Do you think the Ravens need another linebacker? Which second-year player should make the biggest jump from last season? Can I find any possible way to love Team Keep It Clean even more? That last one was just a little bonus. But these questions on this episode of NFL Questions from subscribers. And little team keep it clean. You see my boy, he like got him made it. Got it great. Got it great. So YouTube Team Keep It Clean, what's going on is Engraven here with another video and another episode of NFL Questions from subs. And this is a series where you can ask me any NFL question you want to based off of any team player, whatever, and we answer it in a video just like this. If you want to be part of NFL Questions from subs, you can send me an email to teamkeepitcleanatgmail.com or for the patrons, you can send it directly on Patreon. Shout out to all the Team Keep It Clean patrons. If you would like to become a Team Keep It Clean patron, you can go to patreon.com slash engravenvids. I love y'all. I appreciate y'all. Sad news because this is the final edition of the special question from subscribers featuring our guy, the couch writer Raven himself, Jermaine Lockett. So I appreciated him coming on. I know y'all appreciated him coming on as well. Shout out to him for making the time to come on. So thank you. I appreciate y'all. I love y'all. Without further ado, let's do the last question on this episode of Questions from subscribers came from my boy Greg. He said, what's up Engraven? Hope you having a great day. The biggest reason I want Justin Houston isn't for on-field production necessarily, but to be another very smart veteran leader to learn from, especially for Adolfi O'Waite. His leadership would be great. But besides that part, do you think the Ravens need another linebacker? I don't. I don't know. Do you think they need another linebacker? I don't. You? Then I'll tell you why. Look when we brought in Eric Bruttle, Eric Bruttle brought in a lot of leadership at the time. But I want you to go back in and think about this when the first time the Ravens with Lamar faced Kansas City, where did that leadership get us? It was a little slow on that on that 4th or was it 4th and 12th or something? I don't remember. I don't remember. 8 of them. I don't remember. 8 of them. Duke it up the whole defense. Veteran leadership is important. I get it. Okay. We got my feet for that. To bring in another veteran who's, I mean, they think in just more of a leadership aspect and taking reps away from these young stars who need those opportunities, you're going to hurt on the back end. It's a youth man. It's a young man's gang right now. If you bring in Justin Houston, he doesn't bring the full talent impact that we're expecting out of a player that we just drafted first round and you're going to just stun his growth. I mean, there's plenty of opportunities, plenty of examples that we've seen in the past. Lee Evans, for instance.  I mean, we want to break up these examples. I can break up a million on Lee Evans. Probably stun it. Some of Tori Smith's growth. And, you know, if Tori had been there for that catch in 2011 playoffs, I mean, in the AFC championship game, Baltimore probably in the Super Bowl had been Tori. It was Lee. Lee had the experience. He had the mindset, but the body wasn't there. Everything you needed wasn't there for regular Lee Evans that we expected from the Buffalo Bills. He brought it over to Baltimore and it was more injured and inconsistency when we could have brought Tori Smith along a little further on his path sooner. And Baltimore could have been in the championship that year. They could have been in the Super Bowl that year. So you're only stunting these young players' growth when you're bringing in these Asian veterans that cost a little bit more.  He wants to make sure that he's getting everything he can get out of these young players for the best price for their first contracts to constantly bring in these veterans that are overly expensive. It's just going to hurt the team and you're not going to get as much out of the young bucks as you want. Hmm. Okay. And it's bonus question. He said, who do you think that was drafted last year will make the biggest jump this season? His pick is Madda BK that will make the biggest jump. I can't really say JK Dobbins because I feel like, like JK, like he did really good last year. Um, so yeah, I, I say Patrick Queen. I say Patrick Queen because Patrick Queen last season, I always talk about how he started off hot. He started off hot. He was doing this thing. And he sort of slowed down a bit. He started disappearing a little bit. But with him, and then I know there was sometimes in past country where he would just struggle. Sometimes when he just, he would just get beat and not to say that he can't get beat as impossible for him to get beat, but it seemed like it was more due to a technique. Maybe I don't want to say lack of preparation, but just, just being at the wrong place at the wrong time, um, sometimes it was a late reaction time to something that I was going, but with Patrick Queen, I would say, but overall he had a really good rookie season and he had that great, really good rookie season with no off season. But this year with him being able to be with the coaches, be with the players, be with the team, be at the facility, be there, then I expect him to take a big jump this year as a player, uh, even as a leader, um, cause we, we were talking about it early offline that I expect that Patrick Queen and I'm sure a lot of y'all do too expect him to get that green dot, not this year, maybe next year, um, but to get that green dot, uh, for him to be the one calling the place since he's the linebacker of the future. Um, and the lineback, not even this of the future right now, but as that middle linebacker, you know, that's what Raven's like. That's what they like sending the plays to a minus Eric Wettel.  He got me thinking about CJ Mosey on that play and Tyree Kill. And that's all that, all that game was just hurt. It was a heartbreaker, you know?  Honestly, you know, let the young bucks, the young fresh legs handle Tyree because that dude is nasty. And I think that's honestly what you're preparing for is what beats your previous year. We've done it multiple times. Uh, and then of course, speaking of preparation for that, uh, you've got Matta BK, honestly, I think it's going to be a Matta BK or I'm about to shock y'all with something here. If he gets the opportunity, uh, for the slot is James Prochet. Uh, I absolutely loved watching James Prochet. I got a YouTube video out there showing a couple of his routes. Uh, he, and last year he had this, uh, I want to say it was a whip route. The first time against the Steel Lizard cost at pick six because he didn't run it all the way through and it was, it was bad. It was bad at how he ran that route. He should have continued to run with it instead of sitting down on it. But then against the Titans, you see him run this route and put this guy on skates and then he makes a 13 yard gain. It was the one route that he caught of the season. Uh, one cast of the year, but I think he needs more opportunities. I think this guy can be just as good if not better than Snead. If he's given that opportunity. So Sammy goes down. I have full confidence that James Prochet can win that on to be that slot master that we need as I just look at his routes and a couple of his games that he played. Oh my goodness. Like you could see him be that while they receive it that you needed. He was just slipping beyond the coverages whenever they were running his own, he was running just right behind him. He found the holes in the zone. He was able to sit down where needed. He made big plays when it came to the slot and actually moving to the outside on fades. Guys, guys got it. He's got a complete game when it comes to the slot. He just needs the opportunities. And that's why I was kind of really much against like bringing in another veteran wide receiver, because I could see him getting pushed down and never getting to see the light of day. His opportunities. DuVernay is already there. Wallace is already there. And so there's going to be tons of competition at that spot. Have another person compete in there. He'd be on the streets right now. Yeah, that's that that is true. And I have I've said it too that I think that I think right now that he's on the bubble. I think he's on the roster bubble, because that receiver room, it's crowded. Very crowded. Not as crowded as the tight end room, but that receiver room is crowded. So you already know, somebody going to get that pinky injury or whatever, just a little bit of a little hang there and they're going to get put on an IR foot here. Yeah, somebody sneezed. They sneezed the wrong way. That's it. John, was that a was that a sneeze? Because yeah, yeah, I are right now.  You're going to the IR. Like, coach, no, I'm good for the year. No, no, no, it's just a hang there, man. Can't rescue, buddy. Can't we all shout out? Shout out to Tim White. Yes. Yes. I love Tim White. Oh, my goodness, acrobatic catches. And when he had that family day game, will he was just a it was a camp, you know, game, whatever it was. They invited the family out. Yes, I'm amazed and catches that day. And at camp, of course, he was always impressive. And I feel bad that, you know, Baltimore just couldn't keep them on. I felt like he could have done something big. But I'm always a big fan of the lower name, where I receivers, you know, remember, Spider-Man back in the day with Demetrius Williams. Tana Doss was I was like a huge fan of like Tana was. I thought for sure, like, hey, this is the next Anquan Bowling.  Yeah, I was like, hey, you know, him and him and Flacco, they just went on the same page, especially when I guess they were off on the connection there and Tana may have went a little bit deeper than he was supposed to go on one of his routes and it caused a pick. And that was kind of like the end of Tana and after that, he got in hardball's doghouse and couldn't get out unless he was on special teams. I'm like, I wanted the best for him. And then, you know, because it was like back then, it was the Marlon Brown versus Tana Doss, who's going to be that guy. And of course, Marlon ended up winning out temporarily and then just kind of faded out into non-existence. So it was just see that that that reminds me of what you said.  I was with it. But it it does put other people does bury other people on a depth chart because that's exactly what happened with Marlon Brown. Yeah, check out my YouTube video of we got Julio at home, by the way. With Marlon Brown, his rookie year, he came on the scene. He had, what I think, seven touchdowns, I want to say, broke the Ravens rookie record for touchdowns. And I'm thinking, oh, we don't find the gym. This is our guy, man. And this guy was undrafted. I'm like, he went to Georgia. He's like, six, four, like this outside receive. We got our guy. Finally, like we actually got one and we made him. And then the following year, that was 2013. 2014, Steve Smith, senior. He came along when did we get Mike Wallace? I think Mike Wallace was that maybe that was either. Yeah, yeah, yeah, but that was Marlon Brown. He is rookie season, amazing, did his thing and then. Disappeared, I put down a depth chart and then that was it. That was a wrap for me. I think it was Kamara Aiken in a beating. My aching. Now, yeah, that Kamara Aiken was definitely 2000. That was his year was 2015 when he just went off. But he had been around for a little while. With the Patriots and something. He went to the Copes. And I think he was on the Packers before the Ravens, I think. I'm not 100 percent sure. I think he was, though, but Joe had a real connection with him. I thought, should I keep him on? Because it was just like he was a chain mover. He wasn't magnificent, but it was like, hey, let's get the job done. And that was the piece that Joe needed for his game, was to be able to move the chains. Because we know Joe, he could bomb it like crazy. He never had to be bold. But once you get down to that 30 yard line, I mean, he's taking four sacks or taking three sacks. And then the greatest kicker all time comes out and does his thing. You know, and even with that, I think if Justin Tucker was on another team, then he wouldn't be considered the best kicker in the league or even one of the best of all time because Ray. No flakko is going to introduce Justin Tucker to the Hall of Fame. Because he made it happen.  That's my girl. You can't call him Joe. Look, I'm telling you, Joe had an amazing playoff run. Agneps, he had a good 2014 when he hit the 4,000 yards or whatever. And he turns up in the playoffs, but regular season, Joe. I think I've yelled at some TVs that some therapy right now because of the things that I put that TV through because I'm yelling don't want Joe, don't want Joe and then Joe is on his back. Why don't you take a sec, Joe? Like, oh, the dude was well, Joe, and then that Bill's game, where he threw the five picks. I was like, OK, OK, we got it. That was Nate Peterman before Nate Peterman. I'm not saying before that game, for that one game I'm talking about.  He had some real big ups. Oh, yeah, like he rolled Ray Wright's in a great defense for the majority of his years. And, you know, then, of course, when they went away, you could start to see some of the decline when it came to Flacco. And I like I appreciate everything Joe Flacco did for the Ravens. No doubt, like, you know, great dude, but I was so happy. I was there the night Lamar Jackson got drafted. I was in Dallas Cowboy Stadium. And honestly, I was frustrated. It's all get out about the leave because we drafted Hayden Hursey. After all the trading back and trading and trading back. I'm just like, man, screw it. So I did actually leave. I got to the car and we're riding down the road. And I see this motorcycle, like, do this white line of thing, popping a wheelie past the car. And for some reason, the radio popped on right at that moment. And instead, the Eagles had traded the pick. And I'm in the car, just like, go and turn the car around. Turn the car. Like, we need to go back. We're going to go back. And that's when the Lamar Jackson era started. I was so pumped, like crazy. And that's when, of course, I went to go look at it even more. But I saw a few videos and everybody was like this Lamar. And I was like, I can't wait to see another, you know, mobile quarterback. I want to see a guy play football. Like I play man, you know, because for years, what did I do? I would put in Troy Smith. I take I don't like I put in my right Taylor. I put in Joe Flacker. We didn't have a mobile single color man. One year I was hot. I was like, I'm training for whoever in France. Because I loved watching a mobile guy who could run out of the parking and make plays down the field. And then, of course, make it, you know, use that next element. The thing like, you know, like Vic said, hey, if there's 11 or 11, ain't nobody covering you, man. He's like, you wide open. If everybody's covered it, they got man coverage. And that's why those teams, they, you know, they play the man coverage. They they in trouble because that means the more wide open if he drags everything.


And the human rights situation has continued to deteriorate. The numbers are staggering and hence the interest in the Somali situation. But what is more important is that recently, in the last two years, the climate change situation has also deteriorated. The numbers are equally staggering in terms of the population that has been affected by food, water, sanitation, healthcare, and education. And therefore, in that regard, one has to also not only look at the impact of the conflict on the civilian population, but also the impact of climate change on the civilian population. It is very important to then talk about solutions, both to the government and to the international community. Those solutions would mean that both the government and the international community will have to work together with stakeholders in Somalia to address the human rights situation caused by those two events. What is critical to also look at social development because there's a transition from conflict to development. And that would mean looking at issues of economic, social, and cultural rights issues.


Welcome to the MarketWatch podcast by Amplify Live, where you can access the latest market insights with me, Anthony Chung, the head of market analysis, and joined by our head of trading, Piers Curring, getting you up to speed on what mattered in markets this week. Okay. Hello, and welcome to the latest MarketWatch podcast for Amplify Live. It's Friday, 23rd of April, and there's only one topic to talk about today. And that, of course, is the one that's really dominated mainstream media, and it's the European Super League. Now, to front-run this, I've got the head of trading, Piers is ever with me, and who is a bona fide genuine football fan. But I guess I come at it as I definitely follow football, wouldn't classify myself as a fan, a more of a sports fan, and my interest fan-wise like elsewhere. So I think it could be an interesting discussion. It feels like, Piers, when I mentioned mid-week that we were going to have this conversation, it felt like a little bit of the build-up between like an Arsenal-Toppen game coming up at the weekend or something. And you were giving me a bit of back chat, and I was sending you over a few nuggets of information just to sort of wet the appetite and you were biting. I've been warming up all week. I've been doing my strat. Going for a run this morning, just pumped. I'm angry about this, I have to say. And I'm looking for, this is the, this is the, maybe the podcast I've been looking forward to the most in terms of topics being discussed. So, we want to see Dr. Ron, let's go. Were you one of these people I saw out there, out in the streets in London and really getting involved? Well, I like to do it from the comfort of my own home. So, you support Arsenal, then? What? OK, I've cut the largest. I thought that was the typical Arsenal fan. Well, those are our most loyal listeners to the podcast. Well, of course, know who I support, because I revealed it in podcast number one. And that was when we heard about your man crush as well. As a teenager coming up, who was, of course. So, if you want to know who my man crush is, guys, you've got to go back and listen to episode one. OK, on that cliffhanger. All right, well, let's kick it off. So, I mean, I think the news came out. I even tweeted it because it was breaking at the weekend. And obviously, then it really kicked off. And by midweek, almost the whole deal was off. And it's a completely fallen flat. And so the breakaway European Super League founder and Juventus chairman said that the league on Wednesday can no longer go ahead. So there's six English clubs withdrew. And without the English clubs, there's no league, sure. But I guess context a little bit. And again, you know, I'm sure there's football pundits that will give us more granular level detail. But over top level, there's been a pandemic, right? So a lot of these clubs, you know, match day ticket kind of recedes is what fuels a lot of their revenue and obviously no games, no season, so on. European clubs, my understanding is financially felt the pain that's able severely than than Premier League firms or football clubs. And so therefore, what's been interesting here is that for one, there's a US investment bank involved. JP Morgan is kind of underwriting this and has been involved in the architecture of the deal from a financial point of view. And one of the things that was originally that came out was that founding members were going to get a welcome. So this isn't even talking the numbers that would follow. This is the welcome bonus, which is two hundred to three hundred million euros. But my understanding is what Champions League you're talking about 70 million or so. So these are these are quite large numbers, right? Yeah. So this isn't you said before, though, this isn't a new thing. This is kind of been around for a while, this idea around European football and so on. So what's what's your initial take when the news broke and where we are now at this point? But it's pretty annoyed would be a probably an understatement the way I see this as a football fan and a fan of one of these top six as well, by the way. And you could say, well, you know, if you're in the top six for happy days, you find then shouldn't all the fans be loving it? If you're in the top six and you're going to be in this league? Well, actually, no, quite the opposite. And in fact, in fact, the status seventy nine percent of English fans have opposed this and actually, interestingly, the proportion of fans from the big six clubs it's a higher percentage that actually don't like this. And but look, it's all motivated by money. And so fine. And we're going to talk about the business aspect of a football club. You know, these big boys, these are publicly listed companies. These days, right? So we'll talk about that. But, you know, this is all about money. Do fans care about money? No. What do fans care about? They want that they want to see their team win. They want to see their team win silverware, right? And OK, you could say, well, to do that, you're going to need to sign the Rinaldo's of this world. And to be able to do that, you're going to need to pay a load of money. Therefore, the club needs to generate huge revenues to be able to afford these players. And then you're going to be able to win. And all right, I see that argument. But look, in the end, this is foreign owners mostly. So certainly in the English clubs, right, at the top six, you know, most of them are they're all foreign in fact, all of them. Four of them are owned by Americans and perhaps will touch on the American way of doing sports leagues in a minute. But there are foreign owners here who never come to the games. They're not really fans. They in the truest sense like us, you know, they're not from these communities and they've come and they've bought and they say, right, we've lost a load of money here because of this pandemic. We're going to need to make some of this back. Let's just rip up the way that this sport has been run for 150 years. And then let's just try and make some cash.  But I assume you are old enough to remember the founding of the Premier League in 1992, right? And that was a breakaway at the time for the Football League, founded in 1888. Yes. So that's that's big change. And then the rationale there, taking advantage of lucrative television rights deals. So money's on the table at that point. So how did you feel back in 92 when that was happening?  And people were like, you're damaging the game, you're going off the money. On the one hand, it was annoying because it was moving on to a pay-per-view platform. And that was like, well, that's annoying. You know, I used to be watching this on BBC, right? So that was annoying. But then on the flip side, all right, it was really actually that from that point onwards, that's what's made the Premier League what it is today, which is comfortably the biggest football league on the planet. From a commercial aspect, you know, it was it was a beautiful strategy. Now, but the really, really important key difference here is that the European Super League, the proposals definitely not the same as what happened with the Premier League back in 92. Now, ultimately, it gets down for me. The most annoying thing about this league is that for the for the top whatever, 12 clubs, they can't get relegated. Right. So that actually, for me, that's the critical thing here. If you can't get relegated and. And actually, so all that can happen is you can either win and get the trophy, great, or nothing else. So look, if you're if you start in this league, and let's say you lose. So I'm a Tottenham fan, right?  Yeah, I think one of the best moves I saw it was like Tottenham being invited to the ESL was like banana man called up to the Avengers. So look, so from my point of view, this is what this is what would have happened, right? Tottenham would have been in this league. You'd have lost the first couple of games, let's say, of the league. You bottom of the league from the start. Basically, it's over before it begins. You cannot win now. And what's the point? You know, the Premier League, right? Just as one example, right now, there are six teams fighting tooth and nail every week, desperately to finish third or fourth. Why? Because top four get into the Champions League, right? There are teams fighting this. These are teams going down to that eighth position. We're coming towards the end of the league. And it is its life and death, these games for fans and for players. There's something to fight for. And like down the bottom of the end of the league, if you can't get relegated, well, I just think it destroys the competitive edge that makes football and sport what it is. So I completely agree with that. But from a financial forecasting point of view, if I was running a business, if then the uncertainty of an outcome of a match, because we know this happened, happens. This is what we love about football with like the FA Cup or whatever it might be. You get a minnow, knockout and a major team, which is amazing from a spectator's point of view. You can I'm not under the FA Cup, the FA Cup is something separate. But let's just say, what does next year look like? And how do I build this business going forward? When someone like Tottenham, let's say, which no offense fluctuate over time? And so tell me that. So is that not isn't that then a compelling? You said that these these guys now that own these clubs, you know, they're all they're all businessmen. And so when they see this emotive reaction like of this week, I mean, these are hard-nosed businessmen who are used to this type of confrontation and these types of things.  And how important is having that more stability about the forward-looking financial outlook for these these clubs, which are publicly listed as well? Some of them. Well, I get that from a business point of view to look at Man United's share price. Juventus is like Man United's share price spiked 10 percent off the news that they were joining the ESL. Juventus share price was up 19 percent. Now, a lot of that is exactly for this reason, right? Whereby you can't get relegated. So the stability and the forecastability of future revenues becomes much more stable. And so therefore, if future revenues are more stable, there's less volatility in those future revenues, then that actually makes your business more valuable. And so the share price spikes and fine. And I get that. But, you know, these these football clubs, why do they need to be run as just businesses with the sole aim of generating profit? That's that's not what they were ever for. You know, these football clubs are born and birthed out of communities, right? This is a this is a community social network. You know, you've got like families with four generations of people in the family that support this team.  Some of the crazy ideas was, well, yeah, like these owners can pick up this club like Arsenal, just pluck it out of London and let's go and take it and drop it into China. And we'll have the club in China because the commercial potential in China is way bigger than it is in the UK. So let's just, you know, they can't just use these clubs like pawns on a chess board and move them around. There's communities that are that built around these things. Isn't that the point? Can you not just pick up Arsenal and drop it in Beijing? Because ultimately the locality of a fan and look, I'm not belittling. I think there's a deep rooted rich history in English culture that we identify ourselves, particularly those working class routes in areas like Liverpool, Manchester, I get it. Definitely get it. But if you're talking about a locality fan base of million and let's say Manchester United's on global reach is one billion of which the by far biggest percentage growing market is going through a phase of, let's say, accelerated growth long term through China, through infrastructure, better individual wealth, new emerging middle class, people with ability to spend on things like streaming services and purchasing merchandise. I mean, are we not? You know, I saw this, the guys who were protesting football is for the fans and I thoroughly agree. Football is for the fans. You're just focusing on the wrong fans. Remove yourself out of the emotional tie to exactly what you described, which cuts deep that it's kind of like a Brexit issue. What are we? We're English, we're British. How, you know, this is that defines a lot of your decision making process from an emotive point of view. But if you look at it on the numbers, I don't think that this I'm not saying the Super League is without its faults. I think you're right, the area that's caused the most friction, I think, is its mitigation aspect. So I don't think it could go through in its current form. It needs some sort of amendment. But I do think that in actuality, it's I think you're a bit naive if you think that these these these corporations are going to give weightedness to the emotional tie that these clubs have from their history because we're moving into a new paradigm now of a different way that these companies will operate. Well, look, don't forget about the government's sort of position in all of this, by the way, because if the government says, yeah, yeah, go on. Arsenal, you American owner of Arsenal, yeah, go on. Take it to Shanghai, we don't care. Then that's a vote loser big time, right? So for government, what my point is, governments will not allow, will never allow that kind of, you know, quite extreme scenario of moving the club to a different country, right? That's that's definitely off the tail. I don't care what your business argument, your commercial argument is as an American owner, it's not happening. OK, that's definitely for number one. You saw the kind of Boris Johnson was on this bandwagon, I mean, back loving this, right? Yeah, of course. And, you know, you had Tory MPs kind of threatening windfall taxes on the breakaway clubs, or they're going to be allowed fewer work permits or unleashing competition, legal action and withdrawing police support from match days. These are all the threats that were coming out of the government, right? But look, let's focus on the commercials. And that's because for me, I think they're going about this in exactly the wrong way. I totally understand there's financial crisis in football. And as there are across all sectors, by the way, we're not quite all, but most sectors because of the pandemic, right? But there's there's a much better way to make these clubs more economically viable and in time make them profitable and fine. And then the owners get what they want from a kind of investment exercise. And there's a way to do it where the fans continue to get what they want as well. I think the money, the profit should really be coming from capping and sorting out the wage bills of the players. And actually in American sport, where they have made a success of some of these systems where you have leagues where you can't get relegated. Well, in these leagues, there's wage caps as well. But you need a wage cap in this system. Let me give you let me give you a couple of stats. Not on the wages. Yeah, I'm going to leave that for a second, but actually from a club's point of view, actually, to give you an idea of that revenue breakdown. So looking over the last sort of five years on average, roughly speaking, a club generates 44 percent of its annual revenue from broadcasting rights. OK, and we'll come on and talk about Netflix in a minute, actually talking about broadcasting. 40 percent is on commercial revenue. So merchandise and all the rest of it, right? And then only 16 percent of revenue these days is actually from match day ticket sales. So the pandemic has hurt the match day sales, right? But that's only 16 percent of their revenue these days. So actually the financial impact on clubs. Yes, it's large, but it's only impacted in theory, 16 percent of their revenue. Secondly, these 12 clubs, it is, and this is a stat that made me quite angry. So in the year prior to the pandemic, the 12 clubs, the founding clubs that kind of signed these contracts and let's get this European League up and running, the 12 clubs generated in total between themselves, 6.5 billion euros worth of revenue. OK, those 12 clubs, the next 700 clubs in Europe generated a total of 15 billion. So actually the 12 clubs, they've already got 30 percent market share in terms of all revenues generated by all football clubs. They've already got the lion's share. Now, here's the point. The other thing about the impact this would have on like lower levels of football, because this revenue, right? It comes in and then it filters down the pyramid. And this is how you get children playing football on a Saturday. These clubs cost money, right? For getting kids out there. And but if the European Super League happened and by the way, what would happen is this to replace the Champions League, right? So the Champions League, they earned 2.4 million from billions from the Champions League. And here they'd go to earning 4 billion. So they're talking about an extra 1.6 billion. OK, but this would mean those clubs at the top with their percentage of the revenue share would go up, go from 30 percent. It's already massive, might go up to 40 percent. And actually, that just means less money would filter down to the bottom. So that's just on a top level. Can I just so just just jumping in on on that point, because there's a crossover here to a basketball analogy I can give you. So I think it was 80. It was 85 when Scotty Pippin, the Chicago Bulls came into the league as a year after Jordan, I believe. Yeah. And he was he was an OK player coming out of college. He wasn't like a top, top prospect. Like Jordan was at the time, the year or two before. And Pippin was a guy like a lot of basketball players. He came from a very deprived background and they offered him a contract at X Figure. But to sign up for, I think it was seven years, which was a bit unprecedented at the time. But this is a young guy coming out of college, never played a pro game in his life, has potential, unfulfilled. So you're getting good value. Lock him in, if you're the Bulls general manager, cheap price. Pippin then flourishes, becomes one of the great players in the history of the game. Now, his actual wage salary was something like in basketball world terms, like insanely cheap. So he's now one of the top players in the world and he was getting paid. He was something like the bottom quarter, the worst players in the league, because he chose to take the lump sum up front. Yeah. Now, these football clubs, isn't there an argument? I get it. You're going to kill the competitive element and the distribution of wealth, if you like, from the league, which is going to be unhealthy because then it almost creates its own super league in itself, organically, in a way. But what I'm saying is if I'm Liverpool or I'm Manchester United and I'm generating all of this wealth for UEFA because or for whomever league, I want to aim my rights to turn around and say, OK, I earn a lot. But if it wasn't for me and these six, these five other guys, teams, well, then there is no league. So I'm going to collude with the other five and the six of us. You either pay us or we leave. I mean, is this not a negotiating? Well, yeah, it is a negotiation. Yeah, for sure. It's a negotiating strategy to try and leverage more money. I mean, they've already got the top 12 and 30 percent of the revenue, the next 700 and the other 70 percent. I mean, they're already all dominant, right? But on the one that Pippin example, then what happens here in English football is fine, you sign a youngster. They're on a low wage. They start doing well, but they might be on a five year contract. But then they're getting kind of courted by Real Madrid, right? And so even though they're on a five year contract, they could leave after two years because they can say, look, I want to leave. I'm not playing anymore. And so you're right, they get sold. But on these player wage bills, can I just say to kind of maybe just kind of bring this argument to a close? This is this is where the problem lies in my view. They're earning too much. And all right, there's arguments around, well, hang on, these individuals are generating huge revenues for these clubs. They should be earning money. So you've got the Ronaldo's of this world, right? The giants. And OK, fine, he he generates a huge amount of revenue for your ventures, but he's earning 900,000 euros a week. Well, that's 47 million euros a year. Pay him one million less. Well, if you want to run a profitable business, pay him less money. And actually that pay that one million pounds less that could go to run like five grassroots children's clubs supporting two thousand kids playing football for a whole year. There's other but that that's Ronaldo. He's kind of maybe in a different stratosphere, right? But there's others like Arsenal pay Erzil for the German footballer. They pay him three hundred and fifty thousand pounds a week. He hasn't played for 15, 18 months. Just doesn't play gets three hundred and fifty grand a week. Here's the best. Real Madrid are paying Gareth Bale three hundred and eighty thousand pounds a week to play for someone else. He plays for Tottenham. But Real Madrid are paying him three hundred and eighty grand a week to play for Tottenham. Now, if you think something's broken in football, that's it right there. They need to sort out the wage bill system. And then they can maybe get that a house in order and start generating a bit of profit. Yeah, well, I know we're we're running on with time, but I think there's some other good points I want to discuss. I think we should just roll with it because the other thing here is about there's two areas I want to talk about, which is online streaming and to lead us into that, I want to talk about demographics. Yeah, so going through behavioral patterns of different demographics. So how there's a, you know, perhaps is there a generational difference between how you and I would interact with sport or any product or service to what someone who's 17, 18 would do. And we've seen the emergence of apps that you and I do not use, like Snap or TipToc. Speak for yourself. Yes, you and Gordon Ramsay all over TikTok. But the point I'm leading to is, you know, some stats that I thought were quite interesting that I've got here. So from that point of view is the amount of young people now that own a smartphone, as you would imagine, in the last couple of years has gone from kind of 70, 75 percent to basically 100 percent. Yeah, also, as well, there's lots of different studies talking about. And I think the Real Madrid president, Florentino Perez, even said this, that basically 40 percent of 16 to 24 year olds just aren't interested in football. They don't have the attention span to watch a 90 minute game, particularly if it's like, I don't know, let's say, what for the playing Luton?  And so there's a shift there. And the kind of, I guess, digestion, smartphones, computers, social media, YouTube, short form aggregator, subscription based models is what's generally emerged here. So shifting that then to how football is consumed at the moment. So if I look at my Sky package, right, actually the business model of Sky is right. OK, let's break it all up so that actually if you want the all singing, dancing package, it becomes quite expensive because you need cinema, you need sports separate. But for a lot of people, I'm the same. I buy Sky for sport. You know, if I want to watch a movie, if I want to watch a documentary, I've got Netflix. Netflix is far better in my humble opinion, but I want the sport. So that's twenty five pound on top of your very basic Sky package, which is basically nothing. Sky Atlantic, I think, of twenty five pounds is fifty pounds. Then if you obviously what we've had this split of the battle of the kind of who runs the Premier League games, BT, sport and Sky. So OK, how much is BT sports, twenty five pounds. So now seventy five pounds. And then I start looking at someone like Netflix. And I don't know about you, but everyone's got Netflix. It seems almost that way. And like it's like, oh, have you seen that thing on Netflix? So are you watching that thing?  And it's anticipation. It's like, boom, I just blitz the whole series in one weekend, sort of mentality. So the point here is is is it a problem of accessibility for young people who are basically consuming content in a very different way and with such available free content of high quality. Paying seventy five pounds a month for these kind of archaic platforms seems just absolutely done. Then you layer in, OK, go to the pub. But then there's stats to say that young people don't really like drinking anymore in not not the way that you and I might have done many years ago. We were coming up. This actually starts to prove that this is the lowest level pretty much it's ever been. And that's part of that culture that we were very comfortable and we enjoyed that kind of match day environment. But has that gone? So I guess what I'm moving to here is Netflix. Let's talk about investment opportunities in Netflix and Amazon. With Netflix, I did some reading. I was like, why aren't they in sports anyway? Like, surely that's just a go to place for growth, particularly with a company. We've had Netflix earnings this week. Yeah. Right. Shares dropped like a stone. Yeah. I don't that doesn't scare me at all because I think that if you look at their share price, it's gone up. Phenomenal. It's had a phenomenal story through the pandemic, obviously, on the initial lockdown. So some normalising, I think, is of the order there to a certain degree. But the thing that's worrying for Netflix is growth. Everything's kind of weighted on subscriber growth. And now investors markets expect. How do you keep that that moving, moving north? And so from a Netflix point of view, from what I read, what they said was two kind of points here. One is, as we know, they spend billions of dollars on new original content. That's almost a draw for them. And that's what's really changing the landscape for all kind of production studios and everything. Yeah. So that's one thing. They commit already a roadmap of expenditure, which means it's very difficult for them to then enter change direction. And the second thing is that their head of content said, what can we offer with sport? It's it's a match, right? You can film it from a different angle, but it's the same thing, right? That you're trying to broadcast, so it's not uniquely different there. However, if they did go into that realm, let's say, because we know they like to spend money, Netflix, isn't there an opportunity there for them to tap into a market that would be global in a sense? And particularly for them, they're not the football club. They're a company looking for aggressive expansion and they want to then tap into these foreign short markets where there is a gross potential. So how do you feel about the kind of potential for a Netflix in this this type of scenario to get involved? I think it's definitely inevitable.  You know, I think it's like, what, really? What are we still doing that? And I think Amazon Prime have really come into the picture and now you can watch some Premier League games. But I guess the problem for a football fan is they're there that the games are now divided up across a whole bunch of platforms. So you need sky or you need BT Sport or you need Amazon Prime or whatever. But when it comes to cost, I mean, 75 quid for sky per month or 799 for Netflix or 799 for Amazon, the price differential is just dramatic. And that's why sky in the end, they're kind of dying a slow death. I would suggest when it comes to sport and this Amazon coming into this this arena is just the very beginning. And I'm very sure Netflix will sort out the problem is, especially with football, there's a huge barrier to entry with regards to the cost of these television rights.  And then if you want to slap in football, that's going to that's another huge kind of cost that at the moment, I don't think they can afford. But I think that it's in it's got to be in their long term plans. And right, then you get it into a format that is more consumable for our, you know, the new younger generations. But in terms of like some sports have we've seen it, some sports have changed up the way it's packaged and actually changed up the sport in many ways to try and generate more interest in it. So you've had things like the IPL, that's the the Indian Premier League cricket. You've had things like. Super set tennis, super set. That's what you were talking about. Super set tennis where you get all the big guns together and they play one set in one. They all play off and you get 250 grand. Was it for the winner or something? Yeah. Anyway, so look, you've had sports and you've had darts change things up. You've had snooker change things up and many others, right? But these are all sports that have been dying a bit of a death, whereby the the, you know, for crickets, a good example where young people don't want to go and sit and watch a cricket match for five days. And then it's a draw. Right, they want bang, bang, bang, bang, four hours. Winner, someone wins a trophy. There's an MVP and all this kind of stuff. Right, it needs to be jazzed up to recapture interest. Football doesn't have that problem or certainly not. I know the Real Madrid president saying that younger people are watching it less. And I get that, but it's nowhere near the same problem, the size of the problems that were near what these other let's call them smaller sports have had. But I'm not saying there's there isn't room to change things up. But I don't think I don't think you can say to football, the footballing world, right, instead of 90 minutes, let's just have it's five aside and it's 10 minutes each half. And then the winner gets 250 million, you know, look, it's 90 minutes, it's 45 minutes each way. I don't think you should change that. So I think Netflix coming in and look, I get what they're saying. How can we make this? How can we freshen it up and make it different? Sky did that in 1992, by the way. And that was from the analysis side of the game. Many different camera angles and many more ways to analyze what's happening. So I don't know whether we can go to a whole new level on that front. Sky did try 3D. They had some 3D matches. This was like three or four years ago now, and it kind of just seemed like an interesting concept. But then it kind of died away. So I don't know whether any Netflix or Amazon can come through with innovation in terms of how it's brought to the living room and how it gets analyzed. But there's got to be some room there. Yeah, the other thing, as these conversations progress, the thing about Amazon is that, you know, at the core, they're an e-commerce platform. And then if you were talking about a global game and you've got this direct, smooth ecosystem from point of match through to sponsorship, through to then the rights to then the purchasing of goods, seems like quite a tasty proposition if you could position yourself accordingly. Now we're talking, you see, that's the kind of deal Netflix should be looking for. They should be looking to partner with clubs like Man United. And it's a sponsorship partnership where not only, you know, they televising games, but then there's right there, clicking or Amazon is a better example, I guess, in terms of the e-commerce.  Right, he scores a goal. Yeah, right. Yeah, that'll be $80. Thanks. Perfect. So I think that's that's where it should go. And I'm sure these executives at Amazon and Netflix, I'm sure this is on their radar. If it's not and they end up using our idea, we do want to cut the action. But that's probably where football is going next. Yeah, no, the final point on that is that what was interesting is when I was looking at some of the research over a typical Chinese consumer, a football fan, what was interesting is that because they do not have that, as you described, that community, cultural tie to a club, it's not uncommon. Like there's probably any non-fan, more sports fan is that, let's say, if I was to say to you, or let's take myself, what basketball shirts do I own now? Like now I'm not so in into the sport as I was when I was young. So, OK, I've got a Steph Curry, Orius shirt. I got a LeBron, Miami, Miami heat shirt. Right. And I've got a Larry Bird, Boston Celtics shirt, showing my age, showing my age a little bit. But the point being is that this is quite common in a in a globalised non-locality marketplace where people support characters, individuals, and they're willing to go cross-party like, you know, imagine if you just walked into one of the local pubs outside the Tottenham Stadium with your Arsenal shirt on. You would come out of there alive. You wouldn't even be intact, probably. So, but that doesn't matter, obviously, when you're talking about, let's say, Chinese markets. So one of the things I was quite interesting, I was looking at, it's like how many times multiple could you then start hitting new markets when we were looking at the commercial aspect? And it it was quite compelling. But do you need a European super league to achieve that? Why can't you achieve that? I guess this this speeds into then that whole do does Anthony Chung in living in Beijing, Chinese Anthony, want to watch, right, Reading versus Man United. OK, yeah. Well, if it matters and the Man United need the three points to win the title or need the three points to finish fourth and get the Champions League next season, then it doesn't matter who they're playing.  Yeah, well, talking of Drake, very quick. I mean, we're going way over time here. But look, talking about Drake, he's just invested in overtime along with Bezos and others. This is a US company that's done a deal to broadcast children's or 16 to 18 year old basketball, right? So like for Netflix, I think that's quite interesting. If I was Netflix, I'd be going to the Premier League clubs and I'd be saying, I'm going to cut you a deal. I'll televise your under 18s league. OK, I'll televise that. I'll pay you some money. Maybe you can pay those kids a bit more money as well. But that's their way in. That's their route into football. It's actually bringing a new product that currently isn't really readily available. So can I finish on the very I talked about my banana man meme. There's one other really good one because this was this was hilarious, right? This European super league, all these big guys. Yeah, we're ready. It's going to go. It's going to be amazing. And then it's like, oh, sorry, we're pulling out. And the best analogy I saw was it was like the guys organising a lads night out before they then asked permission from their wife. Yeah, and then as as inevitable always is the case, sorry, shows over. That's right. And on that note, the show is over. So yeah, a little bit longer, but obviously a really interesting and quite emotive topic. So we thought we'd thrash it out. We'll be back on point, obviously, to talk a little bit more trading market related. Obviously, there's been a Biden tax proposal that's been particularly interesting. We can really get into that next week. But thanks for listening, Piers. Good stuff. Enjoy your weekend. See you next week. All right, take care. Thanks, everyone.


So, let us start the day so welcome to the witnesses who are here today with us on age 273. Our first witness who was scheduled as a is delayed and we'll join us in a little while and so Brian low if you are here. All witnesses we're going to introduce ourselves to thank you to thank you for coming. The difference between now and zoom time is that you can't see our names anymore, except for those of us who are remote so we'll start here with the folks who are on on zoom and then we'll come back to the people who are here live to represent the power to start us off. Good morning. I am Mary Howard, I represent Rutland Southwest District five three. Thank you. Morning, I'm representative chip Toriano I'm broadcasting this morning from the flanks of standard mountain in the beautiful northeast kingdom and I represent in a town that I represent. I represent trying to have a legacy hand. Representative map iron virgins I represent Northwest Addison County. I represent the south end of Burlington. John, so I gave South Berlin. Morning, I'm so far from the represent brought tops in the new very morning john plastic. Good morning I'm Tommy walks from very city. Good morning and Barbara Murphy I served in the district of Franklin to represent the top Stevens I live in water very representing water very here in Ontario, Peter to spinning to can bolt in and feel score. So, welcome here on age 273 which is an acronym relating to promoting racial and social equity and lead access and property ownership. This is the bill that we've been taking some time to money on and building up and one of the things that stood out in this in some of the read the reintroduction of the bill earlier this year is that the work that the So in this, in some of the read the reintroduction of the bill earlier this year is that the work that the seating power group for the main stakeholders on this did was, they told us that they had modeled this bill and this concept on the working bills that have been passed over the last several years. And so I think it's useful for us to go to that source and really get an understanding of the process that led up to it, whatever you can testify about the process that that happened which was, which was very grassroots and it was organized, not just through BCR, the Vermont Council on our own was a major player in that. And so we just wanted to have you testify to your specialties and like how how does the working lands initiatives work. How did it get there. How does it work. And how does it really apply to what we're talking about in this bill that I think that's the charge for today so I'll start with Brian Lowe, who is the new executive director for the Vermont Council on Rural Development. Welcome to general housing and military affairs. Hey, thank you very much chair Stevens ranking member Murphy and representatives of the House Committee on that general housing and military affairs it's it's really an opportunity to speak with you today so thank you. I'm the new executive director at the Vermont Council on Rural Development. VCRD is an independent non partisan nonprofit dedicated to the support of locally defined progress and Vermont's communities. And I've been asked to speak to the history of the working lands enterprise, and also to be brief. And so I will try and do both those things for you. I'm hoping to focus my comments on three points. How the working lands enterprise board came into being some of the important elements of that process and the current state of affairs from VCRD perspective. The outset this really was a grassroots effort that preceded my time at VCRD. And so the credit belongs to many across the state, farmers, foresters, loggers, other leaders of the working lands enterprises deserve great credit. As does Paul Costello members of the state administrations, including I see Lynn Ellen and Abby Willard here today. And critically many members of the legislature who works to turn many different voices into a very productive and meaningful program. Many, many different legislators played a role, but I know representative Partridge share one of the ag and forest committee former representative will Stevens and many others also played major roles. On the first point, how the working lands enterprise board came into being it started with a statewide effort led by VCRD and what was called the Council on the future of Vermont. This was a two year effort from 2007 to 2009 that engaged hundreds of monitors in a dialogue about the state's past and present. A major finding of that report was that more than 97% of Vermonters engaged saw great value in working landscape of the state, not just for its importance to Vermont's economy or its draw for tourism. But because the landscape represented much of what Vermonters loved about the state and our communities that love for and respect of the working lands was matched by some significant threats to those farm and forest enterprises that made getting a living off the land very difficult and still does and so an extensive effort was led by the Council on Vermont's future that led to the creation of what was called the working lands partnership in 2010, focused on that question of what could be done to make working lands enterprises more sustainable that partnership which was 100 strong had the leadership of the Council on Vermont's future and produced an action plan. It was a set of thoughtful strategies for investing in Vermont's farm and forest future. The plan which was released in 2011 became the basis of a bill age 496 that year which ultimately passed both House and Senate as Act 142 and act related to preserving Vermont's working landscape and out of that act came working lands enterprise fund and the board that ultimately oversees it. The second point beyond that quick history is to emphasize the importance of several elements of that timeline. The first is time itself, the Council for Vermont's future was Act 142 was passed in 2012. A significant amount of time passed a significant amount of public feedback was taken and the bill that ultimately passed the House and Senate was the result of significant inputs from farm and forest enterprises. Legislators transformed those voices and plans into concrete legislative action and ultimately a productive and meaningful program that in the years since it's been instituted has produced more than 500 jobs and had a return on investment of excess of $5 for every dollar invested through 2020, which are the most recent ROI members available. The second important element to emphasize is just the people this truly was a program that resulted from extensive public input over an extended period of time and deliberate and thoughtful action based on that input. And the third element highlight today is just the program's design. It is intended to serve Vermonters across the state and it does that to reach all 14 counties providing valuable resources for practical projects in all areas of the state. The third and final point I would make is just to share briefly where things stand about working lands. First, I'd like to thank legislators who've already appropriated an additional 2.1 million for the working lands this current fiscal year as part of the BAA process. That quick action has put a total of about $7.5 million into the working lands program this year. That is a great achievement. It will be well used, especially since the number of viable applications is likely to continue to exceed that $7.5 million allocation. Second, I'd like to thank the governor and his team for their budget proposal this year, which does increase the base funding of working lands to about a million dollars. And third, given that there's been a significant unmet need in the allocations of $7.5 million this year and $3.5 million in the fiscal year of 21, the state's fiscal year that preceded that, we suspect that the $1 million allocation for FY23 will probably leave significant unmet need. As part of the working lands coalition, BCRD continues to advocate for transformational investment in the working lands enterprise fund and to the tune of $15 million in one time funding this year to be spent over three years. As you weigh age 273 and they need to increase access to land and home ownership, that no need for further investment in farm and forest enterprises and that increased capital access for working lands enterprises needs to be broadly undermined as well. Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify today. Thank you, Brian and for any of your other witnesses, if you haven't already, if you could submit any of your written testimony to us. We can just submit it to Ron Wild and then we'll be able to post it. I don't want to focus too much on the dollars right now, but I think understanding what kind of allocations have been made over time will be important for our work here as well. Thank you. Any other questions for Brian at this time? All right, next up I have Abby Willard who is the director of the agricultural development division for the Agriculture Food and Markets. Welcome Abby. Good morning. Thank you, Chair Stevens. Yes, I'm Abby Willard, director of the Ag Development Division at the Agency of Agriculture Food and Markets for the record. Thanks for inviting us. This is not a committee that we have a long standing relationship or history testifying before so it's nice to meet you all virtually and have the opportunity to talk about one of the flagship programs within the Agency of Agriculture and administered at the Ag Development Division for a variety of reasons. So I can offer some really overarching comments and then if it suits you, Chair Stevens, to turn it over to Linnell and Schmoller who manages our working lands program and I can speak to more of the specifics. So thank you, Brian, for sharing so much of the history and speaking to the role that VCRD and the coalition has historically and to this day continues to play in this really valuable partnership of having some advocacy for a program and then the logistics managed by the administration. So one of the aspects of the working lands enterprise initiative that I think is really unique and worthy of acknowledging and emulating in other programs is its consistency in process, its access to reliable annual funding and the longevity that the program has in demonstrating its impacts. And Linnell and probably we will be able to talk about the impacts around job creation, increase in gross sales, as well as the acres that have remained in working lands production as a result of the working lands enterprise investments. Another really important and critical aspect of this program worthy of considering in this circumstance around S273 would be the value of partnerships. So having this administered by the Agency of Agriculture and staffed by the Agency of Agriculture, but that it being a true partnership between our agency, the Agency of Commerce and Community Development and the Department of Forest Parks and Recreation really speaks to the organization's commitment to engaging in working lands protection, innovation and investment. So there's a lot of power in that triumvirate, as well as having board members that represent the expertise and industry perspective across so many sectors which again Linnell and can probably share more specifics about as she manages. So I think that's one of those board appointments and in those relationships. We really couldn't do the program though without the sufficient and committed staff that are focused on the integrity of the program, the fairness of the review process, and all the grantee and applicant stewardship that happens to sort of let grantees and those that apply for funds. And the strength of their projects, the opportunities that exist for them to reach access additional resources as needed, and in the reporting to demonstrate the impact of their investments across the state. As Brian alluded to the program has had annual oversubscription and has had an oscillating annual allocation so the dollars allocated to the Working Lands Enterprise Initiative have fluctuated over time. And each year we can speak to the opportunity that the industry has risen to and created demand that exceeds the allocation every year, which I think speaks to the value of having consistent annual funding every year for a program that the industries can rely upon. So they always know that there's an opportunity to apply for working lands funds. They don't have to wonder if the program is going to be in existence or going to be funded in the subsequent year. So something that I think having that long term investment in the program has been valuable. And then I lastly would just speak to the value of the partnerships of all the organizations and the camaraderie that exists in Vermont by having partners like NOFA and so many others that are supportive of the Working Lands Enterprise Initiative and the work that happens through this board and through the funding commitments that are made and the engagement with the staff and other board members. So I think we can speak in greater detail, but it also looks like that there's a question. Chair Stevens and thank you Amy for your information. The question and maybe this would be deferred to someone else but the question I have in mind is, so we're trying to increase the production of farmland as one of the aspects of this bill. And so I've noticed around here that there are a lot more hops being grown. So suppose someone is to purchase 10 acres and with a plan to grow hops. How much can he rely on the agency of agriculture and or the Working Lands Initiative to assist in him. But hops are pretty difficult to grow in some respects. They take a lot of work and trellising and whatnot. How much can they rely on for, you know, information and even subsidies to get into a venture such as this. Would you have an answer to that or someone. Representative Triano that's a great question. I think I can offer a little perspective and then. And then maybe it may be a good time to transition if the committee is willing to, to Lynn Ellen Schmolar to talk about the program in more detail. We have a big hop production as an example so it is an industry where we, we have seen interest in demand. We've certainly seen applications come into the competitive grants that are awarded through the Working Lands Enterprise Initiative and we have awarded some of the top businesses grants to support a business venture so that could be an opportunity for growth for purchasing new equipment or expanding their infrastructure. It could be doing research and exploring different hop varietals and or looking at new marketing opportunities of scaling production and selling to new to new customers. So those are the types of project ideas that the Working Lands Enterprise Initiative has generally received in applications and been able to award and grants. I think the important part about most of the work of the application division is that we offer competitive funding opportunities mostly, which means there's an application period you apply, you're one of many competitive applications, and those applications are reviewed, scored, and then again being that the most always oversubscribed only a portion of those applications are awarded grants. So there's always that, that potential of, of your project not being funded in this round and you may have to wait a year or you may have to modify your application to be more competitive. We may recommend that you apply for another source of funding that's a better fit for your project. And so we have some businesses that have applied multiple years before they've actually been awarded funds through one. We lost you having lost your, your voice, your audio is gone. Yeah. The cut out. Yep. Thank you. So sorry, thanks for the, the heads up grace. My internet has this terrible habit of just losing audio but it doesn't give me any warning so thanks for telling me. So yeah, so this is where the working plans program can address some of the industry needs not all of them and we're very reliant upon the variety of funding sources to fill the gap. But hopefully that gives you a sense of what may be available for a particular producer or sector and agriculture. So would there be assistance in the application process for instance some folks may need that and that could be I mean, my interest is that these ventures succeed. And I think it's very important. As part of this, this bill 50 comes law that these ventures succeed. And oftentimes application process is complicated and a little bit cumbersome for folks that are not used to it. And there are situations in which application assistance and applications are available from resources. And I wonder if this would be an opportunity to transition to Lynelle and smaller I'd love for Lynelle and she does an amazing amount of applicant assistance and I'd love for her to be able to speak to that directly of of the process that she utilizes and the level of response and engagement that she offers if that would be acceptable. That would be great. Thank you. Sure. Well, thank you, Abby and Brian, and I'm on the website for the working lands enterprise right now to learn about all the grants. Thanks, I'm sorry. I wonder if the bill we're talking about h273 isn't quite this but could it could something like that actually be incorporated into the working lands enterprise and have a targeted towards the BIPOC companies and have a really big grant to help with down payments. Is that too much of a mission drug. We're a philosophical question at this point in time I mean just to put it out there as the yeah yeah yeah yeah. Well let's just leave that on the table. I think Abby, I don't want to put you on the spot of like speaking about how we expand it now but I think that that's a valid. And that's just a question as we learn about working lands and that's why we're here is because I want to hear how similar something that's existing. And next on is to what we're talking about in this bill. My last question for you Abby, if that's okay john, we'll just leave it hanging there you know just for now. Absolutely. So what we're having before we go to the now is, you talked about the first time I've heard people refer to your budget receipts as oscillating. Great word for for not knowing exactly how much money you're going to get every particular year. And that's what drives your competitive process if I'm not, if I'm not mistaken is that right I mean it's, it's, you can only give away the money that you receive. But you do receive sets set amounts of money and then there's money added in when there's surplus is that is that the right understanding. Yeah, so that's a good clarifying question so yeah we've had a consistent base allocation for the working lands enterprise investment funding for and have to look back at maybe the last four years, and then there's been additional one time allocations added of varying amounts from you know another $500,000 to a million to this last year there was 5 million in two and three million increments. So the competitiveness of the granting program is by design though that there will you know be an application process. There's a deadline applications are reviewed and scored and top scoring or best fit applications are those that are awarded. So the competitiveness is by nature and design with the opportunity for the board to review and ask for additional questions and, and again Lynn Ellen can can speak to the details of that process and she manages those those intricacies. But I think the there's additional competitiveness as a result of of the oscillating allocation. So, but you know and again we can share some of these numbers if you if you're interested every year that the allocation changes for the program, the demand so in a year that we have, you know, like this past year where we have 5.5 million to award we received over 10 million in applications in years that we've had, you know, two and a half million to award we've received, you know, 5 million in applications. So it's pretty customary that the program has been able to fund, you know, somewhere between 20 and 30% of applications that have been submitted. And so, what while I think it would be great to have a larger conversation around, could we add this land access and opportunity component into the working lands program I think the biggest question for me becomes a relatively representative allocation for the program to accommodate that kind of an additional focus area and we've had experience in recent in recent years of the legislature carving out a particular ask within the working lands program so this last year it was around meat slaughter and processing capacity. Previously it was around dairy innovation or secondary wood manufacturing, and that that has worked well to have particular focus areas or we call buckets funding buckets for the program to focus on. And, and Lynn Ellen and her team can and the partners can do additional recruitment and promotion to those audiences. But I just think we'd have to have we'd have to really think about the funding to requisite to the to the added focus area. Yeah. Yep. Thank you. Good morning. Thank you chair and representatives for having us visit with you this morning. It's an honor to be here and talk about a great program. I have a couple points that I want to go over but I first want to say that it's really impossible to review the ontology of this program. I'm not referencing Brian Lewis notes and the work of the Council on the future of Vermont and its 2009 report, imagining Vermont values and vision for the future. That report was really the home of a data point that has permanently proven to be really vital and the mandate for this program. The working lands program and governing board were created in accordance, accordance with act 142 of 2012 for stimulating economic development in the ag for cultural and forestry sectors by systematically advancing entrepreneurship, business development and job creation. We've come to date from mining data based on surveys from different sectors. We funded over 240 projects. They've impacted all the counties across the state. We've deployed over $7 million in funds, and we've leveraged about $11 million in matching funds. We know that at least from 2012 to 2018, 524 jobs have been created. We've impacted over 19,000 acres in agricultural production. We've employed over 1000 people. And we know that we've generated sales of over $36 million. So some really great impacts. I want to start by saying that it could be the case that committees are really the strongest leverage point for the working lands and our board enterprise board and it's really robust quest for clear and good strategy effective operations and system impact. We're creating a toolkit for and for activating and optimizing the working lands enterprise board committees. That's helped us to feature things like a really good review program charters work plans for the committees and then of course an annual schedule that I think with the board calendar. Board members are really busy. And so, you know, getting them to consider how the committee work and committee leadership really simultaneously enhances their satisfaction as board members and it really builds on the program standing as an impactful and operationally excellent state program. So, Secondly, I'll go through just the process of applying for and granting funds through the program and hopefully answer some of the questions that emerged about assistance to applicants. Again with outreach across the state and that includes public sector, private sector, forest and woods sector, food and farm sectors. Our service providers that provide technical and business assistance around the state networks programs practitioners business enterprises trade associations. After that outreach is conducted. We also have webinar sessions, including information for applicants like key dates program information eligibility, what are the types of grants that are open. We encourage them to develop their application materials from assistance for me but also from assistance from service providers around the state. That can include our partners the farm and forest viability program through Vermont Housing Conservation Board. It could include viability partners at Northeast Organic Farming Association Center for agricultural and farm and forest viability program through Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund. This year alone based on the amount of applications that we got in I conducted close to 50 distinct one to one meetings after these webinars, because once we conduct the webinar and posted on the website, applicants then reach out to me with further questions. So that's a really important touchstone. There's a lot of really important outreach that needs to go to applicants because you get a wide variety of different types of businesses in need. Abby talked about need, and certainly we're enjoying unprecedented appropriation of funds of 5.3 million. We did review over 100 applications with project request to date totaling over $10 million. We're going through applications for the larger projects, but just to give you an understanding of what we've funded so far as of January. Over $600,000 to service writer organizations, which will provide technical and business assistance to ag enforce businesses for topics like marketing and branding ability to brand developing and selling products. Over $500,000 to standard business infrastructure projects. These are smaller. They range from 10,000 to 25,000 and focused on marketing plans for business sales strategy development, enhancing production or manufacturing efficiencies. We funded over 600,000 to meet processing and slaughter enterprises for production improvements. We know that there have been known existing bottlenecks and infrastructure has a food safety plans and implementation. So these funds will really help these businesses with procurement and pricing strategy focusing on cured meat operation, etc. And finally, we have funded close to $200,000 to producer associations. We've seen that producer associations continue to need help with leadership and organizational development, which it could include just looking at their business structure on boarding or transitions for new executive directors and post succession, for board training capacity. We find a lot of these producer associations tend to be run by busy private sector individuals. And so by providing them some help with that governance, it really helps them to move forward. If you don't mind, I'd like to just talk a little bit about that equity inclusion question. I think it could be the case that equity inclusion is maybe the most significant current opportunity for addressing a range of goals and challenges. Recognized by the state as a whole as well as working lands economy. The board has had some nascent conversations. This could be a front burner question for them in the near term. There have been some ongoing strategic concerns and operational imperatives that compete for the limited bandwidth of the board and for staff. But I do think that equity inclusion efforts that are systematic within organizations tend to be more substantive and effective when they're moving into the fabric of an organization structures and activities, as opposed to sort of addressed as a side issue. And so the service provider strategy committee, which helps with some of the press for applications, did weave into the scoring criteria to take a look at equity inclusion dialogue within partners stakeholders. We're trying to make sure that when service providers apply that the work that's happening in their organization has moved past sort of the peripheral value shifts to the center of the organization's strategic development. And so I would say one of the first service providers that showed up after that shift in the scoring criteria for the RSP was the bottle communities project that was funded in FY 21. And they have a Montrelief Collective as a named partner. They're creating a BIPOC land access every town handbook. So that's just an example of some of the nascent work the board is doing and then I think the other item would be an opportunity potentially that they've discussed in terms of the nominating committee. And Abby, I don't know if you wanted to answer that question. Additionally, that was asked about equity inclusion. I'm not sure that I have anything else to add. I was thinking about, and I was trying to look it up really quickly, but I think it might be interesting for this committee to understand and Lynn Ellen you may. You may know or this may be something we can bring back to the committee but working lands has not historically been awarding grants that for land land purchase and acquisition. So that has been a, I think, just a policy procedure of the board to not make investments in that category. So I just want to touch on that a little bit. And again, we can get you back more information if if when Ellen and I are not prepared to talk about that at the moment but I mean, again, our conversations with the event key community and with BIPOC populations, primarily with event key communities has been around the value of investing land to be able to have land ownership and be able to engage greater food production and livestock kind of grazing. And I think these are we all agree that these would be really important issues and particularly around indigenous lands and populations. So we could talk about that but I also just want to think from the standpoint of working lands, how how land acquisition has or has not been a priority in statute or just an internal board policy. Yeah, Abby you're correct the board hasn't traditionally funded directly land projects. The grants have ranged, you know, they vary in range focus and criteria, depending on the board's assessment of what the market needs are. And I, I think that in years where the scale of appropriation has allowed the board has ventured into larger grants as we've seen in the past two years while I'll skip over COVID so FY 20 FY 22 the board's ventured into scaling up grants intended to impact open or even potentially create markets for Vermont or Vermont working lands products. I would imagine that there's some tentacles between land trusts as well. I mean, that people would be purchasing land, or have the opportunity to purchase land through the land trust model to the Vermont land trust, you know, and then be able to, I mean I think that's, they're not two different silos they're all there are tentacles connecting all of this together. I appreciate that it's not that you are not a one stop shop. That's true full disclosure I'm a trustee on the Vermont land trust but I would encourage you to potentially have a conversation with the President Nick Richardson. Representative Triano. Quick question. Is there an anticipated channel in which a potential or a choir requirement acquiring land and with an agricultural plan. So for that person and for instance acting in behalf of this in reaction to this legislation that will connect them with you for the assistance is that channel exists or is it a plan to exist. I understand your question. There are pro there are probably better places to go than the working lands program, if an individual is looking to purchase or access land so there's a variety of programs in Vermont including land link and others that are about sort of match between either land that's looking for a land manager or land manager that's looking for land. And there's, there's other organizations and partners and programs in the state that that's their, that's their primary focus is trying to ensure that people can can access agricultural land. So if the land is acquired, is there a, is there, how will this individual get information that this these services are available that's the question. Okay, thank you. Thank you for clarifying yeah so that is a separate question and that's where we have many and no for Vermont being one of those partners that engage in new and beginning farmer resources and programming so in the agency of agriculture we get contacted every week probably with an individual that's looking for I want to start growing hops or I'm moving to Vermont and I've I've purchased 150 acres and I want to know what I should do so we get those calls frequently and so we have sort of an established kind of like new and beginning farmer process of sending them an email or doing a phone conversation and directing them to other resources so we might connect them to NOFA for their new and beginning new and beginning farmer program or to UBM extension different resources that are really focused on having beginning conversations with businesses as they're trying to determine if they need a business plan if they already have a market channel or a set of crops and livestock that they're interested in in cultivating or growing a raising to begin those conversations. And through the agency of agriculture does not have specifically a new and beginning farmer program but thankfully, many of our partners in the state do, and we help connect them to those resources. Yes, that does answer my question thank you. All right. I want to move to grace is it Odell. It is yep. Welcome grace and Stephanie welcome for welcome to the committee again and we'll, we're going to hear from grace and then we're going to take a break a short break and then we'll get to Stephanie so we know we just flipped the calendar a little bit here. And I know that some folks from I see that I see that. I think you have to step off soon as well so please feel free to duck off on you when you need to grace welcome to general housing military affairs. Thank you chair Stevens and thanks to the whole committee very much for having me I don't get to testify in this committee. Often and it's an honor to be here today and get to share our perspective on this bill as an agricultural organization. My name is Grace Odell. I'm the executive director of the Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont and just quick quickly about who we are. We're 50 year old member based organization with a mission to build an economically viable ecologically sound and socially just Vermont food and farming system. We have around 1200 members and we certify around 800 farms the organic standard in the state. We work on a broad variety of issues that range from farm viability to climate resilience to food security and beyond so it's quite inexpensive body of work and we work to really bring people together to plan to plant for our shared future so we're a member of the working lands coalition. And you've heard from a lot more expert colleagues here on the mechanics of that program and exactly how the history of it. I really appreciate seeing our colleagues here today to speak on this bill with us and share whatever we can to how the working lands coalition model might help inform our thinking on this bill. Just from my perspective as you've heard already the program has had really an outsized economic impact for the state. And my colleagues are have spoken to already so I won't rehash sort of how it serves the community. And I'd like to step back and share a big picture around our support for the need for the intention in this bill. As Abby just mentioned you know we see as NOFA and enormous need for land access funds and I would encourage you as Lynn Ellen said to to connect with Nick Richardson at Vermont Land Trust if you haven't already. I receive outreach all the time as NOFA Vermont to inquiries around sort of what what funds are out there to help me access land I'm a beginning farmer. I want to have an economically viable project, or I'm new to the state or I've been here a long time and I don't have access. And we as a nonprofit organization really don't have the kinds of funds available to be able to support people in that. And my sense is that there's there's much much more demand than we have as a state available. I also want to mention that we as NOFA are a member of the farm to plate network. In a moment, I'm going to speak to how this bill in particular connects with the priorities generated by the farm to plate network who these are some of the partners that Abby named. We've been strengthened by working together as the working lands coalition, we've been brought together by the farm to plate network and just last year we completed a 10 year plan. That process was really robust. Abby was very involved as where many other community partners across the state that that project generated a set of briefs to detail the work ahead of us as a state in our food and farming system. And several of the priorities identified through that process would be addressed in this program I'm going to talk about that in a moment. But as an agricultural organization with a commitment to social justice.  This really this legacy laid the foundation of our nation's agriculture and with it the whole economy. I'm naming this legacy because we cannot undo these atrocities but we can acknowledge them and help them have that truth inform our sense of how we might repair them. In Vermont has an opportunity to begin to acknowledge and seek that repair as a state. Just this morning I was reading in digger the office of racial equities report the disparities for BIPOC Vermonters have only grown since the beginning of the pandemic. And we know that people of color own homes and land in Vermont at far lower rates than the white counterparts. This disparity contributes significantly to this well documented generational wealth disparity between BIPOC and white people in the country at large and here in Vermont. And also, from the perspective in agricultural organization we're standing in the early stages of climate migration to Vermont. This process is causing land prices to skyrocket. It's causing farms to be sold for development, and second and third homes to sell for really incredible amounts of money. This upward pressure is making land access for all farmers in Vermonters, much more challenging, and particularly for BIPOC who already stood at a currently disenfranchised and inequitable position. This trend, I believe, is going to continue. We need to take action so that all land doesn't become out of reach. A bill like this one could serve to interject as working lands has support to address and ameliorate these realities. As an ag organization we just see so much demand as I mentioned for land access and capital investment, particularly for BIPOC Vermonters and as it relates to our wheelhouse BIPOC farmers. You know, broadly as an organic farming association we want to speak to the value of biodiversity and diversity in human communities is the same. Vermont has this opportunity to serve as a leader, just as it has modeled investment in farm viability and protected its working landscape through the working lands program. Vermont could secure, could really model securing land ownership and housing for BIPOC and set this high bar, an example for the rest of the nation to look to. Finally, just call our attention back to the priorities that we as a state and a food system network have identified in the state's 10-year strategic food plan that was completed by the Farm to Plate Network. So priority strategy number two of that because I think it bears repeating is to establish funding mechanisms like agricultural loan loss reserve farm transfer financing to address food specific investment gaps specifically for women and BIPOC owned businesses. Priority strategy three was to improve funding opportunities and create equitable access for BIPOC organizations and BIPOC owned businesses by developing multi-year unrestricted BIPOC centered grant and loan programs. Priority strategy 33 was to plan to plan commit to and prioritize actions to begin eradicating structural racism in the food system. Priority and food system organizations and stakeholders prioritizing racial equity and actions to eradicate structural racism and to sort of center BIPOC leadership which this bill has. So this bill has given us a chance to work on these priorities which have been generated as a robust stakeholder process and NOFA is just hoping that we can move forward on the work that we've identified as a community and believe that we have an opportunity to do so. That's my testimony I feel like my colleagues here today have spoken more adeptly on the mechanics of the bill but I'm happy to take any questions if you have them. Questions for Grace at this time. It really is a treat to have folks from the Department of Agriculture and from NOFA to come in here. And really understand I mean that I guess we're the general committee right so we just sort of when we need to hear from everybody we have that access and I really appreciate I really appreciate your time to come in and I feel like there's more for us to ask maybe not today. But to hear how interconnected the work on the work on the existing work on working lands the existing work and land trust the existing work across many different I don't want to call them silos because we know where they are. But that that 273 is attempting to connect them in a slightly different way. So that's that's what we're that's what we're trying to sort out here this has been really illuminating for for for me anyway I'll speak for myself but because I get in trouble when I speak for the committee. So the ideas here are are very familiar. And I'm glad to see that a program that started back into I remember one to one work the concept came forward from from the first report how far we've come since then, and to hear that it's really. I don't want to hear that is really maturing into a program where the system itself is set up in a way that we need to pay attention to for this bill as well the the idea of committee work and how that works so thank you. Thank you for your time representative try out question before we take a quick break. I'm just wondering with your. What you had just said I mean you made the connections to the to the heart of this bill skinny. And I remember when NOFA was formed. Many years ago, so I really appreciate you coming in grace and speaking that as you did. And as I said, you really made the connection between what you folks are doing and what this bill is going to try and do so thanks very much. Thanks for having me it's such a pleasure to be here. Thank you, and we're going to take a five minute break and Stephanie, we will start with you at 1015.