A Fire Alarm For Interest Rates | Animal Spirits 466

Summary

On episode 466 of Animal Spirits, Michael Batnick and Ben Carlson discuss: the SpaceX IPO, index fund bagholders, the pros and …

Transcript

Welcome to Animal Spirits brought to you by Cullen Capital and DIVP. Most income strategies make you choose between yield and growth. The Cullen Enhanced Equity Income ETF, DIVP doesn't. Unlike strategies that write calls on the entire portfolio and cap your upside every month, DIVP strategically covers only 20 to 40% of the portfolio holdings at any given time. Meaning 60 to 80% of the portfolio retains full upside potential. And rather than applying that to a broad index exposure, we do it on a concentrated portfolio of highquality, large cap, valueoriented stocks. Valuriven, income focused, built for the long term. This is DIVP and this is how we think about income differently. Welcome to Animal Spirits with Michael Ben. If you've been following the show for the past 2 months, you know that Michael is a kind of a Knicks fan based on his attire. Would you say 90% of your clothing these days is Knicks related? It's got to be close, right? >> Yeah. >> Congratulations to you. It's got to feel great. You're you're a diehard Nick. You're not just like a casual fan. You're a diehard fan. >> So, I have a personal finance question, but you're a Knicks season ticket holder and have been for how long? >> I'm almost crying just thinking about the next. It's been soing long. My dad started taking me to games when I was probably my kid's age, around seven or eight. And as much as sports can be an absolute waste of time and and it's it's sometimes I'm envious of like Chris who literally has not a care in the world about what's going on, right? It's it's a giant um giant time commitment, but the >> it's a mental it's a mental commitment too. You're like, why am I so mad about this? >> It's anguish. Why am I sports >> sports are constant misery punctuated if you're lucky by a little bit of happiness. >> Yes, >> that's what being a sports fan is. But the bonds that it builds between um parents and children, between friends, it's like I was about to say it's all I have, but that's what my dad and I talk about. >> Yeah, me too. My dad and I it's it's the same thing. and and yes, so Michigan's won two national championships this decade. It's been a long time between those two and I got to do it with my kids. I made it even sweeter. So here's my question to you. You're a Knicks season ticket holder. I want to bring this back to finance. So you be and the greatest thing is you have anticipation while I wait for the series to go like so this week you're just on cloud9 all week. You don't have to worry about the games for a little bit. It's great. So you you will get the you guys won't be the home team, right? Either way, >> correct? >> Okay. So you'll you'll have game three in New York. How much money would someone have to give you to take those tickets from you? What would be enough money where you'd go, "No, okay, fine. I have to take it." If someone said, "Michael, I'm going to pay for your mudroom for your tickets." >> I'm glad you asked. I'm glad you asked. So, one of the benefits of being a Knicks season ticket holder is I am able to get season ticket prices. Tickets are a fortune, >> right? >> An absolute fortune. So for round one, my face value was 350, then I went to 580, then 750, and the finals are 1350. Um, if you were to buy off ticket master, which is like the primary secondary market, it is obviously a lot higher than that. And secondary market, like if you want tickpick, forget about it. It's bananas. So one of the nice things is I now have flexibility. So, for example, we sold game five. Now, there is no game five for the Cavs series, right? Because we swept them. But we sold my tickets for I can't remember, $2,200, something like that. And we bought tickets in the section 200 or 100. We bought section 200, like the second bowl, for 900 or whatever it was. So, we got paid a thous we would have gotten paid $1,000. >> Trade up for an extra seat. Yeah. Yeah. So, you're going to be sitting by Shalom. >> No, no, no, no, no, no. You're you're missing it. We would have traded down. So, we would have paid we would have gotten we would have gotten paid $1,000 to go to the game. >> Okay. I got you. I got you. >> All right. So, for the finals, I my friend texted me, um, we sold our tickets for game four for $4,400. >> Okay. >> And I said to him, "Wait, whoa, whoa, time out. What are we what are we doing here?" And he said, "We spoke about this. I don't remember speaking about this, but fine." Um, so if we are down three nothing, it will be the greatest sale of all time. I'll give him a big fat wet kiss. >> All right. >> But assuming we're not down three nothing. Now I'm a little Now I'm getting a little bit nervous, >> right? >> Because we have to buy back in. I'm not missing any games to the finals. We have to buy back in, >> of course. >> So what would I what would I sell to Well, there I guess there's your answer. Although I didn't hit the sell button. He did. >> Okay. >> So I'm not I would not have sold. >> So we know we know your friend's amount. >> 4,400. Um, so I will be traveling. I'm going to I think I'm going to game five, assuming that we're not down, you know, assuming that's not a sweep. If we're down 3-1, I'll still probably go. >> So, I bought tickets for San Antonio. Might be premature. I think San Antonio is going to win, but I'll buy tickets for Oklahoma City if that's the case. >> All right. >> In any event, in any event, um, it's a it's been a long, long time. And, uh, I'm feeling good. >> Yeah, that it's a great feeling. It's a wonderful feeling. >> It's a great feeling. All right, let's talk IPOs. All right, from Paul Paul Kadraski wrote about IPOs he talked about. So it's OpenAI, Anthropic, SpaceX. These are going to be massive companies. Each of them probably a trillion dollars at least. That's pretty fair to say. I'd be shocked if the AI companies weren't a trillion, right? >> Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Um he says people aren't focused on the right things. That much new equity supply hitting in a few months creates a math problem. The money has to come from somewhere. Most of it will come from existing holdings. passive funds will be forced buyers once these names join the indexes which will happen much faster than usual given the exchange. So he's saying like what if this is this is a thing and there's going to be a lot of stories about this like okay this is going to mark the top this is going to mark the top >> the funny thing is is I'm not worried about where the money will come from >> people keep worrying about that all decade about like where's the money going to come from for this where's the money the money always just comes from people have money people have more wealth than ever today the money will be there I'm not worried about the money I'm also not I I just don't think it's cute enough to say a headline thing like this will be it. I know that's that's usually how it works historically. I just don't think I think that's a little too cute. >> Yeah, I agree. Um where will the money come from? You also have to think about So there's a lot of smoke around the SpaceX S1 which was which was filed last week. Um their average revenue per user is coming down on Starlink. That was the headline. You know, I love and hate the internet. I I uh I hate it because the headlines get all the attention. Nobody reads anything for the most part anymore. I love it because there are still people that do the work. So Malik, somebody who I only recently discovered, he's been writing about the internet for for decades. Um that's the broad broadband bandits book that I'm reading. >> So he wrote about the RPU crash. literally one of the first bloggers in history. So, it's kind of funny that you just discovered him. >> I Yeah, I'm a little bit late to that. >> So, uh there's a lot about the numbers, >> right? Obviously, like what's going on with with uh with SpaceX, which is >> Can I can I read some of the numbers from Axios real quick while you find Sure. >> So, this is from Axios. Uh SpaceX is wildly unprofitable, reporting a $4.9 billion net loss on $18.7 billion in consolidated revenue. For context, 200 companies in the S&P had more revenue last year than SpaceX. This includes Tesla, whose sales were five times higher. Okay, so the if you look just at the surface level numbers, the thing I love about this SpaceX is that the two narratives are so compelling. One of them is going to be this is a wildly over like 1.8 trillion company. Are you kidding me? They don't make any money. And the other one is going to be no dummy. It's because they're going to have huge growth in the future and AI and all this stuff. Like, and both of them are going to sound reasonable. They're both going to make sense. That's >> Yeah, but the the valuation part is always a lazy argument. So, it's a spectrum, right, of exit liquidity. This is you guys are cheap. This is the dumbest [ __ ] ever. >> Yeah, but the valuation always sounds smart. That's the thing. >> No, it doesn't. >> No. When when you look at the numbers cuz you >> you you think people that site valuation sounds smart? >> No, I'm saying they sound smart. I'm not saying it is smart. >> No, I don't I don't think so. Not I mean, not to me. Not anymore. We've been doing this a long time. That sounds lazy. To a lot of people though, the valuation is like you can't argue with the numbers. The numbers are the numbers. >> Okay. True. I would agree with I would agree with that. I think people, you're right, the the headlines and the average casual investor will gravitate towards the headline numbers, the money losing numbers. >> There's going to be a lot of throwing you're throwing your hands up for this. Oh my gosh. You kidding me? There's going to be a lot of that. >> But that's the it's the same stuff with the macro people that have no understanding of what's actually happening. They just site historical numbers, >> right? >> Lazy. Okay. So, on a spectrum of that's not doing the work. just looking at the numbers at face value is not doing the work. >> Correct. So on the spectrum of dumbest [ __ ] ever, $2 trillion, lol, which I I get, you know, it is a lot of money. It's an ungodly amount of money. Um versus changing the world. I'm like closer to changing the world than now I'm not like I'm probably like, you know, I'm I'm Grand Rapids hedging list a little bit. I'm not all the way there because I'm not buying the stock, but we'll talk about it in a second. But on the on the Arpoo crash, I'll get back to what M wrote. The customer mix explains it. Maritime terminals. So, Starlink is basically broadband in space. There are satellites floating in space that are connecting difficult areas, previously difficult areas to connect to the internet. Okay. It's a huge global unlock. Obviously, >> 10 million customers. >> This makes Wi-Fi better on planes. That's good enough for me. That's all I want. >> Okay. All right. So maritime terminals, which are shipping vessels, oil rigs, they pay between $250 and $5,000 a month and have no alternative. Aviation is even richer. A commercial aircraft terminal runs 12,500 to $25,000 per month. These customers anchored Starlink's early RPO. Consumer residential is where the growth is now. It is the lowest paying tier and outside North America increasingly price sensitive. Add satellite to mobile users via carrier partnerships at a fraction of direct subscription revenue. And the mix explains the slide from $99 to $66 in 3 years. Maritime and aviation grow slowly and pay well. Consumer grows fast and pays less each year. Thank you person on the internet Malik for looking past just the headlines and giving us the actual story. >> So I guess my my grandpa's potent here would be like could this also be an Airbnb story where the valuation at IPO is so high the stock just doesn't do a lot for a while. Like I'm sure there's there's going to be a massive pop on day one. I'm sure. But if if you're like shorting this you're probably not going to be happy. But if you're going super duper long maybe you're not happy either. What if that's the the hedge there? like Airbnb stock has just gone nowhere since it went public because everyone says the valuation is way too high. >> Yeah. So, same thing with snow with snowflake. >> If you go public at a 100 times price to sales ratio and if you are buying and holding the stock for 3 years, of course, I can't see the future, but probability, historic probability says that's probably not an awesome idea. Might does not 100%. Might SpaceX be the one that delivers a world change of results? Yeah. But I I think most people most people don't give a [ __ ] about three years from now. They care about the next 3 weeks. >> You don't think value DCF calculations on this, >> right? Right. >> Well, how long until how long until all his companies are under one umbrella though? That's that's the end game here, right? >> Well, they are everything except for Tesla. >> That's what I mean. Tes all together. Tesla's going to merge with these companies. It's going to be one company. That's that's the end game. So SpaceX owns uh XAI which is Grock and they are I think trying to buy Cursor which is not an Elon Musk company for the record. Um but how oh oh Twitter X.com how long before Tesla gets absorbed? Who knows? But here's here I've never x.com just so you know. Okay it's >> Twitter to me forever. >> Here is where a lot of the um scrutiny falls. It's with the NASDAQ 100 rejiggering the rules for fast entry. So, previously a company needed to be I think the term they used was seasoned um whatever that means. I don't think that it was like an X number of days or anything like that. I think it was 3 to 6 months. They're going to get into the index in 15 days. And this lies the the thing that people are excited about because and credit to NASDAQ. So yes, they changed the rules for fast inclusion which people are like ah this is [ __ ] passive exit retail liquidity okay but they also protected investors because what they did was so SpaceX is not going to be selling or issuing a lot of new stock >> it's low >> to the public it is going so a lot of it is not going to be publicly traded Elon Musk's portion for example is not going to be publicly traded okay or not going to be available he controls it so NASDAQ did was they said, "We've been burned once before with a similar IPL where it was a lot of insider shares being held. Um, we're not going to give you the benefit of the doubt of your full $1.75 trillion valuation. What we're going to do is we're going to do a modified market cap, which is not unusual. We're going to allow you to have three times your float inside of the index, and that's it. We're capping it there." So, if they float, I'm making this up. If they float um $30 billion worth of stock, then the index will hold 90 billion. The market cap in the index will be 90 billion. >> I think the actual numbers are close, >> right? >> I think the actual numbers are closer to to uh >> 15. There's going to be a lot of people going, oh, the bag holders here are the index fund people that there's going to be a lot of that. >> So, there will be a lot of there will be a lot of stock that has to be bought inside of the indexes. That is true. So, if the NASDAQ 100, we're looking at like four to 5%. I mean, obviously, it's a, you know, it's a range. Um, so that's a lot of buying. And with a float that small, the number of buyers is a, um, if you can't see me, I'm holding up my arms, a gigantic circle of buyers, pool of buyers that want the stock and the pool of supply is much smaller, >> right? >> So, the valuation does not matter in the short term, but could you imagine if it goes up to 2.9 trillion because of the way they financially engineered this, people are going to lose their minds. >> Yes. There also there's also like weird cliff devesting de uh unlocking up of the shares where insiders can sell but insiders are not selling at the open. This is they are they are diluting the shareholders. What's interesting is that they're giving a disproportionate amount to retail investors >> which is >> numbers are still being finalized but >> anyway it's certainly it certainly has certainly captured everybody's attention as you would as you would expect to do. It's a big deal. >> And maybe this will be the first level thinking again. Like this, this really will be it, right? I'm waiting for that to happen. >> KB. >> I don't know. All right. Kaiwoo, who was on the compounded friends with us a couple weeks ago, writes these long, what will you call them? White papers. Is that fair enough to say? >> Mhm. >> I I I pulled a little he had an AI disruption paper and he talked about modes and value traps. I just wanted to pull out one thing here that I thought was interesting just to show how hard stock picking is. So he shows the biggest disruptors of all time. I mean, he showed how Netflix disrupted Blockbuster, Amazon disrupted Borders, Amazon disrupted Radio Shack as well, and then Google disrupted Mlache, which I didn't get mlache. Is that encyclopedias? >> Is that was that Encyclopedia Bratannica, the owners? I can't remember. It's >> so he's got a great chart here showing the returns of each and it they're both going in opposite directions, right? Where they these other ones are just fall like a, you know, fall off a cliff. >> But he also shows the the stock prices of these disrupted companies. So, Blockbuster, Borders, Radio Shack, and Mlache. And it's funny because as the stock price is dropping, the revenue per share is either holding still or going up still as these things are getting disrupted. And that >> MLC Mlache has newspapers. Okay. Says right there on the chart. Yeah, that's wild. >> And that's what's going to make this stuff so hard about the software companies is like you look at the results right now and you go, >> these companies are fine. They're reporting great earnings and then they this could happen. That's what's going to make this so hard and that's why stock picking is difficult. >> Yeah. Because the market is the market is obviously pricing in >> um the market is saying the terminal value is is Radio Shack. >> Yeah. So we >> So >> every time I see Radio Shack, I think that I had a friend in elementary school and I think we watched the movie Coming to America, something like that in New York and there's a Radio Shack on a corner, right? So on each side, each corner there's a Radio Shack sign, right? Radio Shack on one side, Radio Shack on the other. They show it overhead and my friend goes totally serious. That's really weird. Why are there two Radio Shacks on the same corner cuz each sign, you know, didn't get it anyway. >> I don't get it. >> It was a a store on the corner. So each each corner had its own sign. >> Got it. Got it. Got it. Got it. >> All right. Last week I talked about interest rate concerns. Okay. John Arnold, very smart, one of the best, maybe the best energy investor of all time. He's on Patrick's Oanes podcast recently. Very smart guy. He said a fire alarm is going off and everyone is ignoring it. And he shows the long-term bond. This is a Bloomberg chart of United Kingdom, France, United States, Japan, and all these long-term bonds, 30-year bonds are going vertical, right? We talked about this a lot. People are very concerned with this. All right, I want to talk about that worry, that five alarm fire with this email we got. Hi, Ben. I've noticed that the yield curve is no longer inverted. I haven't heard anyone talking about this. It has been observed that recessions o occur not when the yield curve inverts, but when it uninverts. Looks like that hasn't happened this time. Harvey's recessionary indicator has experienced his first exception. What are your thoughts? And this is what I want to point out. When the yield curve was inverted, short-term yields were higher than long-term yields. People were screaming, "This is going to be a recession because this indicator has always done that." You and I said, "Wait a minute. This is just the Fed jacking up short-term rates. It doesn't have to be that, right? We were kind of saying, let's pump the brakes on that a little bit." Now, what we've seen is a normalization. Short-term yields have come down. Long-term yields have gone back up. That's a normal yield curve. This is normalization. This is not a reason to freak out, people. Okay? I'm throwing cold water on this all day long. This is a normal state of affairs. Long-term yields should be higher than short-term yields when you're accounting for risk because there's way more risk in a long-term bond than a short-term bond in terms of volatility and interest rate changes and inflation. And maybe, just maybe, the bond market is saying, "I think we're in a higher growth and inflationary environment." Listen to this from Warren Pies, another fellow TCAF person. S&P 500 forward sale growth is projected at 18% over the next 24 months. Historically, this corresponds to 12.4% nominal GDP growth, 6% annualized. Something to consider as yields and the Fed look for new equilibrium. So, he's saying we're probably going to have higher economic growth. And what if what if the bond market is just telling us, you know what, that period the last 15 years were not normal for interest rates. We're trying to normalize here for higher growth and higher inflation than we had in 2010s. Thoughts? That makes more sense to me than the alarm situation? >> Yeah, totally. I also think it's weird that everyone the the everyone is ignoring it. I know it's just a tweet and he doesn't mean it literally, but I feel like a lot of people are doing the opposite. I think there's actually um an overwhelming amount of worry relative to the potential outcomes about rising rates. What I would say though is the the the part of the worry that I think is valid is it's not the spread between short-term and long-term which are which are healthy and normal. It's the speed at which these lines are all accelerating. Like I think people worried like what if this doesn't slow down? It doesn't nothing has to happen. Okay? Because I I was I was about to say it has to slow down. It doesn't. Um, if the long end keeps going up and we're at I don't know where the line is, 6% 7%. I'm going to start to get nervous. Like I I would very much like for this to slow down. >> Yeah, we're not going to get there. That's not going to happen. >> I don't think so either. >> Time stamp. Double stamp. Triple stamp. Not going to happen. It would We'd have to be way higher growth. And the thing is, here's the problem with this. Here's the psychology behind this though. >> You can't triple stamp with double stamp. Come on. >> Here's the psychology behind this though. Everything is happening faster. So when we have these moves, that's what freaks everyone out because people are not used to it. When inflation went from zero to nine, it freaked everyone out because it happened fast. When oil went from $50 a barrel to negative $37 a barrel, everyone freaked out. When mortgage rates went from three to eight and this is just the markets now. People are going to have to get used to things happening faster. And just because they happen fast doesn't mean something is breaking. This is just how markets work now. >> You might be right. >> Okay. All right. Here's the here's the positive side. I think they're pro there's pros and cons to rising rates because obviously rising rates are not good for every like borrowing mortgage rates are back near 7%. I don't think that's a good thing. Okay, here's the positive behind this. Exhibit A chart of the week from last week. Bond yields are historically linked with higher forward returns. So, we're looking at the 10-year starting yield. We've talked about this before versus the forward annualized return. And guess what? The starting yield is a pretty good predictor of future returns for bonds. So, you're getting probably 5% now in high quality bonds. >> That's great. That you're right. That >> that is the other side of the coin and it's a it's a really shiny side of the coin. Hey, we give a ton of uh love to Chartin Matt for making and designing these charts as he >> is has earned every ounce of praise. That kid is incredible. So is Eric, founding CTO, architect of exhibit A. Uh so I just wanted to give Eric some love. >> He's the guy behind the guy. He he built the architecture that allows Matt to paint. So he's the uh he made the canvas and Matt is a painter. >> So here's the potential. So let's say you're right that we do have a sustained rise in rates. So I look I looked at this like what happens if we get a sustained rise in rates and this is the 10ear going back to 1950 and I looked at the total return for the S&P over that time frame versus the draw down. And now the total return actually is pretty comforting. Like most of the time stocks are up in these rising rate cycles. This is every time the 10-year had a sustained rise. And >> what is this? Oh, one more. Okay, got it. Got it. Got it. >> Okay. Yep. And that also shows the draw down. And there was there was a correction in every single one of these of 10% except for one time and that was 1994. And so every time this happened, and some of these are pretty >> Yeah. Is this supposed to make me feel better? This looks really bad. >> Um, but the thing is we're not in a sustained. >> Ben's like, there's nothing to worry about except for the 40% declines in stock prices. >> Oh, short-term hiccup. But the thing is, is this really didn't we already have the sustained rise in rates? >> Yeah. >> I feel like now we've been rangebound forever, right? So the thing is, is this another to have a sustained rise in rates? Like like you said, we'd have to see six or 7% for that to be another cycle up. We already had the one cycle up. Okay. Yeah, you're right. So I think we already had it in 2025. This is another thing from Goldman Sachs. Median annual S&P 500 total return based on nominal 10-year Treasury yield. And they break it down by 0 to 2%, 2 to three, three to four, all these different ranges. Just 1% all the way up to eight plus. And there's no discerning. There's nothing to learn here. >> Well, yeah. When you present the data this way, I don't love this chart. >> Okay. >> Because I do think that the the direction of the speed of the of the of the tenure matters a lot. I agree with you. Just knowing where what bucket you fall into doesn't tell you anything. But I really do think there's something to the to the speed. >> I know we can't do technical analysis on interest rate charts. Is that the thing? Right. We can't do that, right? >> Well, no, you can. It's supply demand. >> Definitely can. >> I want to see like every time we've hit 5%. That's been a higher range essentially and they've rates have come right back down. People freak out then we come down. It's happened like five times. I just want to see a sustained breakout above about 5% before I start to worry. Deal. >> You know, yes. You know the meme where it's the musician who looks like Jennifer Aniston. Is that is that Pop? I can't remember. >> Yes. >> Is that who that is? Okay. So, it's it's uh like the five-year on the way up. >> Yeah. is him and the five year on five 5% of the way down is her, >> right? Yes. >> So, it matters where you're coming, where you're going from. >> So, last week we last week we talked about I just want to talk about oil prices real quick because this in this this whole geopolitical situation because oil's back to down to like $96 a barrel. I think the high was actually when you and I were at that dinner in Miami for future proof. I remember people everyone around the dinner table was like a game of telephones was talking about oil prices spiking super duper high. They got like $120 a barrel. They're up like 20% after hours or whatever. Remember that? I think that was the high. >> I remember very well. >> So, I I think this is another game of really smart people cuz you listen to all the oil analysts and they're like $200 a barrel. It has to. It has to. There's There's no situ There's no situation that doesn't happen and then it just didn't happen. >> Did the market get it right on de from from jump >> kind of >> from the jump? because I I've told this story, you know, a couple of months ago when it happened, but we were at dinner and me and Dan Ies were looking on our phones and I said to him, "Bitcoin's flat. S&P's down like a buck 10 or something like that. The market didn't really react uh the way that we thought it would." And it continued to underreact. We were like, "This doesn't make sense. This doesn't make sense." And eventually we were like, "Okay, this doesn't make sense." But the market was right immediately, not overreacting. It's it's it's wild. >> Yes. The the good lesson is always like the market is usually smarter than smart people, which is hard to wrap your head around. You usually the caveat there. >> We've done this rap a thousand times, but it is usually the facts. >> Okay. What's your talking wealth plug here? Um, I did an awesome, this is like uh random, but as we get into investor behavior, which is actually shockingly blank this week, this has been one of the most popular uh >> what's that big fat text called? Topics. Jeez Louise, my brain. >> You know, something about this microphone breaks the brain. Investor behavior is one of our most popular most most most packed jam-packed categories of the show and nothing in here. >> The Wall Street Wall Street Journal's got a profile interviewing traders how what they're thinking about right now. That's what they got to do. Anyway, in here I put uh Brent Sullivan who has a great substack on a lot of the mechanics of tax treatment for custom indexing and particularly long short strategies which are becoming a bigger and bigger um part of the advisor toolkit on talking wealth. Him and I had a great conversation. So if you're an adviser and you want to check that out, I cannot recommend the show. >> There was a big piece in the Wall Street Journal on that last week. Bloomberg had a thing on tax harvesting a couple months ago. This is something that >> I'm surprised it took so long. >> Yeah, it's it's getting big in the wealth management space and it's going to be something you're going to be hearing about more and more as we talk about it. Okay. Uh let's talk about broken sentiment. So, University of Michigan consumer sentiment index at all-time lows since this index started in 1950. The lowest this has ever been. >> Yeah, it's kind of stupid, huh? >> Okay, we've been talking about this for a while. I feel like we're maybe we're a broken record here. The Atlantic had this piece. The Vibe session is over. The perma session is here. Why Americans are so unhappy by Annie Lowry. Now she's trying to get to the bottom of this. Like why why are why is sentiment so low? There's no way you could objectively look at this. I someone on Twitter last week as a young person. I couldn't tell if they were, you know, engagement farming or what, but they said um was 2008 really worse than this economy? And again, that's probably rage baiting and engagement baiting. Um, >> but I I think there are some young people who like truly think this is a terrible terrible economy and they yet to see what an actual bad economy is. Um, so here's here's a quote from this article. People have stopped believing that the economy can be good and have lost the willingness to admit that they are doing well. That pessimism might be harder to fix than an actual downturn. And she goes through like why is this? Housing costs and inflation and higher cost of living and all the stuff that you and I have been talking about forever. But this is this boils down to one thing and it's the internet. This is just >> No, no, no, no. And inflation. >> We've had inflation in the past and it's the 70s inflation. My god, I did a whole chapter in my book. >> Yeah, but the 70s inflation destroyed the country, too. >> And it's worse sentiment now than it was back then. The inflation we've had this but but to say that nothing >> to just say it's the internet is come on. That's not it's not just the internet. >> Okay, it's the internet and it's co and then sprinkle a little inflation on top of that. that that's it didn't it almost didn't matter what it was that I I think everything is just amplified these days and we had no chance humanity had stood no chance against social media none we had no chance >> whether you want to blame co or inflation this line broke permanently after that so the internet wasn't created in 20 >> my point is if bad stuff that happened in the past would have happened in the social media era that's what would have amplified it okay it didn't matter what it was it was something bad always does happen. Social media made everyone's sentiment worse. And now sentiment is a broken reading for all of history. It's never coming back. >> Not that now that's not going to spike in the future, but as a reliable indicator of how people are actually feeling about the economy. It's useless. You can't use it anymore. >> Well, but for the stock market for sure and for real life, too. But it does have political like this. This is a direct line to the >> political it's politics is the thing that it matters for. And that's why we're gonna have we're people are like are politics just gonna go back to normal eventually like will we not have this like craziness of the extremes? >> No. I think it's gonna get weirder and >> could you say that even though it being lower than it was in the bottom in 80 and the bottom in 2008 even though that's stupid right because this me this this metric is objectively broken even the way that they collect the survey. We've been over this a 100 times. I still think it's directionally it's right. Like people the mood of the country is not awesome. At the macro level, at the micro level, things are fine and not for everybody, believe me. I'm not suggesting that they are, but I think like the average person feels way better about their situation. And this is always true than how the the country is doing. That's not like a that's like an insight that I just made up. >> Yes. And my point is because we are just inundated with negativity at all times, that whole thing of the country is going to hell is never going to change. That's always going to be something now. >> Yeah. And also people like us just give this this sort of stuff too much too much oxygen >> potentially, but it's obvious it's it's a thing obviously, right? >> Um all right. US household ownership of corporate stocks and mutual funds now totals $58 trillion, which far exceeds real estate assets totaling $48 trillion. And this is part of the um this is like part of uh part you know one of the key ingredients of the pie of of discontent is all this wealth is in people's faces and if you don't have a piece of it it feels really shitty. >> I also think that the the what we experienced in the 2020s with simultaneous booms in housing prices and stock prices were never going to have that again. Okay. So people are going to look at that if they miss the boat and go, "Oh my gosh." >> Here's the thing, though. >> Twothirds of the country own stocks. Two-thirds of the country own homes. Most people have financial assets. I know it's skewed. I know it's You're right. It is funny. A lot of the people that are like yelling at each other about how bad things are have benefited and they're yelling about how bad it is for people that don't have part of it. It's like this weird It's weird virtue signaling. Yes. >> All all over all over the internet. All right. Um Jeff Bezos calls for zero income taxes on bottom half of earners. Uh, I didn't I didn't read this or listen to the interview. Did you? >> I listened to a CNBC interview. Yes. >> Okay. What did you >> All right. So, um, >> taxers were running wild with this one. >> Okay. Somebody said, "It's great that Jeff Bezos thinks this way because too many people who don't make money because too many people who don't make money think that giving money to the government will solve a lot of their problems. They think these government programs are the answer and it's clearly not." I would agree with that. Um Jeff Bezos quote tweeted and said, "Thank you. The important part is zeroing out taxes on the bottom half." Best way to put someone best way to put money in someone's pocket is to not take it out in the first place. Bottom half is only 3% of total tax revenue, but it's very meaningful to that person. Zero it out. My thoughts on this are this is a very very complicated topic. Um and there's obviously very strong feelings from coming from every angle here. Um, I think that it's a really potentially scary thing and slippery slope to divide the country like that between think about how bad the class warfare will get if we if the country allows a certain portion of the population and I'm not talking about people gaming the system. I could give a [ __ ] about that. But if it's like the us versus them and you really create like a cast system of halves and halves not like formally now. Yeah, I think it's I think it would be phenomenal like in a vacuum, >> right? >> To not have people pay taxes that don't contribute a damn thing like I in a vacuum in an ideal world. Yes. Who says no to that? Who says no? What type of monster says no to that? But I think it has real big societal ramifications that people much more thoughtful about this topic need to spend a long time thinking about. >> Yes, I ag Well, I'm in the 51st percentile and I'm having to pay now. I moved out of the bottom. Now I'm now Now I'm paying if you're close. >> True. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> So, you're right. It's >> There's got to be There's got to be a There's got to be a better system. >> It's never going to happen, though, because we just keep everyone keeps saying taxes have to go higher and all they do is keep going lower. They keep finding different ways to take taxes away from people. So, I think we're just going to keep testing how many taxes tax rates we can take down lower and see what happens. That seems to be my only This is This is a true rabbit hole that I care not to go down. You know what? Speaking of that, when people say I went down a rabbit hole, no, you didn't. You spent 20 minutes on Claude. >> True. >> Right. Like there's some people there's some people that genuinely >> go down rabbit holes, but uh I'm going to say 90% of people are full of [ __ ] >> Rabbit holes are easier. Now, >> speaking of Claude, this is this ising unbelievable. So Ben got an email from a famous author and and Tara inbox. I'm like, this is so weird. Who writes this way? Like it was just there was a line in there that was I'm not even sure. It was like I thought it was like too cheesy to be AI. >> Yeah. >> But Ben's like, "This is obviously AI. I'll write back whatever." So Ben responded and the person responded with what was clearly an AI response. >> And I said to myself, like, you got to be Excuse me for the fbombs. You got to be kidding me. >> This is this is a very well-known person who sold millions of copies of books. And the thing is, >> this this is this is how you behave. You I'm about to use the fbomb again. You freaking weirdo. You think this is normal behavior? >> So I >> Are you a human being? So, since my book was released, I probably get two or three AI AI emails a day from like people who want to promote the book. And I can tell because they they stole the the summary from Amazon and it like reummarizes the book to me. Hey, you did a good job explaining this. And then it says, "Would you like to join our PR department, help promote your book?" And I get two or three of them a day. And I can't tell you how quickly I delete an email that I know is written by AI. And I can't believe that successful people, I get it. you want to be more proficient and productive and have an AI agent help you. But that is so cringe when I see an AI email from someone, I can't I I immediately delete it. >> It's it's unbelievable. >> I hope that's just something that happens in the future with people where they go, "No, we're not going to give you the light of day for this." Like, you can sign off using AI somehow, like yes or no this work, but like an actual personal email to someone using AI is no way. Sorry. >> It's unbelievable. Um, so Ben Thompson wrote about, so Google had a big demonstration of their new capabilities. It's called Spark and it's basically like the AI assistant that's that's that's coming. Um, so Ben Thompson wrote a lot about this and uh a friend of mine actually was text me the yesterday. He's like, "Dude, it's here. like everything that we've been like waiting for to like the really like holy effing crap moment. Like that's what this is. I haven't used it yet, so I'm I'm excited to to take it for a drive. But this is what crypto was supposed to be, >> right? >> Where it was like, and I don't mean the promise of a different future per se. I mean specifically like, oh, the the you won't even know that you're using crypto. It's just going to be in the background. all the companies are going to start to use it. This is what Google is now going to be pushing and a lot of these uh hyperscalers going to be they're just going to be integrating AI more and more. >> So before you get to the >> without us even knowing it and what's so funny what are you laughing at? >> Oh no, >> we have Duncan trying to guess who the author was. >> Uh uh so is did crypto like miss its moment is what I want to ask cuz there was a story last week about Mark Cuban's like I sold my Bitcoin like I'm done with this. Like do do you think that AI has just sucked all the oxygen out of the room and crypto had its moment to like really get a consumer use case? I know you people say stable coins and maybe that will be integrated with AI but crypto never had its thing. It's like oh my gosh this is the thing. >> Yeah. >> And it never happened. Did it miss its moment? >> It's easy to say yes. I don't know enough about what's happening in the crypto economy to say like yes it's dead forever. But the short answer is yes. Um Shy Balour tweeted Robin Hood's crypto COO is stepping down. Uh, that's a big signal as their crypto revenue growth slows. This is a a a gut punch or at least a jab. SEC delays plan allowing for crypto versions of US stocks. So, is crypto dead and buried forever? I you know, I'm not going to say that. I have no idea. >> I wouldn't say that, but it's it missed it like AI has the >> if but the thing is AI is sucking up all of the talent in the world. >> That's what I'm that's what I'm think. Remember before it was like everyone's going to work in crypto. all those >> and that's what drives innovation. It's the talent that builds it, >> right? >> And who is going into crypto now? Like nobody. If you were going to if if you're of that mind and of that spirit, you're going where the next thing is and it's clearly not crypto, >> right? That's what I'm that's what I'm thinking. Who knows? >> Oh, so Benedict Evans has his I think he does it every six months. He updates his presentation. And this one, of course, was on AI. This was interesting. We talked about this last week. He said, "Everyone is already using this." Is the title of the presentation. He says, "Open AAI reports 900 million plus weekly users, but only 5% of them are paying," which is kind of nuts. >> We were talking about this last week with what Gavin Baker said, like there is there's an obvious natural disconnect between the numbers are eyepopping and it's got to be a bubble. Of course, it's a bubble. How can it not be a bubble? Of course, it's a bubble. But like what the the we're so early to steal another thing from crypto. It really it really is the top of the first inning for this AI buildout. Now the stocks might be in a bubble, right? It it might be that we discounted everything. Okay, fine. I don't know. We'll find out. But in terms of AI adoption, we really are so early. >> Yeah. And the use case obvious is obvious once you start using it. Um so you talked about the Bezos interview on CNBC. One thing he said, he he said, "I'm taking the other side of the labor disruption." He said he thinks AI is going to make people so much more productive. The productivity is going to go through the roof. People are going to have more money. He said AI is going to lead to deflation, labor shortages. He said we're going to have more desire for things in the future because of AI and it's going to create more businesses and more jobs than ever. He's taking the positive spin on AI, which was actually kind of refreshing to hear. Someone last week commented us and said, "I'm sick of all the AI doom from you guys." And I think we've been pretty fair about it all. >> Doom. >> But I know. But Bezos says, "No, no, no. It's going to lead to job shortages because people are going to have be more more productive and richer." >> Very plausible. >> I hope so. All right. Real estate. What do you got? >> Um, all right, Ben. Uh, I bought a stock. This is definitely not financial advice. Um, people like when Josh and I talk about stocks and what are your thoughts? So, as much >> say this is financial advice. Has anyone ever said that before? >> Oh, this guy. >> As much as part of me would like to never pick stocks again because it's stupid and it's a waste of time and I don't make money and blah blah blah blah, I love it. Keeps me keeps me young, Ben. Um, and it's it's great for the content. All right, so whatever. I'm picking stocks again. Um, >> what'd you buy? >> So, I bought Floor and Decor. Floor and Decor is a looks like an an incredibly beautiful, perfectly perfect downtrend. The stock sucks. Floor and Decor. Do Do they have one by you? There's like I think there's like 500 stores in the country. >> I mean, it sounds like a place my mom shops at. >> Okay. So, it's uh they do they do flooring obviously and other home improvement stuff. Okay. So, they compete directly with Home Depot and Lowe's. Matter of fact, I think they sell more flooring. So, I how is this even on my radar? So, Alex Morris who I follow, wonderful writer, substacker. This has been he's been on this beat for a long time and uh I followed him right into the stock. So, in a >> 65% draw down. So, he >> So, he gave me financial advice. So if any if this doesn't work out, >> that's on him, not me. >> So anyway, um you know how we were talking about like how fast things change >> and part of the lessons at least from recent history is that stocks just don't let you in like by the when the story changes like look at Intel or or any of these like it's like wait what just happened? Why is the stock up 40%? I can't buy it now. That's how it works. Okay. So, I am very confident that at some point in time there will be a changing of the housing cycle and I don't want to miss it. Okay. So, this is the stock that I'm betting on. And will I sell in 3 months when I get bored and I don't make money? Yeah, probably. >> So, this is this is your way to bet on the home renovation boom. >> Yeah. >> People not moving. >> Yeah. So, anyhow, that's a long setup, but I thought this was interesting. So, the Wall Street Journal has um a piece showing the age of America's homes and most of the homes are 55 years or old or older. A lot of the houses in my town, I'm sure in every town when they sell, there is a lot of work that needs to be done. And Florent Decor and all these other housing stocks are in an absolute ice age. This is a great depression. This is a great recession for these housing stocks. the the the news cannot possibly be any worse unless it just goes on longer than even the market is suggesting which obviously is happening right like who who knows all right so I saw a chart from Torson Slack who we mention all the time and it says higher rates more renovations locked in mortgage rates are keeping homeowners in place and driving a surge in renovation spending see chart below C chart below. This chart is bunk. >> I I actually thought about this. So, wait, let me see if I can guess. >> Go ahead. >> So, the reason this is bunk cuz it's renovations as a percentage of construction spending. Is it because construction spending is falling? Is that why? >> Yeah, the denominator. >> Right. >> Nailed it. >> Okay. So, I thought >> So, Claude decoded this for me. And if you look at improvements, uh, now this is this is a little bit data the data, but it's that it's it's growing like 2% a year. It's barely growing. It's barely growing. And if you look at if you look at the comps of all these companies, Florent Decor, Mohawk, uh, Sherwin, Lois, Home Depot, William Sonoma, Restoration, they're all saying the same thing. We know the housing market is an absolute shitow. Okay, it is terrible. um Whirlpool that sells uh dishwashers and whatever annihilated. There is nothing happening. There is nothing happening. So high so locked in mortgage rates are keeping home owners in place and dropping a surge in renovation spending. >> Yeah. I suppose if you're looking at a denominator as a percentage. >> Okay. So you're what's your thesis here then? You're trying to get ahead of this. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> So here's here's so I think this is actually like not like a one or two year trend. I think this is like a 15 or 20 year trend because Redfin has a data that shows like 2/3 of all baby boomers have lived in their homes for 15 years or longer and something like 40% have lived in their house for 20 years or more. A lot of those houses going to need a ton of renovation to meet the standards of young people who grew up on HGTV. Okay, I think that's going to be a big huge thing for baby boomers who just said, you know what, I don't need I'm I don't need to renovate. I'm fine with it. We did a renovation 20 years ago. We don't need to renovate again. and young people who come in to buy those houses are going to go, "Nope, we need to gut this, new this, new countertops, new flooring, updated bedroom, open up for entertaining, all that stuff." That's going to be a 20-year trend. But does it is it just dribbs and drabs or is it like this, you know, that's the that's the thing. >> Well, higher rates are is killing housing, uh, obviously. So, I hope you're right, Ben. I hope rates come down. >> Floor and decor. All right. You're bottom fishing. Um, how about this? Uh, I was listening to Matt Belly. Um, and he had a podcast on vertical vertical streaming because everybody holds their phone like this. And even though it's a minor inconvenience to do this, it's an inconvenience, right? This is the natural. So, uh, Netflix is getting in on it. Like all these companies are spending big bucks to compete because also like reals and Tik Tok, this is how this is how people watch it. They said this on the pod. I had Claude confirm and make a chart. Reals alone, Meta's Reals is doing more revenue now. They just This is a new product. Reals is doing more revenue than Netflix. >> Jeez, just Reals. Then argument about the big tech companies is falls flat for me. You you always talk about the business lines of Apple. Apple does more revenue in AirPods than it does, you know, like you always talk about that like if you break down inside these companies for Instagram and you you said just reals and then YouTube for Google and all YouTube TV and all these things like there those are individual businesses of themselves. This is that's that's pretty crazy. The funny thing is is that's obviously not a good way to watch something vertically. It's way better to watch it horizontally, but people don't care. It's convenience, right? Is that something? >> No. I did for the first time. Um, we had a 4 day week weekend as did I'm guessing most or all of the country. I don't know why we were off on Friday. Um, and the weather sucked. The sun finally came out on Monday afternoon, but it was in complete wash out here. Uh, I took the boys to see the Mandalor Mando and Grou. Um, I sat in the like seventh row of the IMAX theater. >> People like the TV show, right? I remember I watched one episode. I'm like, I'm not gonna watch Star Wars show. Sorry. >> I watched the first season, right? It was good. Yeah, I think I think people are into it. Um, but sitting up front in IMAX wasn't as bad as I thought it was. It was it was an experience. >> Pain your neck straight up. >> No, no, I I was afraid of that. No, it was it was not bad. Um, the movie was the movie was so it did good business. I think it did 160 million globally. Not terrible. Um, and it was it was totally watchable. Kids loved it. Uh, Matt Belly had a stat like I think it was like 70% of all tickets were sold before 5:00 p.m. It was like heavy a heavy kids audience. Now, I don't watch Mando, so I don't know if this is an extension of the show. I'm guessing it is. It just was like, why? You know, like it was just >> That's what I was going to say. Why do we need this? >> Yeah, it was the movie was like fine. It was watchable. It was I didn't fall asleep. Actually, I did once, but um it just didn't move the plot forward. Like this is the best they got. It's been seven years. John Favro, it's been seven years since we've had a Star Wars movie and this was it. It was just like it just felt like like like Marvel did this [ __ ] and got out of the system. Like it's over. We're not doing these movies anymore. But uh I guess we're still doing them. It was kind of depressing. >> Disney's going to squeeze the last bit of that toothpaste tube for as long as they can. >> Yeah. Yes, they are. Ben. Um, okay. Uh, nobody's buying dad books. Ben, >> what is that? A dad books like World War II biographies. >> So, Churnau's most recent biography of Mark Twain, uh, which was published in time for Father's Day 2025, has sold 119,000 hardcover copies to date. Ulisses, which I read in 2017, sold 381,000. Speaking of dad books. >> So wait, they they need to It's because these biographies are too long. No one has time to read 900 pages on someone's third cousin. Sorry. >> Nobody. >> Too much. >> Um I always struggle. I'm not a big giftgiver. I'm not I'm I'm a bad giftgiver. I'm not a big gift giver, but I love, you know, I love giving gifts. I just don't know how to do it great. >> As an anti-b birthday guy, I'm obviously not good at it. >> Okay. So, in a period of of being unlocked from this brick on Instagram, speaking of dad books, I bought my dad a book. Um, and this is reals, right? Like, this is this is reals monetization. I bought my dad a book where it's like the first time you did this like like [ __ ] that I don't know that I would love to know when he's not here one day, hopefully far into the future. >> And he'll he'll be able to fill it out and give it to me. All these things all these things your parents essentially, right? >> Yeah. So, it's like that, but it's just done for you and my dad just has to fill it out. So, I'm excited. >> Yeah. It a lot of the stuff you just literally never asked before. >> Yeah. And >> it's good for your kids, too. >> And things that are like, you know, uncomfortable that you probably would regret not asking, not having asked before, you know, when it's too late. >> Yes. You know, I had an uncomfortable my conversation with my dad about 6 months ago. I said, "Give me all your stuff." So, my dad's going to be 80 next year. I said, "Give me all your stuff. Everything. I need to know where your accounts are. I need to know your passwords. I need to know your insurance. I need to know mortgage stuff. I need everything. Put it in one place for me. If something happens to you, I need that. I'm, you know, I don't want to have to like go digging and looking for stuff. >> Did he do it? >> He did it. And he's an old school guy. He um he handed to me handwritten on a piece of paper. Not Not >> I went home. Your bed. >> I keep giving my dad crap on the show. I went home last week and we're we we're a big card playing family. We love playing cards. My kids love playing cards. So, we're playing cards. We like listening to music and playing cars, having a beer. And uh my dad comes out with a sheet of paper with stuff written on it. And he says, "Alexa, play Beatles Hard Days Night." He wrote out his playlist and he's after every song was over, he'd tell Alexa to play the next song. I said, "Dad, >> can I show you how to create a playlist?" >> He said, "No, no, I don't want to do I'm just going to I have my playlist here. I'm gonna All right." So every song he would have to tell Alexa what to play. >> My uncle uh is cut from the same cloth. He still uses, and I think it's a a joke at this point, but like he would do it even if it wasn't a joke. He uses week at a glance, which is the physical calendar. It's like a pocket-siz calendar. >> Oh, yes. Right. >> It's always in his pocket, >> right? >> That's how he And he has an iPhone, >> but he literally uses week at a glance. >> That's funny. >> And I know he used to print out his portfolio every single day. And you know, old some people are just uh >> stuck in their ways. There you go. That's right, Ben. Um, all right. I wanted to ask you about this. So, I this article is not for me, but it's for you. >> The ice cold civil war between Diet Coke and Coke Zero drinkers. >> Mhm. >> So, I uh I'm not a huge Diet Coke drinker. I try not to drink a ton of soda, but I drink it more than I would. You know, I probably have three cans a monthish. ES and flows. Sometimes I drink it, sometimes I don't. I've never had Coke Zero. >> Oh my gosh. It's It's I used to be a Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi drinker. I go back and forth. >> Coke Zero and Pepsi Zero are so much better than Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi. >> In what way? >> They the flavor. It It tastes close to the regular versions. It's so much better. I can't It's hard to explain. >> It's So, I can see why the growth is happening in those those zero drinks. They It t it tastes a lot better. So, Diet Coke sales increased by just n uh 1.3%. In the first nine months of 2025, Coke Zero grew by 4.8% over the same time period. >> I'm a big zero guy. I love it. >> It's all I drink now. This is zero stuff. >> I'll try it. >> It's good. >> You've My interest has peaked. Um All right. Retatride. I don't know if I'm saying that right, but that's the new [ __ ] The new hot [ __ ] from Eli Lilly. Phase three obesity trial just came in. Just came out and the results are genuinely insane. 28.3% body weight loss on 12 milligrams over 80 weeks. I don't know how much 12 milligrams is. 70 pounds on average. 70 pounds. Man, people are heavy. 45% of patients have 30% weight loss. This is beriatric surgery territory. Unreal. >> We've solved weight loss. What does this mean for the health of this country? We've literally do doctors should be handing this out to every patient who has a BMI over X or a >> like the the savings on heart disease and it's unbelievable. >> So I yeah I just said yeah like yeah they should do it. I I literally know nothing about medicine. Uh I'm the last person that should be giving medical advice. I have um I am like a hypochondriac about death because my mom died young. I think about death a lot and I just think that I'm going to die young, which is not the greatest feeling in the world. So, I did a blood test. Um, there's a company called Function Health that I found through somebody Substack that I that I like. Uh, and I said, "You know what? This is probably overdue for me." So, I got like 96 different blood tests. Um, and I signed up for like the cancer, the pre-ransfer screening, the heart stuff. And it's not cheap. It's like it was like 1,400 or 1,500 bucks. Um, certainly cheaper than than than dying or I right. Like there's no amount of money I wouldn't pay to know that to know that I'm either whatever on the right track or not or if I need to course correct. I hate giving blood. Not a fan. It was 12 vials. Not fun. >> Do you get like squeamish about it? >> Not really. I just don't like it. But it was it was it was over fairly quickly. Anyhow, um, so I got the results and my biological age. Ben, would you like to take a guess? >> 40. >> 30.8. >> Okay. >> Now, my my my biological back age is 75. >> True. >> But 30.8 made me feel pretty pretty good. There was like there was four things that were like on the upper range of borderline like borderline out of out of range. Uh, and it was like, okay, >> and it was like diet stuff, stuff that you can control. But, uh, but I shouldn't spike the football just yet. In fact, I probably shouldn't even be mentioning this because I haven't gotten the results for like the pre-cancer stuff, which is the stuff that is especially like prevalent in my family. >> And you have to do this like once a year now. >> It's a good question that I don't know. >> Okay. So, if you take your internal clock versus your hairline, average it out, you're right at where you should be, >> right? >> That was a that was a positive surprise. I feel pretty good about that. All right, recommendations. Ben, I took your advice and I listened to the Harrison Ford podcast, which uh speaking of genetics, his mother was Jewish. I had no idea. One of us. >> Um, great pod. You know what kind of annoys me? Not kind of, it annoys me. For whatever reason, on Spotify there was no video for this. And it's not There's some Are they on Netflix? >> Oh, maybe. I don't know. That's a good question. I don't know. >> I saw I saw there's there's a video version on YouTube. >> Okay. So, >> I don't know what it right. So, I after listening to the podcast, I thought, you know what? I watched the first season of Shrinking. It was a show I liked, I didn't love. I'm I need it as a background show. And I realized maybe I already made this observation. Bill Lawrence is the Taylor Sheridan of comedies. >> So, he's got >> he's got Shrinking, Bad Monkey, Rooster, Ted Lasso. He did the Scrubs remake. >> Wait, which was which was Bad Monkey? >> The Vince Vaughn one. >> Oh, I didn't watch that. >> No, none of them are great. They're all good though. >> Yeah. >> Like we There's no comedies anymore, so it's nice to just have it's a background show. You don't have to like pay attention to every scene. >> So, I put it on the background while I'm doing stuff at night, emails and catching up on stuff. >> Um, it is a good background show. Uh, oh, Obsession, which is a hardcore Michael movie. I haven't seen it yet. You might have heard about this, Ben. Have you heard about this yet? >> No. >> It's one of those indie horror movies. It's on fire. >> Okay. I think it passed 100 million at the box office or it's going to >> Movies are movie. >> What? You have seen it? >> I know I saw a trailer for it. I'm not going to I don't watch horror movies. You know that. >> I know you don't. >> I think I did take you I Go ahead. >> Movies are having a moment. So much so that one of the stocks that I've owned for a long for a long time in Michael years is uh is IMAX. There was reports that IMAX is uh might be getting some some offers. We got a lot of congratulations. Are you going to sell it or you going to wait? >> I'm not selling it. >> Wait for the bidding war. Okay. Uh, I actually took your recommendation for a movie. My wife and I watched Remarkably Bright Creatures this weekend on Netflix. >> That's a Ben Carlson movie. >> What a It's so nice to have just a sweet movie. That's the best way I can describe it. It was sweet. It had like no ulterior motives, no like cynicism, just like a nice mo like and it was kind of surprising because it was unique in a lot of ways. >> I I feel like I got a little like whoa a little chucked up maybe. Uh Sally Field still has it. Like I haven't seen her on something in forever. She's still got it. And I Bill Pullman's son. I love him. He's he was in Top Gun Maverick. He was in the show with Brew Lush on Apple. Uh I think he's going to be a great character actor. He's >> he looks different in everything he does. He's like I Sally Field like still has it. >> Um >> yeah, it's just it's just a it's just a nice movie. Just plus >> it's a that's a nice movie. Like didn't have any like Yeah. any other agendas besides just being a nice sweet movie. I really liked it. It was pretty good one for Netflix. >> Really good for Netflix. Yeah. Um, all right. I believe that's it. Sun is shining. That's good. Sky hasn't been falling for a while as far as the markets go. Someone said that I'm like the dad when I say like whenever we do get a correction, I'm going to I'm going to walk out like after it rains and said, "Ah, we need a bat." >> That's going be me after a correction. >> We just came out of a correction. But I agree, we do need one. I'm with you, Ben. >> 9% is nothing. All right, animal spirits at the compoundnews.com. Right. Did I get that right? Personal emails, personal responses. See you next time.