Podcast: Cycle Volume Update & Conjecture On Where the Cycle Might Be Heading
In this episode, Mike has a conversation with Spivey Consulting's Business Intelligence Director Justin Kane (current 2L and data genius) about where this current admissions cycle (2021-2022) stands so far in terms of applicant volume, what that means, what we predict for the rest of the cycle, and some actionable admissions advice based on what we know so far. They also touch on why our numbers are slightly different from LSAC's (and why we believe ours capture a more accurate picture for current applicants), as well as how to interpret differences between applicant numbers and application numbers, plus a few other wonky topics throughout. We hope it's helpful!
Mike Spivey: Welcome to Status Check with Spivey, where we talk about life, law school, law school admissions, a little bit of everything. Today, I'm joined by my Business Intelligence Director, Justin Kane. And we talk about the data as it presents this cycle so far with the November LSAT now behind us and the score release. And we speculate about the different sort of angles that the cycle could go in. So that's a quick overview. It's wonky, it's nuanced, but it's not that long. Hopefully, if you enjoy it, you subscribe—we have more coming as we progress through the data in the cycle. And without further delay, let's hand it over to me and Justin.
It's Saturday, we're forgoing a little bit of college football. Are you okay with that, Justin?
Justin Kane: Oh, there was no chance I was going to watch football today. I have way too many finals to study for.
Mike: Okay. Justin's a 2L at a very prestigious law school. We won't say which one.
Justin: I feel like it’s going to be hard to find out.
Mike: Yeah, right. Well, just don't say where I live. So this cycle's interesting. I think it's interesting, but not in the least bit unpredictable from three months ago, but let's talk about a little bit why it's interesting, and I think a lot of that hinges on why the last cycle was so anomalistic.
Justin: Everything going forward forever is going to be boring compared to last year.
Mike: Maybe, I don't know. My life doesn't seem very boring these days. Let's just get everyone up to speed. Last year was the least boring admission cycle because it was the most inorganically distributed LSAT admission cycle. Incredibly likely due to the switch from the five section to the three section LSAT-Flex, although LSAC tells a different tale.
Justin: Yeah. We're not here to re-litigate that. It's just, if you're listening to this podcast, you probably know that last cycle saw tremendous increases in not just total number of applicants, but also in high scoring applicants, which were up a ridiculously disproportionate amount. We had over two years’ worth of 170 plus applicants come in in a single cycle. It was pretty wild. And if you look at some of the incoming LSAT and GPA medians for the incoming class of 2021, you can see that with +2s, +3s — well the +3s aren't necessarily common. But plenty of +2s in LSAT median accompanied with a GPA increase. And even more ridiculous after the 10 years prior are increases in class size while still managing to increase those GPA and LSAT medians. We'll talk a little bit later about the class sizes and what that means for this year. Like you said Mike, this year’s similar in some ways, different in other ways.
Mike: So last year was a trifecta that we've never seen before, up your GPA, up your LSAT, up your diversity and up your class size. This year, what we're seeing — and your data is a little bit different than LSAC’s. Why don't we explain how we get our data and why ours differs from LSAC’s as far as how we calculate percentage changes? I think that's important since people have asked about that.
Justin: It's different because the way that LSAC reports data — and this makes sense, because when they report to law schools, they report all your LSATs — but the one that gets reported to the ABA is of course your highest scoring LSAT. And so what's reflected in the volume summary report is an individual applicant's highest LSAT score ever. So say you had an individual who applied in October 2020 with a 160, they then retook the test in February 2021, looking into the future, and got a 170.
If we were to look at the data after they got that 170, it would seem as if they had always had a 170, when in fact they had applied originally with that 160 and for four months or so had been under consideration with a 160. So when we look at prior years, or if we look far back in the cycle after a lot of people have retaken the test, you get an artificial increase in what it seemed like the number of high and mid-scoring applicants were because you can only move up in LSAT score in terms of how it gets reported.
So it makes it look like there were more high-scoring individuals earlier than there actually were, and kind of distorts that number. That's just how it makes it different. And it makes our numbers a bit different than how LSAC calculates theirs just because we record it every day. So, we compare to what the actual reported numbers were at this time last year, two years, three years, four years ago, as opposed to what the high score is at this point in time. Hopefully, that makes sense to people.
Mike: Our data, again is, I think, a little more accurate than the way LSAC —
Justin: I mean, it's not that different. Basically, it tells the same story. We are behind in pretty much all scoring bands, except we have small increases in the 145-149 and 150-154 scoring bands. We're behind everywhere else, with the lowest scoring band, the sub-140 scores —which has just been going down every year — that's a pretty significant 18% decrease, and then in our highest scoring bands, which is the 170+, we have an 8% decrease in number of 170+ applicants at this point in the cycle. Everything else is marginally down, you know, anywhere between 5 and 10%.
Mike: Right. And applicants are down 4% as of today. Applications are down 3.6%. That's a kind of weird twist.
Justin: It's not that different than the total number of applicants. We have a very marginal increase — and I'm talking very marginal increase — in the number of applications each applicant is submitting compared to last year, but that makes up the very small difference between the applicant decline and application decline.
Mike: And let me explain to the typical person who's never applied to law school before what that means. What matters most to an applicant is the number of applicants applying to law school, because you're only competing with applicants. A law school can only matriculate one person to their school. They can't take that person and matriculate them to five schools, that same one person. Applications matter much more to law schools than applicants because they're trying to figure out how many people to admit, and if the typical applicant is applying to five schools, okay, but if the typical applicant is applying to 15 schools, they're going to have to admit a lot more because they're getting applications that aren't going to yield to their school. That makes sense to you, hopefully that makes sense to everyone.
Justin: Hopefully it does. And I think that is what will led to some of the confusion and yield issues that we saw at schools last year. Because there was not just a increase in the number of applicants, there was an even larger increase in the number of applications each applicant was submitting. They were applying more broadly. So schools had trouble calibrating how many people they needed to accept using prior year data, which, you know, schools tend to rely on. I mean, we rely on it. They base their models on how people have behaved historically. And when people start behaving in ways that don't conform to the historical norms, your models get thrown off. And this year, it doesn't look like it's going to be particularly different — at least in applications per applicant — than last year. People are submitting about six and a half on average so far.
Mike: But applications will be down. Most bandwidths will be down. So this is the stuff I think folks want to hear about. Now I'm even more confident with this guess after looking at the January data for LSAT registrants. I think we'll end up around 5% down this cycle, but maybe even a tad bit more down because — if the cycle was truly front-loaded, like we suspect it was, maybe 5% to 7% down versus last year.
Justin: That's definitely I think possible. I mean, the thing to remember is that applicants are not monolithic. They behave differently depending on what their profile is. So the highest scoring applicants, we know they always apply earlier on average. You might have a given 175 applicant apply very late, but on average applicants with higher scores apply much earlier in the cycle than their lower scoring counterparts. So for example, at this point in the cycle, we have about 67% of our 170+ applicants. So, you know, over two thirds of our total number of 170+ applicants last year had submitted by this time. And that's about in line with what the historic numbers are. Last year was weird, but it didn't have any drastic changes in how early or late people were applying.
Mike: Right, yes.
Justin: So we've already got the significant majority of those high scoring applicants in, and we are behind where last year was. We have the November test results. So we're caught up in that sense, we're comparing test over test. And like you said, the January LSAT is going to be down compared to last year. I mean, final registration numbers won't be available until of course the test actually happens, but registration closed yesterday, and there were about 2,000 or so additional registrants compared to last year's number of registrants as of when people took the test. Which means between now and January 14th when the test starts, we're going to have a lot of people drop out. Last January, if I am remembering correctly, there were about 40,000 people who were registered for the test when the deadline closed. And we ended up having about 27,000 people registered as of day of. There's always significant melt. This January, we could see much smaller number of people drop out, but I am very confident that we will have a smaller January LSAT administration than last year.
Mike: So, last year we had a melt of about 13,000 people. Although, I have a feeling that's a little bit high, because I think people started saying, “This cycle is a disaster, I'm out.”
Justin: It was interesting. I personally had not expected the melt to be that high last January. I was looking at some of my notes this morning, and I remembered that I had predicted that the melt would end somewhere around 30,000-31,000 people.
Mike: So let's just worst case scenario, and our likely case scenario. If we melt 5,000 to 6,000 to 7,000 people between now and January, January will be notably down after a down November test. And again, this cycle is trending, as time goes on — and we can say these things with more certainty now; I don't blame LSAC for keeping that pink box up that disclaims it's early, but it's less early than it was two months ago, and these statements become more certain — it's going to be a down cycle.
Justin: It's not as early as it was. We have somewhere between 35% and 40% of our final applicant volume at this point. We talked about how we’re overrepresented with the high scoring applicants. 155 to 159, we probably only have about a third of those applicants in about this point. But yeah, we are further in the cycle, we know more at this point, and we know more about how things are going to look now that we've had several tests.
It's interesting that we've been having a lower proportion of first time test takers for each test so far this cycle. Hard to know what's causing that. It could be a number of things. It could be that people are taking their first test earlier and earlier. I've long been of the thought that a lot of people who took the April 2021 test were taking it to apply for this application cycle. And we could be seeing one part of the potential front loading in this cycle was from those tests takers. And two, people who took that test and the June test are now retaking the November, October, and possibly the upcoming January tests, a higher number than they have historically. And that's why we're getting more retakers. I mean, we've always, every year we see more and more people retake the test as a proportion of test takers. But this year it's been particularly notable; even LSAC has noted that it's been unusually high numbers of retakers.
Mike: Okay. So these are the knowns, we've talked about the knowns so far. Now, there's a category of speculation or probabilities. The one that I feel best about right now, as far as speculation, is the pace of the cycle. So as you mentioned, over 60% of the higher test takers have applied. I'm going to guess about 40% of all applicants have applied, because I think it’s a little bit front loaded. Last year at this time it was 37%; I'm guessing it's about 40%. My point being this: schools have been — this is where I can understand more than anything from their perspective — understandably slower moving this cycle than I've seen in my 22 years of doing this. And it's because of that perfect storm of confusing data, unpredictable data last cycle, and I think some messaging from LSAC that was really confusing to schools.
This cycle is more predictable. The nice thing for applicants to know is, when I was on the other side, when I was in admissions, you're sitting around worrying about filling up a class. And you're starting to worry at a certain stage, “Okay, well my competitor Princeton Law and Brown Law School and Dartmouth Law School have started making admits. I better hurry up and start dialing up that needle.” So that's the perspective that no applicant, unless they have admissions experience, can see. That sort of pressure after Thanksgiving is starting to populate in the minds of law school admissions officers.
Justin: The last thing that you want as an admissions officer is to have to go to the Dean and say, “We under-enrolled by 30% this year because I didn't make any decisions until March 31st.” You can live with losing a point on your LSAT score. Not going to live with massive under enrollment.
Mike: Well, you know what, the funny thing, Justin, I've seen to that point, which is spot on. I've seen so many over-enrollment errors in the 22 years; I've seen incredibly few under-enrollment errors — because of that. Very few schools are endowment driven. They're law schools; they're almost all tuition-driven. You’ve got to bring in the class.
Justin: Yeah. And especially this year, even if we end up with a relative decline compared to last year, it will still be a significant increase over some of the historic numbers, especially the mid-2010s. So it's not as if we're going back to the days when schools were actually scrambling to find people to put, you know, bodies in seats, right? Even if you miss your target initially, there's going to be ample opportunity to admit off of the wait list. So I don't think anyone is worried about under-enrolling. The problem we saw last year, of course, was over-enrollment.
And I think that's another reason schools are being cautious this year. Many of them saw problems with over enrollment last year or saw an issue where they admitted a number of applicants relatively early in the cycle before they had a good sense of just how incredibly competitive the applicants would be that year, and realized later on that they had perhaps locked themselves into lower medians than they could otherwise have achieved, and are trying to avoid making that mistake again this year. Waiting to get a better sense of the applicant pool before they make large numbers of decisions.
Mike: Yeah. So let me give some admissions advice based on what we've been talking about. Number one, waves are coming. They have to, because schools have to fill classes. Number two, they may be coming for splitters and reverse splitters in December, but they may not. Particularly for reverse splitters, it may be January, February, March, but they're coming. They have to. They have to admit high GPA people. They have to admit off the wait list people with strong applications.
Here's number three, and this is not a data comment, this is just an admissions comment. The wave is not going to come for you if you're making up reasons to email admissions offices. I've said it once and I'll say it a thousand times, if there's a good reason to reach out to an admissions office to update them, bang, do it. If you're just reaching out to them to see if they respond, don't email law schools just to be like, “Hey, I'm still around.” “Hey, I'm still here.” Because that is from their experience abusive. They get 300, 500, 1000 emails a day. So hang tight. Waves are coming. They have to come, they have to come. And also for reverse splitters.
I think we're going to see waves all throughout January, December-January, and then we're going to see the reverse splitter portion January and February. And then you start getting in the — people can take the February LSAT. One point higher makes a huge difference for scholarship money and a few more open doors. January LSAT, February LSAT, and then there's going to be people — and this is one more important point to make — who are held, who have no decisions until March, April. So take that February LSAT if you have a third in you. Take the January if you have a third in you. You pinged on this earlier. Admits are going to happen all summer long.
Justin: One point, like you said, can make a tremendous difference just in scholarship money, wait list opportunities. You know, it's not even just February, March, I can't remember if there's an April test or not this year, but even June gives you an opportunity. I don't think anyone enjoys taking the LSAT, maybe there are a few people out there. But it can make such a tremendous difference. Especially these days, given how competitive things are in law school admissions. These days you can really be setting yourself up for success. Just getting that one or two extra points —I really highly recommend a retake if you have it in you and you think you can do a little bit better.
Mike: Did you take it once or more than once?
Justin: I took it twice. Really, just not the most fun.
Mike: Okay. I like to joke — LSAC hates it when I say this thing — you would, on the LSAT-Flex, you would’ve scored a 182 or 183.
Justin: Oh, I'm totally honest with everyone about the fact that I only scored as well as I did due to complete blind luck. If you asked me to do that again, I maybe could do it one in a hundred times. There is so much luck involved with scoring that high.
Mike: That's another reason to take it again. Some people — unless you're 20 points lower and you have to explain your higher score, a lower score's not going to hurt you — so you can catch lightning in a bottle.
Justin: Yeah, exactly. You can get lucky. You only need to get lucky once, and you can save yourself tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Mike: Hundreds of thousands with a one to two-point score increase.
Justin: Another thing that I'm curious about this year that we haven't talked about much is, it’s class size. There were a lot of schools that increased class size last year. We won't know exactly how much that changed until the 509 reports come out. But right now, there's about a 9% increase in the total enrollment of schools that have reported — which is the majority, significant majority of schools so far. You know, 9% might not sound like a ton, but it's actually really significant if you look at enrollment numbers for the 7-8 years before that, which were declining or flat. So this is a very drastic change.
This isn't the podcast to talk about the implications for graduates three years from now and the job market. But it is the place to talk about whether or not that will stay this year, whether or not schools will want to keep their new class sizes or whether or not they might decrease them, which could have some mitigating effect on the decrease in the number of applicants in terms of competitiveness.
Mike: Yeah. The dynamics of how you set a class size are really interesting. It's generally the Dean and the Dean of Admission getting together, and there’s factors involved, there's faculty input, because faculty tend to like smaller classes, less papers to grade.
Justin: I would not want to grade more of my final exams than I have to. They are not pretty. No one should have to read them more than a bare minimum number of times they have to.
Mike: So there's that, there's faculty input, and faculty generally wants smaller classes. There's admissions input, admissions obviously wants smaller class sizes, it’s just easier to get medians, higher medians. There’s career services input. The market's going to get flooded. That 9%, like you said, if it doesn't sound big, wait until it hits employment numbers down the road.
Justin: Not to be completely doomer — the economy could do quite well three years from now when they're graduating and going into the market, maybe it won't be a big deal — but that's a serious gamble given that the employment market for freshly minted JD graduates has not been breathtaking the past 10 years.
Mike: Those are the pressures on the Dean to decrease class sizes. But there's a big pressure on the Dean to increase class sizes, which is as follows. That Dean has a boss, the President of their central university (for most law schools — there's a couple standalone law schools), and that person has been saying for the last several years, ever since the great recession 10 years ago, we've been funding you as a law school. We want ours now.
And there is more and more pressure, with the demographic cliff hitting universities in 2026, for law schools to produce revenue, or else why do they exist for central universities? So what's really interesting, Justin, is you have small sword cuts — bring in the smaller class size — from career services, from faculty, from admissions. And then you have this one big sword from central universities, “No, bring in more revenue.”
So if I had to guess — this is where we're now getting really speculative — I think that schools with money (and some schools have more money because of the increase in class sizes last year) are going to slightly bring down their class sizes because they're going to try very hard to keep the incredible median gains of last year. But if you look at the delta of the class size differentiation versus the applicant pool in LSAT bandwidth differentiation, now we're getting a little wonky, the application decrease, the LSAT decrease is going to outpace the small class size decrease. Point being, and this is the question everyone always wants answered, I don't think schools are going to be able to maintain, the schools with the dramatic jumps are going to struggle to maintain those median LSAT dramatic jumps.
Justin: I'm less optimistic for applicants. I think that it won't be worse than last year. I think it will be marginally better. I think that schools with particularly drastic jumps in LSAT and GPA might have trouble maintaining both of those. But with schools that had more modest jumps in LSAT and GPA — to caveat, I'm really only talking about schools in the top 30-40 or so at this point because that's where we have the most data so far for applicants; come back in a couple months and we'll talk about schools below that — but schools in that range, they'll probably have fewer applicants this year than last year. But I think we saw a lot of, I don't know what the right word for this is, but suboptimal strategic behavior in terms of how they admitted. I think if they make slightly more calculated decisions, that can make up for some of the decline in just raw applicants.
I think that schools that had particularly large increases in class size, that's one thing, they're going to come down just because you're not going to sustain a 40% increase in class size two years in a row. Schools that had smaller increases in class size, you know, if you're an admissions officer, you go to the Dean and you say, “Look, we can bring in a class size the same as last year, or I can give you an LSAT and GPA median that are about the same as last year’s and we just have a bit fewer students,” right? I don't know. I think I know what the Dean is going to say to that.
Mike: To your point, I'm more optimistic. Maybe I'm biased from living 22 years of this. But I remember many summers, small after small after small wave throughout the summer. We didn't get that last year, and things are dropping. They're dropping, they're dropping, they're dropping. So if they continue to drop — and we don't know what's going to happen in January — but if that thing is 10,000 down or 7,000 down, I just think that we're going to see a lot more admits coming up. It's not the go-go years of being an applicant, but when you compare it to last year, it's going to feel like the go-go years.
Justin: You're very correct that we could see that. I'll be honest, I expected the post-November 2021 LSAT numbers, I thought we would have more applicants, and it's only been a few days, but historically —
Mike: Yeah, it bounces up.
Justin: — a few days after the score release, you kind of see really big jumps. And we saw a surge applicants, but not like last year and really not even enough to catch us up to where we were at this time last year, and that is encouraging for applicants. It's just, at this point, so much of the volume and the high scoring bands is baked in. There's only so much runway left for any slowdown to have a big impact on those scoring bands.
Again, I think it'll be down. I just — if it looked like this in mid-October or even early November, I would be much more optimistic than I am at this point for those scoring bands. And it would be odd if we saw — I'm not saying it won't happen, I'm just saying it would be weird — if we saw a real slowdown in January. That's when the other scoring bands tend to pick up the pace, and kind of you get your second boost from all those folks. It would be a weird kind of disproportionate applicant pool if we just kept being slow for the rest of the year, compared to last year. Could be weird just in that sense, but we'll see.
Mike: Some of it will depend on if the front loading occurred in every bandwidth.
Justin: I really wish we knew more about that front loading and about where those people were coming from. I really wish we knew how many people with an outstanding LSAT score had not applied yet.
Mike: Well, let me define that, because that word outstanding confuses people. Justin doesn't mean spectacular, he means an LSAT score that has been taken but not yet submitted.
Justin: Obviously not from all time, just from this year or maybe last year. But I wish we knew that. That might tell us a little bit more, if there's some hidden pool of applicants just waiting to strike.
Mike: We did a podcast this summer with Dave Killoran of PowerScore. And he asked us to rate the cycle competitiveness, if last cycle was a 10 out of 10, which it was. I can't remember yours. I gave this cycle an 8.5.
Justin: I think it's about where we all came out at.
Mike: Yeah. And I think that's about right. I think it might drop on to an eight, but that would depend on how many deferrals were granted from last cycle to this and how much schools are able to reduce class sizes. In fact, if not many deferrals were granted, which I think a number were, or if schools just don't reduce class sizes, which I think they will, this thing could drop down to a 7 or — but I think we're going to stay at 8.5.
Justin: We talked about the deferral stuff in that podcast when we talked about how it's very — that is going to be very school specific. It’s hard to talk about that on a macro scale, because it's just very dependent on what a school had to do. So, you know, that just depends on where you're applying. But I think I'm going to stick with the 8.5 for now. I still think that that's accurate. I think we've seen declines in applicants and high scoring applicants, but not as drastic as you might have hoped for. It's a little less of a bubble, but it's still a bubble. And I think schools are still going to, after last year, they're going to want to keep what they have. And I think that they will behave in a way that tries to keep what they have. And I think there's mostly enough supply at this point for them to do so. If things continue to trend downwards, then I will revisit my 8.5.
Mike: We’ll update either on Reddit or with a quick blog or with a quick podcast after the January LSAT. It could even drop down.
So here's sort of a summary. Last year you didn't want to apply to law school. This year is difficult relative to all the years. When we look back at all the years it's an 8.5. But it is not last year. Last year was freaky, creepy, horrible. This year is less competitive. The pendulum always swings, Justin. I've done this for long enough now, and the pendulum has started swinging back. I hate making future speculations, but I think the pendulum is swinging more and more in favor as time goes by depending on the economy, depending on legal jobs, it’s just going to keep swinging back in favor of applicants. To be determined.
Justin: Yeah. I mean, I think that this cycle is also just better in terms of — one of the challenges last year was just the surprise factor, right? I think people generally expected last year to be a little or moderately more competitive, you know, down economy, people didn't have jobs, you know, college graduates, it was a tough time to graduate. So more applications, but not like what we saw. I don't think anyone expected what we saw, and if they claim that they did, I'm not saying they're a liar, but they're a liar.
Mike: That's how I answer that question. Sorry to interrupt. We did a blog predicting last cycle before last cycle. Our blog picture was a dog in a tie on a computer with airplanes dropping bombs —
Justin: Yeah, I remember that.
Mike: — bombs on a city behind it. That's how crazy we thought last cycle would be. And we had no idea the extent, you know? It was crazier than dog in tie on computer and bombs.
Justin: It was ridiculous. It was bonkers. So, at least applicants this year — and schools, this is not something that I want to forget. You know, it was not just a surprise for applicants, it was a surprise for schools, and that confusion made it hard for them to know how to behave in terms of their decisions, which made it more are stressful for applicants. This year schools are better equipped — dear god I hope better equipped — to plan, prepare, and make decisions than last year. And so hopefully that makes things less stressful on both sides. So I think it'll be better in that regard, perhaps slightly less competitive and perhaps less confused and stressful is where I'm at.
Mike: It's more stable. Admissions offices love stability of data. The data's more stable, which is another reason why things are going to start picking up pretty soon as far as admits. Last year, if someone were to tell you the LSAT was stable last year — and maybe someone has said that publicly, not me — what would your response be to that person?
Justin: About the LSAT? I mean, it obviously wasn't, and one of the nice things about this cycle is we know that average scores have returned closer to their historic numbers. They're still high compared to pre-COVID, but they are more in line with pre-COVID. So you're getting fewer test takers, and you're getting those test takers with lower scores on average. So that is also contributing to a bit of the decrease in competition. Although of course you have a spillover from last year of people who took it last year and either applied and decided not to matriculate or didn't apply and are coming into this cycle. Hopefully next year we've cleared out the backlog a little bit more.
Mike: That's why I think next year is even, if I have to speculate — again, it's far out — but if I have to speculate, the pendulum is still going to keep swinging back, and next year will be even less competitive. Don't make — if you're listening to this, please don't make like a life decision about waiting to apply next year based on me saying that. I'm speculating here.
Justin: Yeah, absolutely not. I couldn't even tell you what things are going to be like in March, let alone next year. But to bring it back to where we are at, I am going to stick with my 8.5 for now.
Mike: 8.5. Waves are coming. There will be more waitlist movement this summer than last summer. So, any final thoughts?
Justin: No, I think that that is a good note to end on. I think that everybody hopefully has submitted their applications or is getting ready to submit them. We’ve talked about how applying early or on time can be helpful, even in a weird year, like this. Just get in a good application, and don't rush to submit your application, but get a good application in. And just like Mike said, try and stay calm and not call them every day. Don't be that person they talk about at the admission staff meeting. That person gets a note in their file. It's not good. Yeah. That's kind of where I'm at.
Mike: I like it. Thanks Justin for your time. If you want more data updates, we're going to give them, so hit subscribe, and maybe we will talk in January, Justin.
Justin: Yeah. All right then.
Mike: Thanks everyone.