On May 10th, 2017, we were proud to host an event at Rise New York: a panel talk focused on taking high growth US digital startups international. At the event, we shared our own experience of helping to build businesses in the UK and wider Europe, and tapped into the expertise of some hugely experienced business leaders.
The panel on the day consisted of:
- Alex Calic, Chief Revenue Officer, The Media Trust
- Geoff Sutton, Partner, Atlantic Leap (former GM for all MSN and Windows content apps businesses outside of the US)
- Jon Williams, Director, Snapchat (previously LinkedIn and Microsoft)
- Evan Rudowski, Managing Partner, Atlantic Leap (former MD, Europe for Excite.com, ex-News Corp)
Over the course of an hour, we covered best practices, what worked and what didn’t, and the biggest surprises that we have come across. We present here highlights of the panel discussion and a full transcript of the conversation.
Why go international?
Geoff Sutton: Many companies, particularly US companies, see a lot of growth, and the opportunity for greater growth comes through international expansion: moving into new markets. I think there’s a particular opportunity for growth for digital companies where a lot of products and services have the ability to translate across different markets very quickly. There’s just, you know, big audiences out there for digital products and services.
Alex Calic: Yeah, most companies coming out of the digital media space tend to be American companies, for lots of different reasons. Ultimately they realise that to grow and to keep growing you have to go international. I mean, as big as the US market is from a dollar value perspective, population-wise we’re still 5% less of the US population.
You’ve got massive countries in Asia between China and Indonesia and then Europe as a whole market is equal in size to the US. So, you know, Facebook doesn’t get to 1.6 billion users by concentrating on the US: they nailed the US and then they strategically went country by country and took over the world. So you know, if you want to limit your size, stay in the US. If you want to actually grow and become a big company, you have to go international.
Jon Williams: Yeah, I would echo that, both in terms of the growth opportunity of your platform in terms of the user base but also to differentiate yourself and elevate yourself to a different space, not just competing in North America. It’s essential to go international if you’re trying to do business with major Fortune 500 companies or even Fortune 20 companies, particularly in the consumer packaged goods space.
A lot of them are trying to chase the next billion consumers and they select their partnerships accordingly, so if you are looking to strike a global relationship with somebody, they’re going to look at your international reach and capabilities as one of the primary remits, just because they’re trying to get point of market entry to people as they come online in every marketplace around the world.
When is the right time to go international?
JW: Think of your strategy as concentric circles and once you are a hundred percent sure that you’ve got a significant amount around the central concentric circle - the focus of your organisation - then you can expand. Expand by taking as little risk as possible: think about an organisation like Atlantic Leap and a destination like London, a lot of the companies in this room are American and therefore the language that you speak and the lexicon they’re utilising is going to be very similar, so London is a good safe place for you to make that leap into the first marketplace.
Then from there, you can look at the rest of Europe and decide to expand into the markets by utilising teams in London to do so before you make the even bigger risk of putting people into Europe because of the laws and legalese and employment contracts that you have to take into consideration as you make a move into a country like France or Germany where there are extremely stringent career moves involved in doing so.
So that would be my recommendation: think very carefully where you’ve already got a very significant moat around your business - where you think that model will be easy replicated in other marketplaces - and then make the move.
AC: Over two different companies I’ve had two different experiences with it and it really comes down to preparedness. Two companies ago I was with a company that was growing very well in the US and we raised a bunch of money. We had this money to play with so we said, let’s go to Europe, because we could.
I think one of the challenges with that was that ultimately, we hadn’t really solved the business model, the KPIs, we hadn’t set all the proper metrics and things we needed to monitor here in the US to be optimised and successful, that we could then take and replicate in other countries. Not that you can exactly replicate what you do in one country in the other because of, depending on what your business is, language barriers and cultural issues and ways of doing things.
But if you know how to run your business in one country it makes it a lot easier to take that and say, ‘you know what, we know we can be successful if we do X, Y and Z, let’s go to whatever country and try to replicate that’. You can do it by country, by region, but you really need to have the economy buttoned up and ready to export your model and the way of doing business, to these other countries. Or you just end up wasting money trying to solve problems at home and at the same time trying to apply those internationally and then say, oh we didn’t solve it let’s try something else, and then you’re spinning wheels and not being very efficient.
GS: I think John’s right, you have to be really clear about what you’re going to do and when you’re going to make that leap.
What is the right structure?
Evan Rudowski: So how do you set up an organisational structure to support that and to support successful international growth? It adds layers of complexity: there’s geographic complexity layered on top of functional roles and you’ve got corporate headquarters and then there’s the regional management and then there’s country-specific management and all the different functions.
Some of them are necessary to make sure that things are properly localised, but then at the same time corporate needs to make sure that the brand values and ethos and capabilities are all delivered successfully, and balancing those things is tricky and challenging. So what experiences have you guys had with that, and what works best in your experience?
GS: I don’t think there’s “one size fits all”. I think the important point is to have the right people on the ground who can make the right decisions and are empowered to make those decisions. I always figured that running an international business, you had two responsibilities going each way. So you had to have the power and responsibility to do what was right for your market, and then at the same time be able to go back into the corporate headquarters and continually be saying, we need this, we need this, give us the right products, give us the right support. But you had to just get going with the things that you could do.
Often you wouldn’t have the right products and the right services and the right support but you still just got going and got moving. So it’s that balance between asking for help and just getting on and doing things.
JW: One of the things you need to be considerate of as you’re entering into a new marketplace and helping set teams up to be successful there is really focusing on making sure you go overboard in allowing the teams in on the vision of the company, the mission of the company, what the operating principles are to support that mission because it galvanises everybody around a common statement.
They also are able to use lexicon that is utilised in the rest of the organisation to feel like they’re part of a bigger cause. Then underpinning the strategy or the operating principles, the cultural tenets and the language that’s utilised in each of the marketplaces and then once you’ve got that locked in with the teams, it’s up to you as a leader to communicate to the cross-functional teams that support the organisation in the rest of the world that they have a mandate to support them versus that team in Europe doing bottom-up work to try and get the resources required to be successful in their marketplace. Because that will take away half the time they spend doing their job.
So companies like LinkedIn add bi-weekly, all company, all hats meetings. It will literally be the whole company, 3,000 or 4,000 people on a conference call via a video with the CEO and his executive leadership team, re-stating the company vision, mission statement and the KPIs and operating principles of the organisation, so it gets hammered into everybody. They remember it and it works, and I think that frequency of communication and consistency of language is incredibly important.
AC: It makes me think of two words really that are key here. One is trust - and that’s a two-way trust. You’ve got to trust the person that you’ve put on the ground there to be able to do the right thing and they have to trust that you’re going to have their back when they do what they believe is the right thing and empowering them do it. So, we were fortunate enough to work with Atlantic Leap ,and so we were able to empower and use the guidelines to go and do it. We said, you don’t need to get authorisation from us for 90% of the things you do, just go what you think is right and we’re going to support you. To Jon’s point, communication is critical because you’re not only in a different office, you’re in a different time zone. So that makes it that much more difficult to convey things.
ER: Yeah, I think that’s a good point. Things become too big to be able to micromanage everything, so there have to be people on the ground who you can trust and who have the capability and are empowered to make things happen, even if it’s in a somewhat different way, as long as it’s compatible with the ethos.
International regulation & GDPR
ER: Another key issue is regulation and the regulatory environment and of course here in the US businesses have what you might describe as the relative luxury of a light regulatory environment. People might disagree with that in their own specific context but certainly when you compare it with the UK and especially with the rest of Europe, it’s a much heavier regulatory touch. But of course we’re now globalised and businesses are globalised so even if they don’t set up operations in a certain market, they are still subject to some of the requirements.
You know, one big piece of regulation that’s emerging right now that’s on the horizon is GDPR, which is going to affect pretty much everybody and Alex, I know your Media Trust is doing a lot to focus on that. Maybe you can educate us a little bit on that and what’s it all about.
GS: Sure, you know your first test is to tell us what GDPR is.
AC: General Data Protection Regulation. So we are literally a year and maybe three weeks from that getting enacted, and it really does affect everyone even if you’re not a European company: the fact that you have a website means that there are people in Europe that probably view that website and now you are beholden to those rules.
The penalties are pretty severe if you are not in compliance, 4% of global turnover is the max. So if you think of somebody like Google, which makes what, $250 billion, what’s 4% of $250 billion, that’s a lot. Europe has always been a very consumer-friendly continent in terms of how they want to deal with how things are transacted and the US is a capitalistic society and a little more corporate-friendly. So you know, as part of “how do I go international”, it’s just understanding that’s somewhat of a cultural but also a regulatory difference that is pretty dramatic.
ER: Yeah, and I think American companies until now have had an easy ride with data protection because they’ve been able to just self-declare that they are compatible with EU regulation. That’s not going to be possible anymore.
AC: That’s not going to fly anymore.
ER: Yeah, so it will change things. Then, of course, there are other similar types of nuances which come down to things like employment and other things like that, and you guys probably have some experience with employing people in the UK. I know that when we start to work with US companies that are beginning to make the move they’re always a bit surprised by the employee-friendly climate in Europe. Things like the amount of notice that an employee needs to be given or that they sometimes need to give to leave their job, it means hiring takes longer. The requirements around how much you can ask people to work and how much they can opt out of working and even the amount of vacation and holiday.
You know, Americans are used to two weeks’ vacation. But that’s part of the planning process, that’s part of understanding how to build a business around that and you can still do it successfully if you take that all into account. But it’s quite a bit different from the way it’s done here.
JW: I think the other way to think about it as well, in a world where we’re increasingly automating everything that we do is, particularly in the media business, if you want to do more of a hub model, which a lot of companies like to do now, you can put people in epicentres where a lot of the media is happening and automate your processes from a market like London, to do away with the necessity of having as many people on the ground in some of the marketplaces, particularly with the advent of programmatic and self-serve tools etcetera.
In fact, if you look at what Microsoft, LinkedIn, Google and a lot of other companies are doing now, there are huge teams in Dublin who service the whole of the mid-market for the whole of Europe. So you have these armies of people that are living in Dublin from Poland, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, Holland etc., in an international team so they can speak the language but are surfacing in those countries in an automated fashion from Ireland, just due to the tax implications of putting your head office for Europe in Ireland versus another marketplace in Europe. So that’s one trend to keep an eye on.
Then number two is, on top of the holidays in countries like France, you also have stringent communication laws around email. They’re not allowed to use email after a certain time of day or over the weekends.
So given some of those implications, don’t only think about the hub model, but also think of a contract model as well as you enter into those marketplaces. If you don’t have the luxury of being able to hire somebody that’s either worked for you before and therefore you trust them implicitly, think about a contract model where you put a contract in place and somebody for three to six months, before you decide to take that leap of hiring someone full-time because once they are full-time then all of the bells and whistles of that contract come with it, so you’ve got to be really careful about those considerations.
Brexit & geopolitics
ER: The UK has always been viewed as the entry point and the gateway to Europe. Will that change with Brexit? Will the UK still be a valuable and important market? Will it have a different role? What are your thoughts? I know we’re speculating here because a lot of that is still taking shape, but it would be interesting to hear your educated viewpoint on that.
GS: You have to look at the opportunities and the positives. There’s still a very, very vibrant tech and startup scene going on in the UK. I think over the last four years something like $35 billion has been invested and if you compare that to France, France is about $15bn, $16bn and Germany, much to my surprise, is even less. So there’s a lot of money going in, investing.
The government has been very positive about the tech scene and wanting to keep that momentum going. I think from a UK perspective, the UK remains that jump off point. Culturally it’s easier, the language is the same, and it’s a big market just in its own right. So the ability to launch in the UK and then move into other markets in Europe, I think, will remain.
AS: One good thing in working with Atlantic Leap is that we can think about it, but we rely on them to help us and guide us with “these are the things you need to start worrying about”, or we want to run our business use their help to guide us, where do we need to tack and tick and move. But for us, yeah I think you’re spot on with that.
You know, I think the UK is still going to be a launching point for any US company that wants to go to Europe because of the cultural familiarity, because of the physical distance between London and Paris and London and Berlin and all those cities. So there’s going to be changes and there’s going to be impact from a financial and physical perspective, how that turns out I don’t know, but I still think that over time not much is going to change and hopefully things will just keep growing.
ER: You know, we often tell people that the UK is still a market of 65 million or so English speaking people, it’s a strong, powerful market that’s not likely to change in a dramatic way, although some of the specifics of how UK-based companies can work across Europe are still to be determined.
The other thing that we’ve seen in the near term and the immediate aftermath of Brexit has been the change in the value of the pound versus the dollar and actually for American companies that’s suddenly made Britain 15% more affordable than it had been a year ago. That’s a nice near term tactical advantage to enable a company to maybe move forward and invest or hire a bit sooner than they otherwise might have. So that’s been a near term benefit.
We’ll see how the currency valuations change over time, but I suspect that for a while the pound is not going to be as strong as it had been and had been for actually quite a long time, so for American companies, that’s a good thing.
GS: I think Ireland will become much more strategically significant. I mean it already is and it’s extraordinary to go to Dublin now and see how it’s changing: amazingly sparkly, glass offices that didn’t exist before on the waterfront. I think that will continue. So I think Ireland will become more important for a lot of companies to use as a base or a headquarters.
ER: Getting back into business strategy and tactics a bit, there are different models for expanding a business into the UK and Europe. There’s self-funding, there’s partnering, strategic alliances, joint ventures. What’s been some of your experience in those different approaches and how does that play into ultimate opportunities for success?
AS: Yeah, in the two different companies I worked at where we’ve launched European operations we had very different approaches, and the first time it was…well it was venture-funded, self-funded, but really came from engine dollars and it was specific to the UK and that’s all we do, is try to create an entity in the UK and operate everything out of there. It wasn’t super-efficient because as I mentioned we were still figuring out what we wanted to be when we grew up in the US.
But this time around it was a different company - bootstrapped. So efficiency was a high priority and that’s why we had established a joint venture with Atlantic Leap, because the personnel we knew really well, they obviously knew the market really well and we could be very efficient in getting into the market, not wasting a lot of time and energy in figuring out the lay of the land and even some of the menial tasks like setting up bank accounts, what kind of entities should be relative to what we’re doing here in the US.
All those little things that we just didn’t have the cycles to deal with, we pushed off on Atlantic Leap to deal with for us, which was great and we got up and running much more quickly. I think the success there is just really a trusted partner doing it really efficiently on getting up and running. In theory you’re sacrificing dollars in some regard by joining up with somebody, but hopefully in the longer term that means you’re just generating revenue that much more quickly and it all works out and washes out that way.
JW: Both at Microsoft and at LinkedIn, in smaller marketplaces we often didn’t have sales teams in the marketplace, we used partnership sales houses to represent on the ground in those countries. Again, similar…not problems, but similar challenges occur, you have to make sure that even though you’re partner selling, there’s an incredible amount of Is that need to be dotted and Ts that need to be crossed with the process and the systems and the training that you need to provide those people with so that they’re doing a good job.
ER: You know, it’s interesting. I want to get back to this, but you made an interesting point which is that in Germany, MSN didn’t get as much traction as in some other markets, and I think there have been some other examples of that. You know, LinkedIn is probably another example, where Xing was developed in Germany actually by a guy who, when I got over there, was our PR guy in Germany, Lars Hendriks, who ended up building Xing and became a huge success. But it probably severely limited LinkedIn’s opportunity in the market. What are the implications of that? You know, obviously it means that moving fast sometimes is necessary to preempt local competitors. Sometimes, though, that might not be enough, and there might just be certain other characteristics that enable a local competitor. What’s been your experience there?
JW: Yeah, the natural tendency for any marketplace in the world is going to be its loyalty to a domestic brand and so you have to make sure that, as you do your research, number one, that in terms of the entry points that you’re choosing into a marketplace is, is there a strong domestic brand that’s a competitor and then think very carefully about that marketplace before you choose to enter – now that’s obviously fairly basic but very, very much required from a planning perspective.
Then number two, if you are going to be going into that marketplace, you have to make sure that you’re forecasting accordingly in terms of the potential growth trajectory being less versus the rest of the marketplaces where you haven’t had that conversation so you can do the requisite planning.
GS: I just wanted to talk a bit about partnerships as well, and give a shout out to Mike Vengoldall from Moneto who’s one of the companies that we’re working with. So Moneto has got great shopping technology for buyer buttons, purchase at the point of inspiration. We’ve been working with Mike in the UK and Mike, I think one of the things about partnerships is finding those companies that enable and accelerate the speed of growth and connect the different sorts of customers and clients that you’re after.
So Mike linked up with Awin which is an affiliate network, which then has both the publishers and the retailers that we needed to get and that’s how we start to get traction by having that sort of key strategic partnership, it’s about trying to look for those partnerships that make that big strategic difference.
ER: In some of these markets local players will set themselves up with the possible objective of getting acquired by a US company, and that’s a perfectly legitimate strategy for the US company and for the local players as well.
You know, recently Nextdoor.com, which you’re probably all reasonably familiar with here, acquired a company in the UK called Streetlife, and that was their way of expanding into the UK market, a kind of turnkey, if you can merge the systems and the processes and the cultures. It’s not without challenges. That’s happened again and again in the UK.
A company called Book Pages got acquired by Amazon and it became Amazon UK. There are numerous examples like that. Of course in Germany there’s Rocket Internet which sometimes copies American business models, they get accused of that. They would probably argue that that’s not exactly the case, but they tend to preempt and sometimes sell. But it’s an interesting strategy and something to think about, grow through acquisition rather than just organically.
AC: On the consumer side that’s going to be a much easier proposition because you’re taking something that is a cultural fit in one market and putting it with what’s a cultural fit in another market, and hopefully you’re leveraging the underlying platform of the bigger company to make it more efficient to grow in other markets.
On the Enterprise side, it becomes more difficult. I mean, we’ve talked to folks who wanted to represent us in certain markets and it just feels like we’re another tool in their belt and ultimately if they are successful that’s great, but I don’t know if there’s a great value in buying a sales team: there’s relationship value but there’s not a lot of technology or things you can leverage beyond just that manpower.
AC: The challenge obviously is, if you get marketing ahead of the infrastructure, how do you most efficiently follow up with all the leads you’re generating in from a consumer perspective and you’re having to service those consumers, or from an enterprise perspective and selling and supporting those folks. So you want to be ahead, but if you’re too far ahead then there’s going to be this huge gap where you’re under-delivering on the promise of the brand and you never really want to do that because you only have one shot to really get that right in a market.
JW: Yeah, I mean particularly in the B2B space, a lot of companies are buying up products and services. They’re looking for time to benefit or time to cost efficiency, and so if you’re not servicing the opportunity immediately then that time increment is only going to be increased. If you’re launching in a marketplace and you start to have that reputation from the inception, it’s probably not the best place to be.
AC: People ask, I mean you know … we have clients say, well who do you have in my time zone, even though we’re literally available 20 out of 24 hours a day online, they want to know that, I want to be able to call that guy in Spain or in Hungary or wherever, because heck, if I really need him, I’ll make him fly to my office.
ER: I think it is important to try to get the brand out there before investing a lot and putting operations on the ground and we’ve seen that with a number of clients. Their business is working well in the States and its growing and they’re confident, but they’re unknown in the new market and it makes sales and business development much more challenging if nobody has heard of them.
They start out by thinking about using their US marketing materials and just sending them out and yes, that does provide some credibility but it’s Alex’s point, people like to see that it’s happening in their market, they like to see people in their market who are using the product and service, so getting a case study in the market, getting out there and promoting and building the brand, working with local media, really makes a difference in terms of when you call them and try to sell something, they’ve already heard of you. If that hasn’t happened it’s much, much harder. That’s certainly been our experience multiple times, yeah.
We did that working with the Media Trust, we did a piece of research in the UK market and we worked with some local publications to help get that out there. We did an event around that, that starts to help to build credibility and the local research talked about how the UK market was responding to some of these challenges, so it made it relevant and not US material that had been shipped over.
AS: If you look at digital media, the UK is actually probably ahead of the US. If you look at a percentage basis, they got to mobile quicker and they got to certain utility around the digital media space faster than they did in the US.
But the adoption of certain technologies on the back end around programmatic have happened slower: the UK being the fastest but France and Germany being even slower. So there are great examples like that in certain markets, or certain technologies where you can see how it’s being rolled out and you can pace yourself that way.
I think that might be more enterprise tech-focused versus consumer. Consumer you sometimes can’t control, it might get adoption in a certain place and a certain country and you just have to go after it.
JW: I think another way of looking at it, a lot of large multinational corporations now actually, including Microsoft and others, don’t necessarily put countries into geographical environments anymore, they have clusters and markets. So to give you an example, when Microsoft was working for Pepsi on the launch campaign of a new carbonated beverage they were developing a number of years ago, they wanted to launch it into two test markets before they launched it into larger marketplaces, and the two test markets they chose (because they had similar socioeconomic and GDP backgrounds) were Norway and Australia, just because the cultural entities of those markets were very similar in terms of the research that they had internally.
So we helped launch a pretty significant marketing campaign in those two countries alone, as a tester, before the rest of the markets rolled out. But if you look at bigger companies, such as Unilever for example, they have a market like Brazil paired with a market like Turkey, because of their similar size in terms of GDP but also a similar economic state and so they can actually do some cross-learnings in terms of their launch of products and services from market to market.
It’s not necessarily what we think but it’s the way things are developed in services. So we might want to do some research in terms of market to market comparing, not necessarily France with Spain or Italy or Germany, more, ‘okay, what’s another country with similar economic output and a similar age or demographic mix and what’s been the adoption in that country of these types of services?’ I think that could be an interesting dimension into that in terms of the research work that you do as an organisation.
ER: Yeah and I would say, you know, just to finalise on that question, I think as was alluded to, the adoption of different technologies varies from market to market, so you know, mobile as someone mentioned, was adopted much faster across Europe as you probably know.
I remember it was probably five or seven years ago that the penetration of mobile devices in most major European markets was in excess of 100% and that wasn’t yet the case here in the US. The US has probably caught up now. So a lot of services and products were being developed for mobile first in Europe and that wasn’t yet happening here. Another good example is probably payment solutions, and I’m always still surprised when I come back to New York and I have to sign things when I buy things. Of course in the UK and Europe we’re using chip and pin. Here you start to use chip but without the pin which is a little funny, it’s not quite so secure.
GS: I think isn’t Kenya the most advanced for mobile payments? So everything is paid for micro payments through the phone.
ER: Yeah and contactless, you know, also ubiquitous there now and all sorts of things. That influences product development decisions and that’s probably also connected to why London has become a huge fintech centre because of the ubiquity and the ease of payments and of course the international component as well.
Exchange rate & budgeting
JW: I guess experiencing this from a Microsoft and from a LinkedIn perspective, generally … at Microsoft they set the exchange rate for the year. So at the beginning of a fiscal year they’d say okay, here’s the upside/downside across every single country in the world, putting together very significant statistical figures, and for every single country in the world you’d have a trading position of that currency exchange rate for the year. If it went up, great, if it went down, tough. I mean, it’s literally that simple.
As a corporation, that generally evened itself out around the world as you think about it - all the different marketplaces - if you are truly a global multinational organisation. But some individual countries who held the P&L at the local level would inevitably either get some upside or have some downside and that was just an “it is what it is” situation for those particular marketplaces.
I think other companies I’ve worked for have been a bit more flexible in that they’d have either quarterly or biannual reviews of those exchange rates to change. Then the other thing you need to consider as a company isn’t just the rate that you’re utilising to trade on yourself but what’s the exchange rate if you’re going to do a multinational deal within a corporation. What’s the exchange rate that you agree with that corporation to trade with you and what are the checkpoints on that as well?
If you’re a big corporation like Microsoft, you generally get your own way, but if you’re smaller you’re probably going to need to adhere to whatever that company is giving as their exchange rate and you need to factor in some risk analysis for the potential fluidity in that rate of exchange as well. So I don’t have a perfect answer for you but you would generally set a point in time versus it just being on the day trading which is just impossible to manage forecasting around.
ER: Yeah, at Excite we didn’t do that kind of exchange rate planning, it was kind of ad hoc and we would have moments where we would hit our numbers for the quarter in Europe and we’d send the money and a few days later we’d get a call from the CFO saying, why did you miss your numbers? We didn’t miss our numbers. But as far as he was concerned we had, because he was planning in dollars. We never really solved that problem. I think some of those methods are clever and make sense but I guess it also comes with scale and that helps a bit.
JW: For example, imagine if you had had a sales organisation in the UK for the first time this year and you set the exchange rate for the year before Brexit, and then you know, what was it, a 20%, 30% drop? But if you held that rate you’d need to enable the local leader to have some compassionate flexibility for a slush fund to keep his employees, because otherwise you’ll have half your sales team leaving if they don’t get paid. So I think, thinking carefully about, you know, not too much of the carrot and stick in that type of situation as well, would be really, really beneficial too.
Huge thanks to our panelists, Geoff, Alex and Jon for taking part in this event. To find out more about some of the companies that we’ve helped to take that international leap, click here.