So has Schumpeter been rediscovered? Are they bringing the

entrepreneur back in? No, not bringing the entrepreneur back, but mainstream economics has rediscovered, as you say, Schumpeter, and they have picked up this concept of creative destruction and want to explain economic growth in the same way as Schumpeter did as a process of creative destruction.

But this is very interesting in an article that I and two colleagues of mine, Magnus Hendriksson and a former PhD student, Johan Carlsson, we kind of documented the use of or misuse of an entrepreneur in this tradition by identifying articles and textbooks that has been written in this neo-sopraterian group in 1990 when it started to emerge.

And they do not have a clear concept of entrepreneur, which is very interesting.

And we can also explain why.

And it's not us who talked about this at first, but other scholars have done it.

And the reason is that they cannot include a realistic concept about the entrepreneur.

Was there anything else you wanted to be sure we got to that we haven't?