Ever wondered how software-defined automation is reshaping the factory floor? In this episode, Alexander Krüger chats with Dr. Tilman Buchner from BCG about bridging IT and OT, adopting cloud-native concepts on the shop floor, and why deterministic systems still matter in modern manufacturing. They explore how open-source can drive trust and agility, the economic impact of scaling use cases globally, and practical ways to build a future-ready architecture - all while managing real-world constraints like network complexity and cybersecurity.
Topics Covered:
- Shifting from traditional automation to software-defined solutions
- Bridging IT/OT gaps and deploying services at scale
- Why Unified Namespace can simplify data management
- Balancing reliability with flexible, cloud-native updates
- Opportunities in the pharma industry and beyond
- BCG’s hands-on approach to engineering and proof-of-concept
Key Takeaways
- Software-Defined Automation
Traditional automation systems are shifting toward a “software-defined” model. This approach allows for faster deployment, more flexible updates, and better overall adaptability on the shop floor. - Bridging OT and IT
OT can adopt IT practices like containerization, virtualization, and continuous deployment to improve speed and reliability. Meanwhile, IT can learn from OT’s emphasis on deterministic control and safety-critical environments. - Scaling Beyond Lighthouses
Many companies have success with individual “lighthouse” projects but struggle to roll them out broadly. A strong architectural foundation—along with a focus on cost and performance—enables smoother scaling of solutions across multiple plants. - Clear Business Alignment
It’s not enough to focus on the technical details alone. Demonstrating how automation upgrades support broader business goals helps secure buy-in from leadership and ensures long-term success.
IT / OT Integration Platform for Industrial DataOps
Connect all your machines and systems with our Open-Source IT/OT Integration Platform to make all shop-floor data accessible at a single point.
Chapters
00:00 – Introduction
01:45 – From Traditional Automation to Software-Defined
04:00 – Virtualization & Containerization in OT
05:48 – Bridging IT/OT & Scalability Challenges
10:00 – Strategy, Value Leakages & Architecture
13:59 – Unified Namespace & Data Management
19:56 – Build vs. Buy & Open Source
25:00 – Future Manufacturing Stacks & Closing Insights
Transcript
Alexander Krüger
Hi, Tilman, great to have you here. That's actually a really special episode for us because now we have this technical podcast and now also swirling in a little bit the organizational aspects of what's really needed. And I think you're really a great person to talk about it. Can you shed a little bit light where you're coming from? So now at BCG and what led you there?
Tilman Buchner
Hi Alex, nice having me.
Tilman Buchner
Sure, happy to do so. as you said, so I'm a partner with BCG, 10 years with the firm, but my background is in mechanical engineering, I a PhD in automation control. So spent most of my time dealing with automation tech and developing software on the shop floor and for the shop floor. And actually I live between the IT world and OT world and have the pleasure to work with a couple of companies.
out of the manufacturing industry, but also pharma industry and help them actually to develop future ready architectures and designs for their factory of the futures.
Alexander Krüger
and you have been CTO in the past, yeah? So you're really in the trenches on technology. What did you do there?
Tilman Buchner
Exactly. So I had various CTO like positions in various tech companies. After graduating my PhD, I joined a couple of internet companies. So at this time, this was very much about how to develop mobile applications. So before I gained experience in industrial control technology. So it's a pleasure to gain different experiences with different type of software stacks from
today edge computing to industrial control technology, to backend technology, cloud computing. at the end, broad spectrum of languages and architectural pattern to solve problems.
Alexander Krüger
White stick.
Alexander Krüger
So really, really wide technology scope that you actually have been exposed to. really, I would say this perhaps a little bit dusted automation control space. I think that's happening a lot with virtualization and DevOps also on the shop floor, in contrast to mobile and cloud native applications, I think wide stretch. So, and what do you see there? Like in the automation market, is something changing there or how do you see that space evolving?
Tilman Buchner
Yeah, absolutely. think that both of us, we also claim that automation tech is turning into a software defined automation world. As you said, topics like virtualization, container technology are building or paving the way towards a really software defined automation world where in future,
Alexander Krüger
Who did it up, who did the term? There's a company like that. And who founded the term SDA? Did you settle on that with Joseph or not yet?
Tilman Buchner
Yeah, I think it was a kind of coincidence or both of us had some thinking about the terminology. At the end, think it describes the fact quite well, right? So everything is turning into software and that's also true for automation technology. And I think also from an economic point of view, it makes sense, right? Because you have a much better utilization of your compute power.
if you are capable to manage your OT as you manage your IT. think at BCG, we claim this sometimes also as a data center operating model for the shop floor. Because I think the OT world can also learn a lot from the IT world. So how we manage compute load in the IT world, if you try to think of this pattern and apply this to the operational technology, it totally makes sense. For sure, we need to deal with different latencies.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah.
Alexander Krüger
Mm-hmm. Yeah.
Tilman Buchner
in the IoT world than in the IT world. But if you can overcome these challenges, and I think it's technically feasible today, there are great references and examples. Look what Henning Loeser is doing with Audi, for example, in this regard. It's doable, yeah? So the future will be a software-defined automation.
Alexander Krüger
Hmm.
Definitely. And I really think there's a similar discussion with VLogs a few podcasts back and he also said there's like so much free knowledge in the IT space. can be just copied with pride to automation. So it's how we deploy software. How do we package software? How do we create high up times? How do we harmonize? So like, centralized firstly and then harmonize software. there's an often this, I would say OT perspective.
but IT is built differently. It's built for high user, high volume, and we are building for safety, safety, safety, and reliability. And this is often not an easy discussion, but it's moving into each other, I guess,
Tilman Buchner
I agree. And my experience is that what prevents companies from really turning their automation or shop floor system into a software defined system is on the one hand side, it's not as easy to deploy software in the OT world as in the IT world. So this whole continuous development and deployment idea, I think, which is like one of the
Alexander Krüger
Mmm.
Tilman Buchner
the key sources to innovate at the speed of software, which is really well known in the IT world. This is something we strive for in the OT world, but the existing network topologies, you mentioned topics like cybersecurity, but we need to deploy, let's say, across different levels of edge gateways, for example. And this is way more complex than in the IT world.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah.
Tilman Buchner
But I'm fully convinced once we solve this problem, we can really unlock a lot of potential and lot of value. But as of now, based on our experiences, it's really one of the key things which prevents companies from unlocking this value.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah.
Alexander Krüger
I think it's also really that I think there's also some technology misuse, perhaps a little bit too harsh, but it's like we want, for example, Kubernetes on the shop floor. want data streaming on the shop floor. want like high availability on the shop floor, but then we want to have it air gapped. We cannot have SaaS applications and like cloud applications or like cloud technologies are not built in airgapped scenarios. So you directly crank difficulty to super hard and they are.
I think there needs to be like a better, like everything needs to be in my private container registry, everything needs to be aggapt, it can only like manage updates in that specific way and then you make everything so hard. it's also a change management process on architects that needs to happen.
Tilman Buchner
Yeah, fully agree, fully agree.
Alexander Krüger
And I think this is the one side to enabling platform that you need. like technology, cloud-native on the shop floor, scalable, reliable, and also powerful for the future use cases. what is your take on that? So how should you approach like and pitch it to your peers and your coworkers that you need such kind of technology when they're specifically more interested in the use cases and the bottom or top line savings or uptime, upside.
Tilman Buchner
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think if, if, if someone is talking to the both of us, so we are very enthusiastic in technology, right? So it depends, as you said, a little bit on the audience. Yeah. I think when you, when you approach decision makers or C level people with all respect, but I think they, they, they do not judge mainly on technology. Yeah. So they really care about what kind of value you can unlock. Also how to scale.
certain use cases. So this is actually the kind of thinking which drives their decision making. And so to be clear, think it's not so much that you can convince these people with a seminar about industrial data management. It's more like you need to showcase value leakages on the shop floor.
how you can solve dedicated problems, how you can start automating things which you couldn't automate before. And you need to showcase and give good reason why you are now capable to do this. And once you are capable to communicate and to make this tangible, that people really see and feel it, then you can change also their perspective on certain things. Then there is a kind of willingness.
first to give you time that you can explain, but then also to take decisions. Because as we discussed at the very beginning, it's a very complex topic. And normally you don't have time to explain in detail a complete architectural design and to explain the pros and cons.
So we need to derive this actually first and foremost from a company strategy. So the whole architectural design should also be in line with a company strategy because a company strategy also explain like your ambition level. Yeah. So how ambition are you when we talk about a future ready architecture, what does this mean for you? What kind of automation level are you, are you striving for? And then if this is in line with your, with your business goals, with your business strategy.
Tilman Buchner
Then we need to understand and clearly articulate what are the value leakages and translate these value leakages in concrete use cases. And then out of the use cases, we can derive technical requirements, which we then design into a proper architecture. So this three-level approach of having a clear strategy in mind, which each and everyone in the company is aware of and understands and is working in the same direction. Secondly,
Unlock value leakages, so really explain where the value is. Explain how to scale this to really unlock the full potential. And then last but not least, derive the technical requirements on an architectural design.
Alexander Krüger
It's also way nicer to position. This is the business goal, this is our mission level. We really want to have this, this, and this use case covered to take that value from the table. And therefore we need a high available architecture. We need like an easy to deploy solution. And I think this then resonates way better with decision makers, which are not as technical as you are.
Now zooming out, like there's like not directly, it's a recession all over the world, specifically in automotive markets. What is currently top of mind? So there was this AI or there is this AI hype train still not full steam. I would say it's a bit down, but.
What is now currently top of mind, perhaps, is that we actually need the data to power those AIs? Is that we need to have the right organization, upskilling? What do you think is currently specific in technology sector in industry? It's top of mind.
Tilman Buchner
Yeah. So good question. What I see at a couple of clients is most or all of them gained, let's say, experiences with certain lighthouses, right? So they identified use cases, implemented the first use cases. But there's also a little bit of a downside of this because the expectations of industry 4.0, for example, was way bigger than maybe the impact they can measure as of today.
And this brings us a little bit back to what we discussed previously. The reason why they cannot scale is the missing underlying architecture to really deploy software. Because it's not as easy as it sounds like, hey, we develop the famous predictive maintenance application, and then we just press a button in the same manner as we download an application on our iPhone to deploy this into an architecture.
of your factory. And this is something what people need to understand. What it really takes to develop, to manage, to deploy, to maintain software on the shop floor.
Alexander Krüger
Mm.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah. And I really think it's.
Also, perhaps a change of audience also that's needed. think it's 2017, 2016. This was the industry from point zero hype train time, where it was a full steam and then was often pushed on later to the cloud. And then all our problems are solved and then we build solutions in the cloud. And what I saw in the last years is actually the change in audience. So it's not a data scientist that develops use cases. It's actually often like the maintenance guy, the automation guy, the electrician or whatever is who is really exposed
to the shop floor problems who needs a tangible solution to really solve his own problems fast. And this is really the enablement factor. yeah, this is apps where some architecture deviations or like reworks are currently under progress to really skill and enable those people rather than just having it there. And then the abstract data scientists will take care of all my problems. So yeah.
Tilman Buchner
Yeah, I agree. And I think this is, by the way, also where you guys come into play with your solution, because what we also see is it's on the one hand side, you can invest the effort into building a first lighthouse. But over time, you need also to showcase that you have some, that your approach scales so that you can benefit from economies of scale. And the difficulty in it
Today's way how we implement these solutions is, for example, that if you develop one use case, let's say a predictive maintenance use case, which needs certain industrial data, then you follow up with a set point optimization use case, a visual quality inspection use case. And all of these use cases needs to have connectivity. All of them needs to have industrial data. So the way that you replicate again and again, this complete, let's say, plumping of
Alexander Krüger
Yep.
Tilman Buchner
industrial data to your application doesn't Yeah. And I think that is also one of the reasons why the effort is way too high today to do it. So very strong economic reasons and the reason or the idea to establish something like a middleware in between, which abstracts actually and exposes data to an overarching layer where you can connect to with your use cases, I think is exactly what's the missing piece.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah. Yeah.
And it's also like, like I said, tied to economics. It's like really getting the cost per use case down. It's like one thing to like spend a lot of money on one digital lighthouse, but it has obviously huge overhead and system integration attached, but it's something to attack the long tail and specifically in the long tail of small, small use cases at a wide, wide stretch and a wide exposure, there's actually the value to be found. And therefore data needs to be a commodity. like electricity, like
pressured air in some industries needs to be also data needs to be easily exposed and to be consumed and to be acted on and this is the unified namespace perhaps and it could be a buzzword but I think it's actually a good term
to describe what we are doing. It's something that's already been out at the name and it's an event-driven architecture and also on the shop floor. What's your perceived perspective on the unified namespace? Is it something that already resonates in the management spheres or is it too niche yet?
Tilman Buchner
Well, think the term unified namespace is maybe not so well known in the industry. So you really need to talk more to very technical people that people are aware of this term and what it really means. But once you explain this, so what is the benefit from it exactly as we tried to explain this previously, so that you can benefit from economies of scale and
that you can lower down the implementation cost because you try to establish a kind of middleware, a unified namespace for each and every application on top of it, people start to understand. And absolutely, they see the value in it. Why? Because they experience how it is today. And that kind of peer-to-peer architecture where you connect each and everything with each other, you could also illustrate this quite nicely and quite easily.
Alexander Krüger
Hmm?
Tilman Buchner
and make totally sense that a hub and spoke architecture maybe makes more sense. So with these easy illustrations of the current architectural design and the future architectural design, you can convince people and at least make them think about, okay, the way how we approach it as of today, maybe we need to rethink this, maybe there is something we need to take into consideration.
For sure, it's, let's say, an additional level of complexity on a first grade because you introduce, again, another piece of software, another middleware. But I think on the mid to long term, it totally makes sense because it really helps you to start scaling and deploying your use cases. And one last word, I think in many conversations and in argumentations, we focus very much on one use case and one factory.
But the reality at large scale companies, so at enterprise companies, they need to manage hundreds of plans. So it's a way bigger problem. So if you explain like a really enterprise company, hey, we really want to deploy and set one optimization use case, you need to explain how you deploy this across 100 or 150 or 200 plans globally. Think of you need to do this manually. That's impossible.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah, it needs to be elastic.
Yeah, it needs to be elastic. So even if you have like a template or use case, like the reality of the shop floor, it's built through mergers and acquisitions. Like it's so different. So they could not even agree on an MES system in most cases. So how should they agree on one API to power all the use cases? So it needs to be this flexibility to really make it scale. beyond technicalities. And one...
One important lever that's also in the mix is we as technical people also love to build. So like, have a problem that's through architecture and components and more and more and more on there. And I think there was a little bit of a mind shift in this build versus buy approach. Shola and I will build or buy such a middleware. What's your take as a management consultant on this?
Tilman Buchner
Yeah, as always, it depends. So it's a little bit depends on the let's say DNA of the company. There are companies out there who also in the past invested very much into their technical capabilities. I personally know people in companies who have absolutely the technical skill sets to implement this by themselves. Maybe these, I call them sometimes like the do it yourself type of companies.
who are capable, maybe sometimes use also or in favor of open source technology. So they are capable to do this. But there's a huge but there are also companies who understands and argue, hey, that's not core of our business. We do not need to invest and build up these capabilities to do this by ourselves in the same way as you do not develop your own.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah.
Tilman Buchner
Microsoft Word or PowerPoint application, only because you use it every day. So there's a good reason why you should rely on professional software. So my answer would be, it depends a little bit on the background of the company, but I think the majority of the companies, they would prefer actually to use it as a service or to buy it.
Alexander Krüger
engineering answer.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah, fully, reent. It's a lot of our customers or in-coeing customers who then learned like building software is once, operating is it's another. So you need to take care of the dependencies to update the patches and the, that actually whatever you change something, the rest doesn't fall apart. And this is also annoying. So like, this is why we also put it open source so everybody can.
can work and use it, but don't need to like have the long tail of operating it. so, yeah.
Tilman Buchner
I think that is, by the way, a very smart move actually to put it open source and to build up a kind of managed service business model around this. Because at the end, this universal namespace is a kind of critical infrastructure, right? Because you really, so you deal with industrial data. So it's a kind of industrial hub. So people...
Alexander Krüger
community.
Alexander Krüger
Yep.
Tilman Buchner
They need to trust you. And I think the best way to earn this trust is when you put actually your business logic open source so that people really can trace and track and understand how you deal with the data or what happens with the data. Let's put it like this. So it's a good move.
Alexander Krüger
I think, I think the open source, I think this shifted like when we started like four years ago, we were actually mostly confronted with open sources dangerous, open sources for the tinkerers, open source is not something that you could rely on manufacturing on. And this was, I think a narrative.
No blame, but this was what Microsoft did in the early 2000s and where they had like this free GitHub acquisition campaign of against a little bit open source. But I think this changed like quite a lot because they see how much open source is running circles around commercial offerings and so much spaces because they're so much faster and more open. So I think this is a good and important shift and beyond the commercial stuff. Like this community is something that's manufacturing so isolated. you have ideally perhaps you're.
your user forums, like PLC forums, perhaps you have once in a year like in a convention where you can meet up with other Siemens or back off users, but there's not this open channel and exchange of information like in open source communities. And this is like the other aspect. So we are like pushing data and software so fast out to expose it to so many people. And this finds also like feature requests.
perhaps some bugs, some issues in using, so a community that gives you feedback is also really, valuable. And.
So now what do you think does BCG makes difference? what they're like, we come from an, from the blue background, if you want. So, so we worked quite a long time together with another management consulting in their digital factories. And there is a critique against those management consulting firms that they don't like get you all the way there. They give you the PowerPoint slides with a lot of fancy boxes and then they're out. what's, what's the provoking question? What do you do differently?
Tilman Buchner
Sure. Now I think we go beyond PowerPoint slides. So just running example, happy to invite you to our BCG automation lab at Aachen Tech University, which is part of our ICO network. So we operate 11 innovation centers for operations globally in partnership with industry players like AWS, but also with academia. And in these centers, for example, in Aachen,
We actually build proof of physical proof of concepts. So we support our clients in engineering and implementation work. We mostly focus on, let's say, really cutting edge solutions. I can just give you an example. We are very deep and very much into robotic applications as of now. So we built.
physical proof of concepts to automate, for example, handling operations which are too versatile or complex for traditional automation solutions. And once we build this proof of concept and we ship it to the client, at the line, we integrate this also with solution integrators or with the help of the client into the line. Then in the next step, we would support in design to
costs and design to performance because normally after you've completed such a proof of concept, you showcase the technical feasibility of something. But in the next step of development, you need to tweak on performance and cost of the solution, again, to scale it at the end. And I think we are a very good partner of choice for our customers and helping them along this way. For sure, after the industrialization phase, when it comes to scaling and rolling this out,
Alexander Krüger
Yep.
Tilman Buchner
This is something where we would hand over to a solution integrator, because we are not a solution integrator. So this is actually where our engineering implementation work will end. But it goes far beyond a PowerPoint presentation.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah.
Alexander Krüger
This is really attractive. So you're really eating what you cook if you want. So you put something on it on a PowerPoint, but then also like build it in the field, understand the limitations and the challenges that arise on that. And then also can tweak whatever you proposed and for future offerings also take that into consideration. I think it's really, really important to see the real world pains.
This is also our background. So we're coming from system integration. So we had a system integrator where we really crouched to the dirty shop floors and laid cables and saw the limitations on networks, limitations on power in some cases, then specific limitations on data availability. And this gives another perspective on how you position software and advise people.
Tilman Buchner
Yeah, absolutely. one last word. So within BCG, there are not only consultants. So due to acquisitions and strong investment into our digital capabilities, have more than 1,000 data scientists. We have hundreds of software engineers, solution architects. And normally, we build up really interdisciplinary teams consistent of strategic consultants.
plus software engineers, data scientists, solution architects. So this is like the typical BCG project as of now is really a heterogeneous team of different skill sets.
Alexander Krüger
and positioned it then now in the global landscape. So we are like both from Germany. Germany has a strong manufacturing background. Do you see the advantages or based on the current trend disadvantages of deriving offerings and software from that market?
Tilman Buchner
I would love to see advantages, But I think as of now, need to deal with uncertainty right now. So the geopolitical situation is really makes it not easy to navigate in these times. Yes, overall, I think within Germany, we have a very strong footprint in mechanical engineering, in industrial control technology for sure.
Alexander Krüger
Thank
Tilman Buchner
We lack a little bit the capabilities when it comes to compute power, to network infrastructure, to there is no German or European cloud service provider as of now. And both of us we know. So it's a little bit, I stay absolutely optimistic. I think we can make it.
Alexander Krüger
Thank you.
Alexander Krüger
some that trying words.
Tilman Buchner
But the time is now. We need to invest now. We need to understand the importance at the very beginning of our conversation, if we talked about that everything is turning into software. So we need to understand and we need to derive the right decisions on this and invest also significant money into these topics to gain competitive advantages. Because what we think also learned over time now
is that even in a global world where each and everyone is connected with each other, there might be incidents where you need to build a very strong resilience. And this could be a reason why that, or a good reason why we should also invest into our own infrastructure.
Alexander Krüger
And this is like a really good bridge to one question that I have top of mind that I would like try to answer, ask as many guests as possible, but what do you think changes now in the software landscape? What's the classical stack in five years will look like? MES systems, Scala systems, what do you think will change? like being optimistic about implementation speed and actually people to adapt, but what do you wish?
Tilman Buchner
think even in five years time, there will be a SCADA system and MES systems. Let's say at least for the discrete manufacturing industry, I see where we see, I think a huge shift also in scaling as in the pharma industry. Because when we look into new approaches, if you look into cell therapy manufacturing, which is nowadays, let's say, very laboratory oriented. So it's more like a
lot size one business. And if you want to scale this, that's a great chance now really to think of from a green field, like how do you scale and automate these processes and the existing, let's say enterprise science systems and let's say MES systems for these type of businesses, they are much more tailored for laboratory environment, but not for large scale environments. So I think these are kind of new markets which will occur.
in this particular industry. I think this whole topic of bioengineering and pharmaceutical industry is like a huge chance for also for existing players to conquer new market shares.
Alexander Krüger
you
And I think this is also where currently there's so much growth also happening. And even if the industrial sector in its whole is a little bit like shaking, like the pharmaceutical industry is like growing as fast as ever and even stronger than before. there will be a lot of change and they're as effective obviously by the cost pressure from the overseas because they are like their product and their value gets built in quality and in R &D. So manufacturing is something where they just need to execute fast and flexible.
So, and then one question that we had at the beginning. So we talked a lot about what OT can learn from IT, but to wrap it up. what do you think can IT learn from OT?
Tilman Buchner
Please.
Tilman Buchner
Good question. I think like this.
What you need on the OT side is like based on this cycle-based pattern on a PLC. In the OT world, you cannot deal with likelihoods. So you really need to rely on the strong deterministic behavior. And on the one hand side, maybe this
Alexander Krüger
Hmm.
Tilman Buchner
might be a disadvantage when it comes to artificial intelligence, but on the other side, also a very strong argument because deterministic behavior at the end makes sure, for example, if you enter an elevator and you press level three, you're not interested in a likelihood that you reach to level three. It should always be that you come to level three. So this kind of deterministic behavior is maybe also something
we could rely on in the IT.
Alexander Krüger
is actually a super interesting point because like when we talked about, for example, Kafka introducing as a streaming technology to some of our customers and it's like about cycle time. What does Kafka guarantee on latencies? For example, it doesn't guarantee it optimizes across a certain like times period, could be that worst case five seconds and they're like, no, five, but it just happens in ones and the trillions of instances, but it could happen because it doesn't, it's deterministic and discrete.
So yeah, this is something that it needs to crack and where we are like the state machine kings, this is OT, yeah. So really, really important learning to get from there. So.
Tilman Buchner
Yeah, but maybe it's also okay that IT is focusing on the one hand side and OT on other aspects. we need to work on the conversion of IT and OT where both things actually come together. And there's a good reason why you have different pattern in the IT world than in the OT world, but we need both of them.
Alexander Krüger
Mm.
Alexander Krüger
Yeah.
Alexander Krüger
I think understanding for both sides. I think the key learning on the requirements and capabilities and then just come closer and don't consider the other side as the enemy, either as a security threat or as the inflexible internal service provider.
Tilman Buchner
Yeah, agree.
Alexander Krüger
So if you're seeking like advice on this topic and really want to understand deeper on what the dejected already can offer, feel free to reach out to Tim and team. this is a really, really good. So we also from AWTH from Aachen. So we know what they're doing. It's really, powerful and impressive what they've built up in the learning factory. So reach out to us, reach out to him and leave him a visit if you're interested. And that said Tim, it was a really pleasure to have you on the podcast.
always super educated and precise opinions and I think super helpful for the audience out there.
Tilman Buchner
Thank you, Alex and team for having me. It was a pleasure.
Alexander Krüger
See you soon and then, here comes outro.
