A Better Way to CPA with Chase Birky

In episode 7 of the Big 4 Transparency podcast, I am joined by Chase Berkey, CEO and co-founder of Dark Horse CPAs. Dark Horse takes a different approach to the franchise model, having built incentives around elevating the group as a whole and sharing equity in the overall organization rather than a traditional franchise and fee model. Chase and I cover many topics ranging from the limitations of the partnership model at scale, employee stock option plans for firms, the sale of secondary shares by employees, and how to offer an alternative to the traditional CPA firm model. This episode is also sponsored by Pluvo by Rain Technologies. Pluvo is a one-stop shop for business owners and decision makers to plan, strategize, and project their finances with unparalleled efficiency. Pluvo integrates directly with QBO, offering you a smoother process and includes a suite of FP&A tools supporting forecasting, scenario planning, and financial reporting. Reduce the amount of time you're spending on manual tasks and focus on strategic decision making instead. Pluvo is a great addition to your firm if you're looking to step up your game in virtual CFO services with clients or to improve the internal finance function of your own firm. Check them out in the episode's show notes and enjoy the episode. Hello, and welcome to the Big Four Transparency Podcast. I'm joined today by Chase Berkey, the CEO and co-founder of Dark Horse CPA, and the author of some of my favorite hot takes on the accounting industry as a whole and issues within the profession across many of the platforms. So welcome to the podcast, Chase. Thanks, Dominic. Yeah, I probably sound a little bit like Colin Coward or maybe Stephen A. Smith to a number of folks out there. So hopefully my hot takes haven't aged as poorly as some of theirs. No, I think they've aged like fine wine for the most part. A lot of what you kind of talk about, I think, is right on the nose and it's maybe a little bit less filtered than some of the other takes that we get, which is refreshing to see. So to introduce why what you do is a little bit different, especially that I've interviewed a handful of accounting firm owners on here recently. Can you walk us through exactly what Dark Horse CPA is and what differentiates it? Yeah. So I've been on the record a lot talking about how Dark Horse is a platform CPA firm. But I've come to understand platform means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. And what exactly is in that platform may not be well understood. So I'm going to try to take a different spin on explaining it this time around. So there's a number of accounting communities out there like your Realize, Rootworks, Tax Tax, Twitter, etc. So imagine if one of those communities became an actual accounting firm. They decided to pool their resources to work on things that benefit everyone together. Creating a premium brand that commanded higher prices, creating more profitable practices, and then reinvested those profits into further innovation, efficiencies, and client value. Creating an evergreen cycle of higher profits and more investment, integrating even higher profits, all the while benefiting from the appreciation of the stock ownership they have in the collective enterprise and the growth of the value of their practice. So if you can imagine that, then you have a pretty good idea of really what we're doing here at Dark Horse. So to be clear, there's no partners, right? It's all kind of, it's actually like a regular corporation, investing periods on shares and whatnot, right? Right. We are not a partnership. Our equivalent to a partner is what we call a principal. But yeah, we are a C corporation and our principals are employees of the corporation as well as shareholders, as are a number of the folks that support them, as well as the folks on the corporate team. And I actually saw in a very recent post that you shared, there was an article by Alan Bolton discussing kind of the troubles of the partnership model. And you leaned into that a little bit where kind of once a firm reaches scale, you can kind of lose that one leading voice and the firm can kind of find itself paralyzed by, I guess, like indecision and potentially just too many, too many partners and no kind of clear direction and, you know, which you would normally have in a corporation via clarity on voting rights and likely, you know, a CEO and someone who's actually guiding the overall, the overall business. Do you see kind of having more of like a C corp structure being the solution to this? Well, I think it's a solution. I think it's a great solution and it's the one we went with. I've been rallying against the partnership business model since 2019. And for me, you know, that was really a recognition of my experiences, you know, starting at Deloitte. You know, I had a lot of folks I worked around with that I really loved and respected and, you know, had a great time hanging out with outside of work. Inside of work, you know, we were kind of put through this machine and it didn't matter necessarily how much I, you know, enjoyed, you know, the senior manager or partner on the engagement. You know, I wasn't necessarily going to enjoy working with them because it was a lot of hours, a lot of stress, you know, and there's just a machine that's built into the business model of these traditional kind of partnerships that drives the misery of the profession, obviously, in my opinion. But I've spoken to hundreds of CPAs now, you know, in the course of what we're doing at Dark Horse and I know that I'm definitely not alone in that sense. But yeah, so, you know, on the other side of it, you know, a small partnership can be great, you know, when there's cohesion among the partner group, you know, there's rapport, there's trust and all of that, you know, there can be great accounting partnerships that are, you know, smaller, right? But that's very hard to scale, you know, because what works in maybe, you know, a just by default or unstated way because of that relationship and that rapport doesn't necessarily scale. So as more partners are added, you know, how does, how do you scale that level of tight knit, you know, community? It's, I think, increasingly hard to do. And so then you get to this phase of, okay, what is our leadership structure actually going to look, right? So then you start talking about a managing partner, you know, which hopefully at its best is acting as the CEO of the firm. But what ends up happening a lot of times is that it just becomes decision by committee, right? You've got a lot of chiefs in the room that all want to say, and maybe more waiting on the more senior partners in terms of what decisions are going to be made. You know, but it's really a tough environment, you know, in terms of being able to make decisions and, you know, create action, you know, in timely ways versus just paralysis by analysis and trying to accommodate, you know, the preferences of every decision maker in the room. You know, that just does not bode well for a firm that wants to scale. I mean, all we have to do is look at the clients we serve. Fortune 500, you know, they're not led by a group of chiefs. There's a CEO, not to say that that person, you know, should just be, you know, ruling with an iron fist. They typically aren't other than in areas where they have high conviction and it's in line with, you know, the values and, you know, the mission of the company. So all that to say, partnership model is something, you know, that I think is at the core of a lot of the problems that we're facing as a profession. And a lot of the, you know, talent pipeline issues that we have now have obviously been, you know, developing over decades. And I think really the core catalyst is the business model. Yeah. Yeah. And I think what you say about the flaws of the partnership model, maybe occurring at scale kind of makes a little bit of sense where a lot of the kind of bolder moves that people are making, right? Like, oh, I'm going to pay top of market or I'm going to introduce some sort of like variable pay component to kind of solve that disconnect between just juicing all of the hours out of this poor, this poor senior, you know, and it kind of solves some of those issues. And you kind of see those bolder moves really only being made by small firms for the most part. I think, again, probably like you're saying, because at the larger scale, there's just too many people in the room to decide that we're going to make that big decision. So were you really like celebrating the move that BDO made as kind of like a proof of concept to move from the partnership model over to like more of like a traditional share based structure? You know, I think it's probably more validation than anything, because we've been proving the concept for a couple of years, you know, which is evidenced by our growth. But to see a big firm do it, you know, validates, you know, this isn't just, you know, some fringe idea. Right. So they, you know, really did two things. One became a C corporation. And number two, adopted an ESOP, you know, and while what we do technically isn't an ESOP, it has a lot of overlap with that, you know, the idea really is we're going to operate like, you know, maybe a startup would where we're a C corp structure, we've got, you know, a C level director level, you know, VP level, so on and so forth. But, you know, what's important for us is making sure that, you know, we can tie in our vision and our goals and our mission with incentives that matter to folks in the here and now, you know, so if they're contributing to the whole in ways that we can institutionalize and, you know, create enterprise value out of, we want them to participate, you know, in the in the growth of that enterprise value through stock, right? Versus your traditional partnership, where, generally speaking, stock is only given at the partner level, you know, and what does that stock really even mean? It means that as long as you work there, you know, late enough into your career to get to a certain age, you know, you'll get paid out over 10 years, maybe two to three times your salary. So, as far as liquidity goes, that's got about as much viscosity as you could possibly bake into the equation. So, you know, we wanted to also provide ways where, you know, we're building the value of these shares, right? But we're also providing liquidity, right? So for us, we do a 49A every year, and we open up a 90-day window, where we allow folks to sell some percentage of their invested shares back to the company, if they so chose, so that it's not just this thing that's locked up forever and has marginal value as a result. That's tremendous, actually, like the opportunity to sell, I guess what I'll call secondary as well is really, really cool, right? And I think in general, I really agree with like the ESOP or whatever kind of equivalency model there is, like, I think that's, you know, that's the standard in tech. So after kind of big four, I moved more to the startup world. And that's like a relatively large incentive for like overall compensation, right? And it's good for retention, it gets everyone on board, you celebrate the wins a little bit more earnestly when it's just like, oh, cool, my partner is gonna make 30% more this year. Nice. So I think it really does bring everyone on board a little bit more, which is which is really, really nice to see. So, you know, hats off to you. And then having that liquidity at secondary is, is actually really interesting. I didn't know that you you did that. Which again, like, depending on life events, like I would love to be able to liquidate some of my, you know, some of my options currently, if they were also, you know, above above strike price, but that's another discussion. But no, I think that's that's awesome, kind of introducing liquidity built into the model. That's awesome. Yeah. And I'd like to ask, who is it that's joining dark horse. So I know last time we spoke, you mentioned some firms that were already like fairly established, we're looking to join the ranks of dark horse, which is really interesting, because to me, a lot of the value proposition that you've discussed, I kind of think like, listen, if I'm starting a firm, that seems tremendous, right? But it seems like it's more than just that, right? Yeah, yeah. So there's, you know, a couple of ways, folks find their way into dark horse. So when it comes to the merge in that you're referencing, you know, that is really a matter of, you know, anywhere from just a sole practitioner to, you know, maybe a 20 person firm, you know, and everywhere in between. And a lot of these smaller firms are struggling with what we struggled with when we first started out, which was trying to wear all the hats of an entrepreneur, trying to build a meaningful tech stack, you know, balance cybersecurity concerns, you know, in a increasingly threatening environment, the compliance, you know, whether that's peer reviews, running payroll, you know, filing tax returns, you know, just all the stuff that adds up, you know, being able to attract the right level of staff, which is really difficult for those a players at a small firm, unless there's a clear succession plan that they're interested in, you know, the branding, the marketing, the sales funnel, the reputation, you know, that allows you to charge a premium, you know, the expertise you don't have in house, there's just so many things that go into building, you know, a successful firm and one that scales and is profitable. And it's really hard to do all those things when you're deep into client service, you've got deadlines, you've got limited time energy, you've got a family, you know, you've got bills, but you got all these things, right, that are competing for your time, attention and resources, while you're trying to build something right, that can that can grow and scale. So these firms have really just recognized, you know, in large part that, you know, while they could continue doing what they're doing, you know, they know that they could take a lot off their plates, and gain a lot by joining dark horse, you know, being able to focus on their clients, growing their practice, growing their people, you know, and not having to worry as much about all the other stuff that supports that. So that's one way. And then, you know, so we're getting folks at the principal level there, and then they're supporting staff. We have an accelerator program. So as you're mentioning, starting from scratch, you know, we have a really unique way to do that one that's unparalleled. And that happens in our accelerator program, where folks are typically manager, senior manager level, you know, seven years of experience or more that come in and build a book of business from scratch. We're, you know, really working hand in hand with them. You know, for all things, technology, sales, business development, you know, all the things that they need to be able to do to attract, you know, have the right conversation with the client at the right price, get the right scope, all of that sort of stuff. You know, so they're building from scratch to six figures in a couple months. I mean, we've had people recently that have gone from scratch to over $200,000 in a course of less than four months. So, you know, you're not gonna be able to do that on your own unless you have some sort of pre-existing set of relationships that are unencumbered by a non-compete that you can bring over, or if you buy a firm. If you buy a firm, you know, buyer beware. We've heard a lot of horror stories, right? Because you don't fully know what you're buying in a lot of instances, unless you have a really tight relationship with the seller, which happens, right? But in the absence of that, the seller is only gonna give you so much exposure to the reality of their practice because they're trying to keep a level of confidentiality so that if the transaction doesn't work out, you know, they're not up a creek with clients or staff who are now worried about, you know, the continuity of the firm. So then you end up getting clients who aren't a good fit, whether that's because of the price, scope, the personality, the way that they do or don't work with technology, you know? So then, you know, maybe you paid a 1.25x, roughly multiple on that revenue. You know, when you start talking about the attrition that happens either because the client opts out or you opt out, that becomes 2x, 2.5x, maybe 3x, depending on the situation. You know, then you're also dealing with trying to transfer a glut of clients over to, you know, the systems, the technology, the way that you actually want to serve the clients, trying to get them on board with it. It's a huge task to try to do that all at once, right? So I could keep going down that rabbit hole, but point being that, you know, it's either you go that route of purchasing a practice oftentimes, or you go the route of growing slowly, which is tough for, you know, accountants who most of us to some extent suffer from paralysis by analysis. And, you know, the idea of how long is it going to take me to build that clientele? How much am I going to have to invest to get there? How much time am I going to have to spend, you know, in order to track those clients? How much of a sacrifice am I making to make this happen? Yeah, it's this tricky kind of like income range too, if you're a CPA who's at a point where they can actually start serving clients on their own, like odds are you're making a good income, but not enough that you can actually like take a year off and be like, I'm going to start this business, right? Like I feel like by the like manager, senior manager level, you know, you're probably in the mid or high hundred, like, you know, 150 ish range, depending on where you are. But like, you're probably making good money, but not enough that you can actually just be like, Hey, I'm going to start from scratch and build this new client book. So yeah, I do. I do think that it's like a, it's a tricky income range where you're probably used to a pretty good quality of life. But like, you're not at a point where you just drop it all. And, you know, live off of your savings in many cases. So it is cool to see that there's like support to help you get over that kind of initial, you know, initial challenge and help accelerate you. Because I think for a lot of people, that's probably a very large obstacle, right? Yeah. And beyond just the fast growth, we're also paying a salary. So you know, folks can, you know, it's not going to be maybe as much as they're making at their existing firm, but you know, it's enough to still be comfortable and to not, you know, have a disproportionate amount of your brain concerned on how am I making ends meet. So someone who's joined Dark Horse, they're going to be guaranteed basically like a floor of earnings as part of this? Yeah. So there's a salary and we've got a formula that, you know, takes into account what that salary is, what their gross receipts are, whether an accelerator. And so long as there's, you know, a Delta below the thresholds that we've established, then, you know, there's a buy-in that's a certain amount. If our investment goes up as a result of, you know, what we're paying in a fully loaded salary, you know, less, you know, the collections going over our threshold and that buy-in can increase from 150. So it's really a matter of what do you need as well as, you know, what level of confidence that you have, you know, to be able to grow quickly, you know, and, you know, it's a little bit of measure of confidence in yourself, you know. And so with just about everything in the firm, it's like, you know, we want to create the right incentives, the right optionality, the right agency. So we're not forcing people to do things a certain way that just don't resonate for them. And we ultimately want everyone to, you know, benefit from their success. Yeah. So when, like when firms come in where they're not necessarily starting from scratch, is there like a common element that they're often needing the most help with? Like, is it like they, they're often, they don't have like a practice management software or they're not giving themselves enough headspace to sell? Like, is there like a common thread that you see a lot of when they come in? You know, I don't know if there's any one thing I would say is more common and more prevalent than another item. I think it ends up being pretty pervasive, but it usually depends on the skill set of the owner of the firm that's merging in, in terms of where they need the help. And, you know, there's just a lot of different people out there with a lot of different strengths and weaknesses. So it ends up being, you know, relatively balanced. But again, it's, you know, it's things like, I don't really understand technology. So I've got a couple apps that were recommended to me by some peers of mine, and I've set them up a certain way. And, you know, maybe some of my staff have run with it a bit, but I don't really know, like, as a whole holistic stack, like, is this serving my needs? You know, I'm constrained in X, Y, Z areas, you know, I feel like I'm totally exposed from a cybersecurity standpoint, you know, so there's technology, there's, you know, I think a lot of firms, I would say, actually, a common element is, there's a level of talent, you know, that I think is lacking in small firms, you know, you end up seeing partners that are really doing all of the hard stuff, you know, and then the staff is only at a certain level, which means that there's a ceiling put on that firm, because the partners already, you know, at 100% capacity doing the things that only they can currently do in the firm. So, you know, that's partially recruiting and getting the right talent. But it's also partially, you know, the things that you need to do to invest in the growth of those, you know, supporting staff members so that they can rise up the ranks, and hopefully, eventually, you know, be your right hand person and take over your practice. But we see that lacking a lot in small firms. Really, there's a direct correlation, larger the firm is, generally speaking, the more talent there's going to be in that firm at a high level. Yeah, that's a lot of discussions I've had with kind of smaller firm owners. Obviously, like with the offerings, Big Four Transparency has a long kind of like compensation support and compensation strategy support. Like that's, that's often the biggest thing is like, hey, like, we're not retaining or attracting what we need to grow. And a lot of people are just kind of lost when it comes to that. So having these kind of guardrails and support around that, just absolutely invaluable for the growth. And even just having someone who's going to tell them, like, hey, like, your problem is that you are not keeping the right talent or getting the right talent that you need, right? Yeah. And I mean, compensation, certainly, you know, a core component of that. It's also the structure of the comp, right? Because it's not just about paying a high salary. It's, you know, can you create meaningful incentives for them to generate more revenue for the practice, get more work done, bring more to the bottom line, right? And if you can align them around that, you know, then that, you know, overtime hours they're spending during tax season has a lot more meaning than, you know, if it's just a flat salary amount with maybe a discretionary bonus that they don't necessarily, you know, have the ability to draw or connect the dots on what they're doing to what that bonus amount could be. You know, so it's a bit of structure in terms of, you know, if you want people to grow within your organization or you want, you know, a certain level of talent, you know, you got to offer things that are attractive to them, right? And someone who just wants a salary amount at the highest salary they can get probably doesn't, you know, have the same entrepreneurial spirit as someone who will accept a lower salary with a higher top end if they perform, you know. And then also, again, being able to have them participate in equity, you know. Yeah, I think that's a great answer. Yeah. Totally. And the way that we do that is we've got formulas for our principals on an annual basis that are based on the profitability of their book of business, as well as their contributions to, you know, Dark Horse as a whole and what we can institutionalize as a result of their collaborative efforts. And so whatever that grant ends up being, it's in the form of a stock option, but we give them the ability to designate any number of those shares to any of their supporting team members and whatever shares they decide to designate to those team members. members, we do those in the form of a restricted stock award so that that support team member doesn't have to pay to exercise those shares. So that's a real incentive for them to share the love and also keep those support team members involved in a way that is really meaningful and shows the intentionality of growing them within the practice and the firm. And this is equity ownership in Dark Horse as a whole, not just of that branch or subsidiary essentially? Yeah, it's in Dark Horse as a whole. And just for clarity's sake, there is no separate entity for a given practice. It's all within one entity, which is Dark Horse CPAs. They run their own P&L within the firm, but it's one of the ways that we can leverage the economies of scale that we get as we grow is by having it all under one entity. So there's not all of this other administration that has to happen at the entity level. Yeah, that's super helpful. And so that kind of would be one of the differences, I assume, between Dark Horse and kind of a more traditional franchise model, where I imagine they're probably their own legal entities separate. And I'm sure there's kind of more of those. I've heard a little bit about some of the traditional franchise model for firms can be a little bit restrictive for businesses as well, particularly when it comes time to kind of exit. And so what are some of the other kind of differences between Dark Horse and maybe a more traditional franchise model for firms? Yeah. You know, and franchise is a word that I hate using when I describe Dark Horse, but I only use it really just to get someone thinking along the right lines if they're not really gravitating towards what we actually do. So there's some overlap for sure, right? I would say maybe we're a franchise on steroids, plus plus, right? Obviously, I'm biased, but one of the core differentiators is the monetization model of a franchise, which is, you know, franchises are really not tied in in a meaningful way on your bottom line. They are taking a percentage of revenue. You know, there's a buy in, there's expenses, maybe things that you're required to buy from them as a result of the franchise agreement, you know, all these things, all these expenses, you know, really come down to, you know, they're not tied to profitability. It's just this idea that by being a part of this group with this brand name, and paying for the resources that you're getting through the franchise that, you know, you're going to be profitable as a result, right, or else the franchise dies. And then a level beyond that is, you know, the true economic value proposition, you know, the economic surplus that they believe they can create by, you know, the comparable of, well, without this franchise, and also without the expenses, you know, would you be in a net better position? And so that's really the question, right? Because you know, if you're not profitable as a CPA firm, you know, I don't think being part of a franchise or not, is really going to help you out there. Yeah, that's just table stakes. But you know, does that franchise really bring enough value to the table beyond what you're paying them to move the needle? And I can't say from experience, you know, in terms of being a part of a accounting firm franchise. But I would argue that, you know, there's, it's probably not a substantial amount of economic surplus, it's probably enough, or roughly the same. And the idea of switching and paying the exit fee on that franchise keeps people tied in. So compared to what we're doing, you know, we wanted to do things differently than a franchise, right? I think the other real elephant in the room when it comes to an accounting franchise, is that accounting and tax services are not something that can be systematized, productized, and made to the level of consistency of a Big Mac, you know, from a McDonald's in Salem, Oregon, to one in Miami, Florida, right? You can make that real consistent, even across country lines, to be honest, whereas the types of services we're providing, you know, they just vary so much in terms of who's doing it, what they're doing, you know, how that service is being delivered, you know, that commoditizing it and trying to say that, you know, a franchise, one franchise is the same as another is just impossible, right? They're gonna be totally different, just sharing the same. So in our model, we wanted to bake in some accountability, you know, to be candid in terms of, you know, one of the value propositions is the brand that we have, and the reputation it has. And, you know, we don't want that soiled or diluted by someone who is not doing what they should be doing. You know, so we're all accountable to each other at Dark Horse, and, you know, there's a certain level of control that we need to exercise as a firm to make sure that we're not having principals that are going rogue and creating bad client experiences, you know, being toxic to the firm, and, you know, just creating, you know, really stealing, you know, that value from other principals who are pulling the weight and then some, right? So we wanted to have that level of accountability that's hard to do in an arm's length relationship like you have in a franchise. Honestly, personally, like I obviously do some research on these, and we worked together in the past when Big Four Transparency used to just be a job board, and I had looked into trying to understand this, and I think kind of with the breakdown you've provided, I think I now understand Dark Horse to like a much deeper level, where it's, you're picking people to bring into your collective rather than selling to people to say, hey, here, use my business model in this framework, give me a part of what you're making, and then you've got to kind of figure it out, right? You're picking people. You know, the other thing, too, for us is being aligned in terms of none of the, none of what we're doing matters if we're not helping our folks generate profit and grow that profit. So instead of, you know, us getting some percentage off the top as our monetization model, we share in their profitability, right? They get the majority of it, but there's a chunk that goes to Dark Horse, and there's obviously hard costs there, payroll taxes, benefits, you know, the technology, SaaS licenses, overhead, you know, a host of things, right, and then there's money. But by being aligned with them on the bottom line, it's a totally different mindset, right? We don't care that, you know, they're just sustainable enough to not go out of business. You know, we're going to make more money if they make more money, and that's, you know, I think a structure that is, you know, stands the test of time, and it's really, you know, how we wanted to be aligned with our people, and, you know, we thought that having that all in-house, not franchised, not separate entities, you know, is really where that, the possibility of deriving that comes from, you know, and so then there's also the collaboration component, right? We really wanted to make sure, you know, that we're setting the expectation that you're not an island, you know, at Dark Horse. There's an expectation that if you're joining, one of the reasons is for the community and the collective brain, you know, the experience, expertise in areas that you don't have, right? The only way you can leverage that is when you have folks come in that are the mindset of, you know, contribute first, consume second, you know, and so, again, in an arm's length, you know, relationship, it's harder to get that to happen, and related to that is really this emphasis on culture, which, you know, when you talk about a franchise, culture probably has some level of importance in the franchisor's mindset, but it's more about, you know, are we providing a consistent client experience, you know, or customer experience to whomever we're serving? That's kind of highest priority. For us, you know, because we're in business to serve accountants, and they're in business to serve, you know, their clients, it's super important for us that we're only adding folks to our organization that are a good culture fit, that, you know, are the type of person that, you know, is someone you'd want to have a beer with, someone you would call, you know, in a state of emergency, you know, just high quality, high capacity, good people that are good natured, you know, we really put a huge emphasis on that, because that's the glue that holds everything together, to be honest, you know, so as clever of a business model or approach, you know, that we might think we have, it really means nothing if you don't have the right people who are bought into the why behind why we're doing what we're doing, and treat other people, you know, that same level of energy and enthusiasm and empathy, you know, without that, you just you don't have. Awesome, that's a really good breakdown of how this works. And like I mentioned, like, that's actually even changed how I understand it a little bit. And I think that's tremendous, like incentive aligning, right? Like, again, everybody cares about everybody's bottom line, makes a lot of sense. And there's not these like perverse incentives of like, how much do we need to squeeze out of the franchisee for our business to work as well as possible, but again, not put them out of business. Whereas now it's like, how do we make them have the highest profitability? So like, what was your journey like to where you are now? So I know you have experience at a big four firm, as well as a smaller firm where you're in more of a leadership position. And obviously, kind of like everything we do, there was some sort of lesson that we learned along the way that led to this, right. And so I think you've really kind of changed the accounting model really, really, like, it's very different than what most people would have done where they go, I'm going to now launch, you know, Berkey LLP and do things my way, but you actually really thought you, you know, changed the entire model of how the business works. So what, like, was there anything in your experience that like, really led to that? Yeah, I mean, everything about my journey, you know, to that point of pivoting the business informed it, to be honest, you know, I think my journey is pretty well documented in other podcasts. But, you know, what I would say is, you know, it was really a series of desperate situations that led to other, you know, desperate situations, which led to, you know, there's just a level of creativity and boldness that you get when you have nothing to lose, or when you feel you have nothing to lose. And at various points along the way, I would say that's how I felt. And it really just forced me to look at what truly wasn't working for me. What I think wasn't working for others, and what isn't working, you know, for the industry as a whole. And I really think the only reason that I was emboldened to take the leap was because of that just desperation of this does not work. This is taking me to a dark place in life. And I believe that I'm not alone in that. And so what am I going to do, right, because there's a lot of people who can articulate the problems of the profession well, but when it comes to creating a solution, you know, they might have some ideas, right. But like, it's one thing to complain, you know, I like to use the analogy of like, I don't want to hear, you know, from a food critic that isn't willing to get, you know, in the kitchen and, you know, be a chef, right. Because you don't understand what you're critiquing until, you know, you try to be part of the product of the solution. So, you know, from my standpoint, you know, I would never want to relive the journey that, you know, got me to a certain point. And on the same hand, I feel like it was absolutely necessary and absolutely rewarding in what needed to happen in my life to do the things that I think I was meant to do. On the same hand, it was, you know, born out of misery. So yeah, I mean, to answer your question, you know, really, all of the negatives and the positives that I experienced along the way, which I started to experience more of the positives through, you know, progression of that journey, you know, it was really about how do I create something that reduces or eliminates as many of the negatives as possible and, you know, creates and amplifies those positives as much as possible. What business model would allow that to be a reality? It wasn't any, you know, quick and easy solution. Never is. I think a lot of accounts are looking for, you know, bite-sized solutions that they can, you know, tack on over time that make something meaningful eventually. And I think it really has to come down to an ethos of what are we uniquely trying to do as a firm, you know, to improve public accounting and that everything else has to cascade from that in ways that are aligned and, you know, make sense. And I mean, you've clearly done a good job of that by kind of tackling what's at the core of public accounting, the entire business structure. So, you know, hats off to you for taking that on. I think that that's tremendous and, you know, it'll be great to kind of follow the continued growth of Dark Horse and see if this truly is kind of like the better model out there and more people should maybe be adopting this because a lot of what you explained, I think kind of answers a lot of the issues that I believe are at the heart of this talent shortage that I believe are at the heart of, you know, even why personally, you know, large accounting firms did not work out for myself. So I think a lot of what you're doing tackles that. So hats off to you for rethinking the model, being creative about it and actually just going out there and doing it. That's awesome to see. I appreciate that, Dominic. Yeah, my pleasure. So for people listening, who is the person who needs to get in touch with you? Like what are some of the triggers, either they're running an accounting firm or like you said, they're kind of that manager, senior manager. What should be that trigger that like, OK, I need to go talk to Chase about Dark Horse and what's the best place they should get in touch either with you or your team? Yeah. And before I answer that specific question, I'd take a step back and say, you know, we're not just looking for folks that are wanting to merge their firm and or become an accelerator. You know, we've got principal teams and a corporate team, you know, that hires. Right. And so, you know, it's kind of, I guess, across the board in terms of who makes a good Dark Horse accountant, a Dark Horse CPA. You know, it's someone that recognizes that, you know, they're struggling for purpose and meaning in their work. They're maybe learning, you know, in a certain area, but they feel like they're not growing holistically or in the areas that really resonate with them. You know, it's folks that want a level of agency in their life and autonomy and are maybe less inclined to want black and white structure. Because one thing I can tell you, Dark Horse, is that, you know, with agency and autonomy comes less structure, you know, because that's intentional and we don't want to control people by any stretch. We just want to make sure that what they're doing is aligned with everyone's interests. But, you know, it's really about that accountant that wants to grow in ways that are entrepreneurial, ways that are future ready technology wise, you know, and not just be learning obsolete skill sets. You know, someone who really wants to be in accounting as a career versus someone who's using it as a springboard to something else. I think for too long we've looked at public accounting like the farm system for, you know, going pro in something else. And what we're really trying to show folks is that, no, this is the major leagues. This is professional and it's sustainable and it's not something that, you know, is going to take everything from you and leave you on the side of the freeway. So it's really that person who just knows there's more to their career that they want and need for that sense of fulfillment, you know, sense of purpose and, you know, is hungry, smart, you know, ready. They should absolutely get in touch with us. And what's the best place for them to do so? So abetterway.cpa is kind of our account facing website and there's job openings there and ways to inquire on that website that will be a direct line to, you know, our recruiting function. And then, you know, personally I'm on LinkedIn, that's my social media poison of choice. So, you know, if they want to directly get in contact with me, that's where best to do it. Fortunately, my name is unique enough that I can be found with a simple search. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Cool. I would highly recommend the follow on LinkedIn. I think you post some fantastic stuff. Good mix of kind of entertaining and, you know, informative as well. So I won't offend anyone who follows, but, you know, follow at your own risk, I guess. Yeah, absolutely. Well, thank you so much for coming on, Chase. Appreciate it, Dominic.