiple product lines, or multiple categories, services that you offer, to look at your click-through rate by that category of product or service. Because human behavior is different. And features that Google shows are different based on the type of things that we look for. Just in the previous video, we’re talking about real estate versus finance, and finance having really good high click rates comparatively amongst industries, but fashion and apparel not having that good. That’s because there is an underlying difference in the SERP features, and the big search competition and so on between these sets of keywords. Really important, if you’re a large company, and multi-product retailer, look at it as segmented as you can.

11:52 Steve I have a few clients and some, especially in the real estate industry, at various sizes and levels, from one that’s mostly East Coast, up and down the East Coast, versus some of the small local guys. And almost all of them have abandoned Google entirely. They don’t even bother with it anymore. Because their customers don’t come from Google. They come from Zillow, they come from realtor.com, they come from the massive industry sites. And I’m wondering if part of that overall drop in click-through rate that we’re seeing is a combination of those issues where people looking for homes are going to Google to go to Zillow versus individual company websites… Especially when you look at the wasteland that the first page is on Google. If you’re searching for a home, you’re not going to get a local realtor. Nine times out of 10, you’re going to get one of these big data houses, you’re not going to get somebody who can actually help you buy or sell a house. And it sort of feels like, in a lot of industries, that Google has gone so far… one direction… that they’ve ruined what they were originally supposed to be; a place for people to come and find things.

13:20 Mitul Yeah, it’s an interesting observation. I’ll cover it in two parts. Because I think this is important for everyone. We see this a lot in many different industries. Since we sit on top of so much data, we look at the industry slightly thinking differently. And what you’re describing, as happening in real estate, is actually very similar to what’s happened in travel before. A lot of the smaller travel companies have found it harder and harder to compete as larger companies have gotten smarter and better at addressing the needs and challenges and questions that people ask.

13:59 At the same time, we’re all seeing industries — and I’ll take a very obtuse example, lumber. You think that the Home Depots of the world and the Lowes of the world and these large aggregators of a lot of this stuff would just dominate the lumber and local carpet and those kinds of home services. And yet in those industries, that doesn’t seem to have happened yet. And it’s interesting for us to watch because we see that very clearly in your example of real estate and travel that is happening, there are niches that are still not quite to the same extent and local competitors have figured out a way to compete very effectively against larger, more wealthy competitors.

14:45 On the click-through rate side of things, since our data looked at ClickStream data, it included clicks for anybody that showed up in the top results and at a localized level, because ClickStream is inherently local to a specific location. All search is local to a specific location, right, it’s just we aggregate it up. So in that case, I’d say, it’d be interesting to see how many local players we were able to find that people click through on versus one of the larger companies because we do see where the search happened, and where did they click through to. So that may be an interesting follow-up. How much of those clicks are going to local competitors versus just Google Local, which we can see all the time and large aggregators?

15:33 Steve I would be interested to know because… it’s so hard for a lot of smaller local companies to compete because they don’t have the IT departments, they don’t have the SEO departments, they don’t have big budgets, they have to rely on being local as their savior. For me, a prime example is… the nearest Lowes to me is 44 miles away – well, the nearest McDonald’s is 22 miles away. So I mean, I’m an exception in that we are so rural where we are. And Google simply doesn’t know how to handle us. Because when I do a search, even if I specify a city, the nearest big town is Jackson, but it tells us Jackson, Mississippi, not Tennessee. I say Lexington, it gives me Kentucky, not Tennessee. I say Savannah, it gives me Georgia, not Tennessee. And so, for me, even though we’re a small segment of the population, local search is almost useless. We have to be so specific in what we’re doing, it’s almost easier just to drive there and go look.

16:50 Mitul Yeah. Being in Chicago, it’s hard for us to see because it’s so honed in. To your point. I never thought that the algorithm was so honed into what is the most number of people searching for. The intent is driven by what a majority of people searching for, which is how Google suggests works, which is how most of everything works; statistics and numbers determining what surfaces to the top. So Savannah as soon as you said it, my first inclination was also Georgia.

17:18 Steve And I live in the middle of all three of these cities, whichever direction I go, I go through one of those to get anywhere. And I specifically either have to type in a zipcode or Tennessee, otherwise, it simply gets it wrong, even though I’m on a local DSL searching from home, and they know my home address.

17:39 Mitul Yes. And they know your IP – they can pinpoint you. Right?

17:42 Steve And I don’t know how that applies to some of this. But I like the idea of trying to break the data down a little more, specifically local versus more big boxed city type. Because that would be an interesting piece of information to have as well. I know we all have some SEO clients that are at the very small end. And it’s so challenging, but now with Google (what did they call it now?) Business places…

18:17 Doc Business profile.

18:19 Steve Business profile. They changed the name again. I would also be curious to how much of that is pulling click through away from the main search results?

18:29 Mitul Mm-hmm. We lump all of those right now into the Google listings. When we think about the local three-pack and links and clicks going to the local three-pack, we speak about Google local listings. And they may or may not be business profiles that somebody has owned, but it’s powered by Google Maps, right? So it’s anything that Google Maps knows from any of its data aggregation, that that location exists. And I can tell you that that is a huge part of where the clicks go to for those industries.

19:00 When Google has honed in and determined that something has a super hyperlocal intent, that is the first thing they see that is the biggest thing searchers see, and that is where the clicks also naturally gravitate to. So Google seems to have figured out this machine where it’s working well for them, where the clicks lead the way and somebody sitting back in Google’s headquarters is looking at those numbers and saying, “Yep, when we put Google over there, the majority of people click through. So that’s a good thing. Most of the people find it and that’s probably what’s driving that to the detriment of everybody who has a website, trying also to win that same click.

19:40 Steve This reminds me of Terry Van Horn saying Google needs more money so they turn the dial. And they can do that because they own it. So again, I read through the study over the weekend, and we saw the absolutely abysmal click through rates. We’re looking at all of page one only accounting for 22 to 25%.

20:11 Mitul Yeah.

20:13 Steve I mean, that’s the whole page one.

20:16 Mitul Yeah, there is a lot more on Google pages than the first AOL study came out, right? The 10 blue links were the AOL study, with the AOL clicks. But with everything that’s going on, I think the large, broad data perspective also tells us that there are searches that go to a lot of places. So clicks that go to Google Local, clicks that go to Google Images, people who do a search and then do a search again, those are all counted outside of the 22% that actually people click through. Now. 22 to 25%, is what we estimated are actually the clicks across all of page one, on organic. By industry, by keyword by, a variety of different factors, it does differ.

21:02 Averages should be taken as just that. It’s average. There’s always something higher, there’s always something lower. But in aggregate, we do find it interesting that about 20 to 25% of these clicks happen on page one, and people are searching, and people have been trained to search. So as we look at the evolution of the SERPs, more and more people are used to searching deeper and deeper, compared to many years ago, or a few years ago, when you would find a lot more people searching for broad things and typing very, very specific things because they didn’t trust Google would understand whatever they typed in broad. So I think it all culminates into a whole broad range of things, which tells us, that’s not as much of a big worry, unless we start seeing that drop even more. It’s not as much of a big worry for me, since this is the first time that we’re getting a snapshot of what it looks like with such a large data set. And so it will even be wrong to try and compare it with any previous studies. Because we could be comparing apples to oranges. Just the underlying data set is so different.

22:09 So we’ll be repeating the study in about a few months, six months, and take a look at it again, and see if that stays at that level, which would mean that’s just how human behavior is on page one or if it’s actually declined, which would indicate more of this is getting sucked somewhere else.

22:26 Mark Addressing that little comment about people going deeper now, we actually saw physical evidence of that, in this study. One of the very surprising little results was that we went down to not just one page, top 10 results, but we went all the way down to 20. And we saw that in aggregate, when you get down into the bottom of what we traditionally would call page 2 – 17, 18, 19, 20. There’s a little rise that comes back up again – not huge, but a little rise. And it actually comes up slightly higher than the bottom positions of page one.  Nobody was expecting to see that. And that’s pretty amazing that there are people that have results at the bottom of the second page, traditional second page, that are getting as good CTR as people that are like eight, nine or 10 on page one. And evidence again, that people are maybe trusting the results, even though they’re not clicking on the first results, they’re trusting that Google has something there. Also the mobile effect… we call it the thumb roll. Naturally on a small device, you kind of flip through faster. So we’re actually seeing some evidence of that.

23:38 Doc Yeah, that was surprising.

23:42 Steve So, you’ve got two years worth of data with all of this. Did you do any tracking with that over the course of the two years to kind of get an idea if that was just a continual steady drop? Or if there was just a…?

23:57 Mitul Yeah, we did. We looked at seasonality as part of this. And I think this is another good thing to look at and think about. And we find that CTR (click-through rates) are not the same across the course of the years. So we took a year’s worth of data. And we took daily click-through rates for every day in that period of time. And we actually published this as part of the study to show the click-through rates actually change as people’s behavior through the seasons change and through events and occasions and holidays and so on. What was most surprising in the seasonality CTR was how May and December actually had the lowest click-through rates of any other times of the year. And that was super surprising for us too. We would have expected in December for it to be higher, but again, past data influencing our assumptions on this, past analysis and so on. Given the ClickStream nature of this data and then the wide range of this nature, what we find was during December — at least we can explain December — a lot more searches happen, just the volume of searches just goes up dramatically, and there’s a lot more shopping and browsing activity that goes along with it that is not accompanied with a click.

25:14 So imagine somebody looking to buy a particular TV and it’s a $399 TV and they want to find it for $349, the Black Friday deal. They are just hunting and not clicking because a lot of the data is now visible on the page, the prices of these products, because of schema, is right on the page. Whether or not it’s in stock is right on the page. So some of those things may also be influencing people not clicking till they’re absolutely sure that’s where they want to go. So it is super fascinating for us. We are still trying to puzzle out the May factor. I haven’t quite figured out if it is summer vacation or people looking for more informational queries, home projects, fixing the house, keep kids busy with activities… not entirely sure.

26:00 Steve For just the two niches I’m most familiar with, which would be jewelry and real estate, May is a terrible month anyway. It’s just starting to get nice out. People are spending more time outside. May is a horrible time to be looking for a house because at the end of the school year, you don’t want to be moving while the kids are getting out of school. Same thing with jewelry, once you get into May all the weddings have already happened. And you start to taper down throughout the summer. So the jewelry industry starts to taper down in that time period. The rest of it, I have no idea, because I have not embedded in those markets very well. But May doesn’t really surprise me too much. December surprises me a lot. But maybe it’s a side effect of people just going to Amazon for shopping?

26:55 Mark Or yeah, well, we do see the bigger impressions. And I think that goes back to Mitul’s point that people are window shopping on Google now because you can. I think you you can say enough with schema and the additional data that shows in a search result now – even in our traditional organic results. You can window shop in Google and not click through. Like I can say later, oh, I remember, Macy’s had the lowest price on this, so later on, I’ll go there, you know, and check it out. But all I went to Google for was to browse. I got the information I needed and didn’t need to click.

27:29 Doc It goes along with Eric Schmidt’s old statement that “we want to become an answer engine”. They’re getting closer and closer to that. And I know, personally, when I’m looking for prices on something or perhaps reviews for something, a lot of times I’ll find them in the SERPs. I don’t need to click anything. And that’s becoming more and more prevalent. So that’s going to drive your CTR down too.

28:00 Steve I know we’re getting close to the 30-minute mark. Is there anything else out of the study you guys wanted to share real quick, or something else you want to add in?

28:09 Mitul I think the one thing that we didn’t touch on yet, but could be interesting for global clients or companies is how CTR differs by country, and especially how low CTRs are in the US, compared to the rest of the world. In fact, in 5 different countries, US, UK, Canada, Japan and India, the US has, by far, the lowest click-through rate of any one of those countries. And that could be attributed to a lot of the aggressive Pay Per Click advertisers here in the US, a lot more SERP features and so on prominent in the English language. But as we look at other languages like Japan, if you look at India, where there’s a booming e-commerce market, but yet, India and Japan click rates are actually higher; the top two or three curves across all the countries we looked at, where almost 15%, 16% click-through rate in position one still happen in India and Japan. But all the other countries, UK, Canada and the US are between the 9 to 12% range. So that was super fascinating. And it also goes back to the highlight. Companies need to be looking at their own CTR curves. Use this as a benchmark but look at it in as many segmented ways as possible. Brand, non-brand, by product, by country, if they’re a global company. There may be different opportunities in each one. That’s the chart.

29:36 Doc And by device.

29:38 Mitul Yeah, every which way that you can pivot it, you want to take a look at it. Companies and SEOS are doing the forecasting for next year, right? Like most companies in SEOs are doing the forecasting of where to invest for next year’s growth that they’re responsible for driving. Knowing your own CTR right now is a fantastic place to start. If you can’t do this, contact us, and we’ll help you out for free to calculate your own CTR. But this is the best one for you to use for your own forecasting. Don’t use 40% if that’s not your own CTR, just because somebody else says it’s 40%.

30:18 Steve And I think that’s going to have a wild effect on the predictions for next year. We’re starting to see more of that in the groups, in the forums, “how do I do an SEO projection?” And the general answer is, “it depends.” Well, it always, that’s always the answer for everything. But having something like this to at least point to a client, and say, overall, our Individual results may be a little bit varied, but overall, in this niche, this is what they’re seeing, after billions of clicks.

30:59 Mitul Exactly right, this would be conservative. It would be conservative to the middle of the aggressive path versus something that is based on a lot smaller data set, and is going to be super aggressive. With any kind of forecast, you’re better off being a little bit more conservative or saying, “we’re going to double next year”, and then figuring out it was really only a myth.

31:23 Mark I wouldn’t be a good VP of Product Marketing if I didn’t mention that this data from this study is not only available publicly, but it’s being integrated into our platform. So the seoClarity clients will have that advantage of being able to get that more accurate forecasting, more accurate everything that’s dependent on CTR across our platform fixed into their individual niches.

31:46 Steve Fantastic.

31:47 Doc Well, I think probably the most important thing that you’ve made in this study is the fact that this is a snapshot and in generalities, which you’ve done an excellent job of breaking down much more than any other study has done in the past. But it still doesn’t replace your CTR, you know, for your site because it can vary dramatically, by geo, by device, by seasonality, by country, you know, whatever. And I think that in our industry, we tend to fall into the trap of following intuition, because this is what I’m already seeing. Someone who I respect tremendously, says he’s seeing 28%. So that’s probably a good thumbnail. We admit that it may vary a little bit. I certainly did not expect to see the kinds of numbers that this study is indicating. And 750 billion impressions, I’m sorry, you can’t throw rocks at that – that’s a good dataset, okay?

32:53 Steve And thinking about it, looking back at some of the Pay Per Click stuff that we do, the click-through rates, making more sense with what we’re seeing with impression share, and click-through rate and PPC accounts, where your impression shares are holding solid here. Everything’s holding solid, but the actual clicks, just continue to drop, and get more expensive at the same time, which…

33:16 Doc …which kind of blows your mind.

33:25 Steve Well, this has been fantastic. It’s been a wonderful talk. And I appreciate it. I want to give you guys a minute or two if you want to pitch something for the company or pitch your next project. Let us know what you’ve got going on so that we can let everybody else know what you’ve got going on.

33:42 Mitul That’s all. I’m out.

33:44 Mark Oh, so many things going on. And so many of them I wish I could tell you about but they’re kind of under the boiling pot lid right now. We’re very excited about some things that are coming out soon. But as Mitul said, we’re going to continue to run this study, it’s not over and done. We’re gonna continue. We’ve got some great suggestions from users and readers of the study on things that we should dig deeper into, we’re going to be doing that. But we do have some great free tools that take advantage of the kind of data that seoClarity can have. You can find those on our site under the resources. We’ve got a browser plugin called Spark that gets you access to all of our data for any site on the web to an obviously somewhat limited set of that data, but still useful enough to anybody. I’ll mention our schema.dev site, which is again, a totally free tool, open to anybody. Probably one of the best tools for implementing schema on a site out there – schema.dev. So there are a couple of things that we offer out there. To find the study, the easiest way, this is one place where Google does work, just Google seoClarity CTR study, you’ll find it. And Mitul and I are on Twitter, you can contact us there. He’s M.Gandhi on Twitter and my name. And we’d love to chat with anybody about this

35:05 Steve Outstanding. Thank you again, both of you for taking the time out of your day. And we look forward to seeing the continued updates of this study.

35:13 Mitul Yeah, thank you. Appreciate it.

35:16 Mark Thank you very much.

35:17 Doc Tip of the hat, because that is an impressive study. And I can appreciate the fact that this did not come together over the weekend. This took some very concentrated effort – not just harvesting the data – but I hope that your engineers are getting your appreciation, because that’s a fine piece of work.

35:39 Mitul Thank you. Yes. This was a labor of love, but yes.

35:5 Steve Thank you.

Recent Webinars