►
From YouTube: Product Group Conversation (Public Stream) 2021-08-30
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
So
I
I
do
have
a
question
I
don't
know
if
peel
is
on
the
phone
or
someone
in
growth
slide.
15
talks
about
the
post
purchase
survey
with
bronze
and
starter
going
away.
I'd
be
curious.
They
could
walk
through
this
slide
and
kind
of
explain
how
they
collected
the
data
and
talked
about
the
stages
one
through
ten.
B
A
Mike
I
saw
mike
kaye
here,
I'm
not
sure
if
he
was
responsible
for
it
by
k
to
you.
Are
you
close
enough
to
it
to
weigh
in
on
that
one.
C
Yeah,
so
I
think
sam
was
driving
this,
but
I
am
aware
of
it
enough
to
be
able
to
speak
to
it,
and
I
think
you
know
it's
mostly
covered
in
the
slide,
but
wanted
to
survey
customers
to
understand
which
features
in
their
tier.
They
were
unaware
of
and
of
those
features
which
ones
they
would
be
excited
to
adopt,
and
so
I
believe
the
plan
with
this
data
is
to
look
for
opportunities
in
the
product
to
highlight
these
features
to
people
so
that
we
can
make
them
aware
of
them
and
drive
further
adoption.
C
B
Yeah,
I
guess
it's
more
like
I
could
read
the
content
and
you're
right.
It
is
mostly
self-explanatory
and
I
can
follow
up
with
sam
afterwards,
the
colored
boxes
and
then
what
they
relate
to
don't
seem
like
they
map
properly
to
the
right
stages.
So
I
was
trying
to
understand
it
that
there's
a
reason
why
that
was
that
that's
where
the
it
doesn't
connect
to
what
you
described
got.
C
C
Was
to
have
the
color
coding
so
like
features
one
through
four
as
part
of
plan
and
features
five
and
eight
as
part
of
verify,
and
so,
if
those
aren't
mapping
correctly,
we
should
we
should
clarify
that
and
fix
it.
B
Yeah,
I
mean
that's
the
reason
why
I'm
asking,
I
think
one
of
the
things
with
the
approvals
is
not
just
the
stuff
that's
in
create
or
the
stuffs
and
verify
that
also
includes
secure
and
now
protect
as
well
and
making
sure
that
we're
capturing
where
those
features
actually
reside
in
the
right
boxes
and
that
those
are
the
only
ones
that
kind
of
jumped
out
is
maybe
not
correct.
But
that's
why
I
asked
the
question
okay,
although
that
gives
you
better
context
as
to
why
I
was
asking.
D
A
E
E
So
where
previously,
I
would
attend
and
consume
some
information
find
out
some
about
a
particular
group.
Now
I
had
to
have
kind
of
prepared
and
done
all
my
homework
to
come
with
a
question.
So
it's
more
bi-directional
now,
so
maybe
others
feel
like
that,
like
they
can't
attend
if
they
haven't
done
the
homework.
B
It
said
the
other
thing:
I've
I've
noticed
and
it's
prohibited.
My
attendance
of
group
conversations
is:
we
have
things
like
the
gitlab.com
daily
standup
is
at
the
same
time
and
there's
other
couple
of
meetings
like
that
that
are
recurring
that
have
become
critical
and
I
think
those
overlap
with
this
time
slot
that's
prohibiting
people
from
coming.
D
Yeah,
I
think
both
are
valid,
like
we
used
to
be
really
like
it's
not
acceptable
to
plan
meetings
at
eight
o'clock
and
over
time
we
plan
more
and
more
meetings.
I
bet
just
a
lot
of
people
just
have
a
meeting
at
this
time.
By
now,
it's
a
great
time
slot.
That's
why
we
have
the
google
conversation
there.
I
think
maybe
yeah
michael
I
or
the
other
comment.
D
If
we
gotta
normalize
that
you
can
ask
a
question,
even
if
it's
in
the
deck
that
you
can
come
unprepared
and
ask
the
question,
that's
on
your
mind,
even
it
might
be
in
the
deck
or
something
like
that.
Maybe
we
we
want
to
normalize
that
so
I've
never
seen
a
hey.
I
give
it
one
more
minute
or
three
seconds
into
a
countdown
that
never
seems
to
work,
but
maybe
a
good
way
to
solicit
questions
is
hey.
D
D
Yeah,
I
think
we
gotta
normalize,
make
it
coming
unprepared
and
I
think
we
gotta
normalize,
asking
stuff
that
isn't
like
in
the
deck
just
what
you're
curious
about,
but
I
think
the
the
prepare,
because
if
you
join
this
call
and
then
you
try
to
go
to
the
slide
deck,
which
is
super
dense
and
then
watch
the
video
that
that's
not
going
to
work.
So
those
materials
are
out
there
for
the
people
who
want
it
but
they're
not
quite
christina.
D
Can
you
make
sure
that
we
give
this
as
a
hint
to
solicit
questions
and
say:
hey
totally
cool?
If
it's
you
haven't
read
the
deck?
Haven't
watched
the
video
happy
to
talk
about
anything,
including
stuff
that
isn't
in
the
deck.
E
Any
questions
like
that,
I
do
I'm
unprepared,
it
might
be
in
the
deck
there
you
go
usually
at
the
first
part
of
the
year
sales
kickoff
product
does
a
this
is
what
we're
going
to
try
to
accomplish
in
the
product
in
the
year,
and
I
remember
there
was
an
enterprise
ready
themed.
I
think
that
was
two
years
ago.
Yeah
I'd
love
to
kind
of
understand.
You
know
where
you
feel
you're
on
that
journey.
E
Right,
we're
a
little
over
halfway,
at
least
in
the
sales
fiscal
year,
how
you
feel
like
products
making
on
that
journey
and
and
what
are
what's
kind
of
the
big
gaps
that
you
think
you're
going
to
hit
by
the
end
of
the
fiscal
year.
A
Yeah,
the
three
big
themes
this
year
were
sas:
first
adoption,
adoption
or
use
of
adoption
through
usability,
sorry
and
application
security
testing
leadership
and
we're
heavily
invested
in
all
three,
particularly
the
first
and
the
last
one.
A
We
have
a
lot
of
people
working
on
sas
performance,
sas
reliability,
burning
down
security
issues,
the
the
to
make
our
sas
posture
safer.
All
that
so
we're
heavily
invested
there
right
now,
there's
a
lot
of
work
to
do,
but
we've
got
a
lot
of
teams
focused
on
it.
So
the
I
think
we're
we're
making
quick
progress
on
that.
The,
for
example,
there's
a
sharding
team.
A
That's
given
us
more
headroom
in
a
database
teams
like
search
and
runner
and
verify
have
made
material
improvements
in
response
times
and
their
availability
of
their
services
with
dedicated
focus
so
we're
seeing
payoff
on
some
of
those
investments.
But
that's
a
you
know,
that's
a
long-range
thing
and
there's
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
different
groups
have
to
come
together
to
make
that
a
full
success,
but
I'm
very
happy
with
the
progress
and
the
focus
on
sas.
First,
on
application,
security
testing
leadership,
we've
had
pretty
stable
investment
there.
A
We're
adding
a
handful
more
people
to
it.
We've
had
good
evidence
that
we're
we
are
in
fact
gaining
leadership
there.
Our
position
in
the
magic
quadrant
improved
customers
continue
to
buy
on
account
of
it.
So
I
think
we're
making
great
progress
on
that
one
as
well.
The
one
in
the
middle
adoption
through
usability,
we've
focused
on
it
a
lot.
A
A
A
It's
it's
a
measure
of
user
satisfaction
with
the
system
that
has
dropped
the
last
measurement
was
was
flat,
but
it's
lower
than
we
want
it.
So
we
haven't
seen
those
efforts
result
in
that
score
improving,
but
we
have
invested
a
lot
in
it
and
I'm
optimistic
that
with
dedicated
focus
over
time,
we'll
we'll
move
the
needle
on
that,
so
heavy
investment
in
all
three.
I
think
the
first
and
the
third
we're
seeing
clear
returns
from
the
one
in
the
middle.
We
haven't
seen
objective
evidence
yet,
but
I
I
do
believe
that
it's
gonna
turn
around.
G
Allow
me
so
I
lost
the
deal
last
week
in
belgium
to
github,
and
the
reason
was
is
that
they
were
young
in
the
development
lifestyle
or
in
devops,
so
they
were
quite
immature
and
github
were
able
to
add
advanced
security
at
the
repo
level
as
they
grew,
and
we
need
everyone
on
the
same
tier.
G
So
I
was
wondering
if
I
guess,
if
I'm
not
sure
who
to
address
this
to,
but
are
we
aware
of
the
fact
that
they
can
help
someone
to
incrementally
grow
and
have
everyone
on
the
same
platform
and
do
we
have
a
strategy
for
potentially
something
I
think
that
could
be?
They
could
either
launch
on
this
in
the
next
few
years.
G
G
Give
teams
access
to
ultimate
features
without
licensing
everyone
in
the
in
in
the
organization
and
their
tco
was
way
better
than
ours,
and
you
know
when
I
look
at
the
packaging
and
the
pricing,
it
would
be
really
nice
if
we
were
able
to
compete
at
some
point,
but
I
know
obviously
that
or
the
structure
of
how
our
product
works
may
have
to
be
adjusted
for
that,
and
there
would
need
to
be
appetite
for
it.
So
just
curious
with
your
thoughts
on
that.
A
It's
a
hot
topic:
keith
from
pricing
is
looking
at
some
different
options.
There
it's
a
tricky
one,
because
there
are
a
lot
of
advantages
to
having
everyone
on
the
same
tier
and
we
feel
strongly
about
those
it's
way
simpler
for
sales.
It's
way
simpler
for
customers
it
doesn't.
It
prevents
companies
from
treating
different
people
in
the
company
different
ways
like
oh
okay.
Maybe
they
have
a
little
bit
more
budget
or
they're
a
little
more
advanced,
so
they
get
all
the
fun
tools.
A
A
So
those
are
those
are
it's
hard
to
walk
away
from
those,
but
I
do
know
that
there's
pressure
we,
you
know
we
have
a
customer
advisory
board.
We
hear
that
from
some
of
our
larger
customers
that
there's
some
pet
up
demand
for
higher
tiers
for
only
a
portion
of
their
people,
so
we
fully
understand
there's
pros
and
cons
on
it.
We
have
not
chosen
to
move
the
pendulum
to
this
point,
but
I'm
well
aware
the
sales
and
customer.
D
Pressure,
yeah
and
hans.
Can
you
maybe
explain
a
bit
what
what
what
what
happened
there,
because
I
don't
I'm
not
fully
aware
of
the
how
github
prices
it
looks
from
their
website
that
they
need
everyone
to
be
on
there,
but
they
have
more
security
features
in
their
free
tier,
which
is
something
I
encourage
us
to
do.
D
Josh
has
some
first,
you
want
to
talk
to
it.
H
Sure
yeah,
I
link
the
page
with
their
their
billing
policy
for
github
advanced
security,
it's
a
it's
an
add-on
and
then
it
also
details
how
it's
priced.
So
hopefully
this
aligns
with
what
you're
seeing
in
the
field,
but
that's
yeah.