Transcription
Oh, are we late? We're getting, we're getting roasted in the chat for being a minute late. Michael, what are you going to do? Right. Aren't we doing the, aren't we doing the best we can?
>> I always am.
Okay. Jonathan 7768 says, "Josh must be combing his hair." You're not totally wrong. You're not, you're not totally wrong. All right. Hey everybody. Welcome to What Are Your Thoughts? Uh, the world's greatest investing podcast. At least in my opinion. We are back because it is Tuesday. It's 5:00 p.m. East Coast. So you know what that means? It's time for an all-new edition of What Are Your Thoughts? And with me today, my co-host Michael Batnik. Michael, say hello.
>> Hello. Hello.
>> All right. Uh, the live chat is, is going off right now. Happy Tuesday, Compounders from Real Manning. Yes, I made it live. Zeke 316. Welcome, brother. Joe Alamaro says, "Well, what's up, pounders?" Uh, Daniel Cooks says, "Micron is bigger than Walmart and JPM combined."
>> No.
>> Can't be, right? Just bigger than, bigger than both. All right. They had to change into Nick's gear. Biff Grebles. We didn't have to change into Nick's gear. We haven't taken it off and I don't see it happening anytime soon. Um, tonight's show, we're going to get into all the biggest topics in the market, the economy, stocks, bonds, IPOs, interest rates, all the things. Uh, but before we do, we have a sponsor tonight. Michael, who's the sponsor?
>> That's right, Josh. This podcast is sponsored by DBMF, a market-leading managed futures ETF. Alternatives should do two things: be uncorrelated to traditional asset classes and deliver strong performance. But many alternatives don't do those things very well. That's where DBMF comes in. With its revolutionary low-cost approach, DBMF has grabbed the attention of savvy allocators looking to deliver both alpha-generating returns and genuine diversification to portfolios. Find out why managed futures should be a foundational part of any alternatives allocation at www.dbmf.com/wawt. The fund's investment objectives, risk, charges, and expenses must be considered carefully before investing. The statutory and summary prospectuses contain this and other important information about the investment company. It may be obtained by visiting www.imgp.com. The IMGP DBI Managed Future Strategy ETF is distributed by Alps Distributors, Inc.
All right, shout out to DBMF, guys. I, uh, I think we really need to start with the SpaceX S1. Um, we sort of touched on a
>> Ooh, what in the world? Just popping that.
>> Oh my god, it's Rupert Mitchell from Blind Squirrel Macro. How did you get here?
>> So good to see you.
>> Good to see you guys. It's so crazy that you're here because we were going to talk about some of your research that you've been putting out. What, what an unbelievable coincidence. We're so excited to have you. Thank you, Rupert.
>> Ah, it's a pleasure. It's a pleasure. Pull my ass out of bed for you guys anytime.
>> All right. And you, and you just happen to be in the neighborhood, aka in Hong Kong. So, it works out perfectly. All right. Uh, it works out perfectly. Uh, let's, let's get into SpaceX. You have been writing a lot and speaking a lot about the topic and uh, you've got a lot of experience in the investment banking world and you have thought a lot about the sheer size of, of the, let's call it the opportunity. Um, the basic argument I'm going to quote you to you and then have you react. The basic argument that you're making here, um, is that a lot of people already own this stock. All of the people who are going to be speaking positively about it, not only are they extremely long, but they're long from pennies. They own this thing, I don't know, from, from seven years ago, nine years ago, 10 years ago. There's pe, yeah. People with a cost basis that it's almost, they almost own the stock for free. And that's a very important point. This is not as though venture capitalists or Wall Street players participated in like a Series D round two weeks ago at roughly an equivalent valuation. We're talking about people who are up huge. Um, this is your actual quote. "You are currently being submitted to a continuous barrage of propaganda. You must tune out CNBC bubble vision, rockets, Mars. Wow. SpaceX has also co-opted the entirety of Wall Street. The assembled syndicate is probably looking at a fee pool of $850 million." Um, which is an underwriting commission of 1%. Let's put this graphic up. This is from, uh, Blind Squirrel Macro on Substack. Uh, this is everyone. I can't think of anyone that's not on here.
>> To your point, there is one, there is one missing, Josh. And, um, Jeffries is not on there. And they've got a very highly ranked aerospace and defense analyst. So, keep an eye out there.
>> Okay. Do we know, do, has there been any public comment about why they're missing or?
>> No, no, but I've got my ear to the ground.
>> Okay. All right. So, tell, tell us to start with, um, why you think we're on the receiving end of this barrage. Surely it's not because people genuinely think that they need to promote this. It sort of promotes itself. It's Elon Musk.
>> Yeah. Okay. Well, let's, uh, the world is motivated by, um, by constraints and opportunities and incentives, right? And right now, everybody is on one side of the incentive bus, right? Pretty much anyone who's anyone has had the opportunity to buy SpaceX and has bought SpaceX at significantly lower valuations over the course of the last 20 years. And trust me, everybody owns it, right? There's not a sovereign wealth fund, there's not an institution, there's not a mutual fund, there's not a private equity shop, there's not a crossover hedge fund that doesn't own this thing in size at a much lower price that's being than than what is being offered to the market. Now, I don't want to, I have given views on valuation. You can read it in the notes. I don't want to clutch my pearls around the governance stuff. Um, I just want to focus on the side, right? So, let's do the numbers they're talking about, a $75 billion primary raise. By the way, 20 billion of that's going back to pay the bank. So, this is that's not exactly a growth stat story, but $75 billion. Um, that's just about 4. Well, what you need to do is you need to add the green shoe, the overallocation option. So, actually, they need to find a home on day one for $86 billion worth of
>> Oh my god.
>> In one, in one shot.
>> In one day.
>> In one shot. One day in June when everyone that's big now, trust me, there's going to be a lot of performative participation in this deal by big Wall Street names. They're just averaging up, right? By a tiny bit, right? So, you have to tune that out. You just got to look. I, I have no doubt that there are a lot of people that are really excited about owning the rocket ship company. I have no doubt, right? And, um, so first thing, how are they solving this? First of all, they are co-opting the passive. In the passive funds, effectively, the rules have been changed with the NASDAQ, um, with the NASDAQ and the S&P and the Russell indices. This thing's going into the index as fast as humanly possible. Now, I've run the numbers, right? And I've looked at all of the, the, the funds that are both passively benchmarked to these indices and are, and those that are sort of closet benchmarks, they're, they're benchmarked against it. They're kind of, they, they can't afford to completely ignore it. Right? If you assume you've got almost full compliance, right, by the, by, well, full compliance by the passive guys and reasonable compliance by the closet benchmarkers, you, you get to a number of about 445 billion of that of that 86. Then, um, and this is quite an amazing stat. They, they reckon they're going to place 30% of the deal with retail, right? That's $26 billion. I, I don't know. I, I don't know if that's a 100 or 150 times more than has ever been placed with retail. Is that, it's a staggering absolute and relative number.
>> $26 billion. And, uh, we were talking before we went live, you were saying of the millions of deals that you've seen in your career, 5% to retail is considered risky or high.
>> So, I'll tell you a story. So, I mean, I, I, you know, we used to get twitchy if we had to place more than 5% with retail, right? And then we'd go, "Well, that's great. If retail, if retail flips completely, flips a deal completely, we've still got a 15% green shoe. We don't really have, we need to just worry about how tight the top of the institutional book is." Right. Okay. And I remember this was, this is in my, my, my city days back at the time of the Facebook IPO. I was running, I was, I was, I was doing US listed deals out of Asia. Think, you know, think Alibaba and others back then. I remember getting, getting the, um, getting, I was on the, on the chat with the, the guy that ran the Smith Barney Retail Network just as the IPO was going out and he was saying, "Hey, by the way, do you want any, um, Facebook stock?" I said, "You, you got some?" He said, "Yeah, you can have as much as you want." And at that point, I went, "Whoa."
>> Yeah, that's not great.
>> And we all know what happened to Facebook.
>> Yeah.
>> Opened at 40, ended up at, I don't know, 18.
>> Okay.
>> What if, what if everyone just sells 10 shares of Micron? Boom, we pay for the whole deal.
>> Ah, that's a really good point, right? It's, it's, it's not as easy as that. So, let's get to the scale point. So, just, just to finish on the layout, right? That leaves 16, assuming we get all the, the index guys get that, that retail sticks. That's a big ask. You got another $16.5 billion dollars just to get to one times covered. Right? Then the next problem is, is that Vanguard, BlackRock, State Street, and Invesco, the guys that run the big ETFs, well, SpaceX isn't yet in the index. They can't, they, they can't come into the order book. So, essentially, the hedge fund community at large is going to have to warehouse this stock until this thing goes into the index. And they're going to need to hedge, you know, hedge, hedge, hedge that position. I mean, and the prime bro, prime broker community has never supported that kind of quantum of warehousing before. You know, these aren't treasuries. This is
>> It's a handoff. So, if, if BlackRock, State Street, Invesco, the big index, uh, ETF houses, they have to wait, it's 10 days. Well, I mean, the NASDAQ 100's going to be the first to admit, right? And
>> 15 days.
>> 15 days, but that's that's only $6 billion, right? Out of the 44. So, there's, there's actually quite an extensive waiting period, right?
>> Yeah. Okay. So the hedge funds are going to be the bridge from the IPO date until the index providers and all of the active funds that are mimicking the index de facto can come in and buy. So you have this two-week period where it's almost like, well, who else is left to buy it? And it's unclear who that's going to be.
>> It's, it's a bit like the Spider-Man meme, right? They're all going, "No, I'm going to sell it to Investco." "No, I'm selling. I'm going to sell it." So, I mean, I, I think, you know, you're, they're going to look around and they're, all of their peers are doing exactly the same trade. And I think that the, the risk managers at the big investment banks are going to be going, "How much of this stuff are we really warehousing, right?" They're being paid, they're paying being paid a small fortune to do the deal. But hey, I think this is hard. I think this is really hard. And then the other thing is, right, you know, for that, that's, um, let's get to one times covered, right? You know, if, if this thing's going to, if this is going to pop off the bat, right, we need to raise what we need to get to two or three or at least four or five times covered. You're going to see some, you, I mean, listen, ignore the ignore the noise because if you, if you, if you, if you're hearing a number that's more than twice covered, that's that just isn't that kind of money going around.
>> It's impossible.
>> It's impossible, right? Right.
>> There's not $5 trillion in demand for a $2 trillion IPO. It's impossible.
>> Well, yeah. I mean, it's, it's, well,
>> Two trillion market cap, right? But you make a really good point, Josh, because if you look, if you read the S1 in a bit of detail, the lockup agreement reads like a sieve, right? Essentially, all of the ex-Elon float, so that's 60% roughly of the economic interest, you know, basically is unlocked by November of this year. And it all happens in stages. Now, I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea of, um, avoiding a cliff edge, um, a cliff edge vesting for insiders because that, that looks like a sort of, you know, runaway locomotive coming at you. But what I'm saying is that as these guys get unlocked into the free float, and it happens much faster than normally happens in an IPO, just there's just going to be constant supply to absorb any, any, and, you know, any people to, there's constant supply to support, support the passive index demand that's coming in. So, it isn't a short squeeze on the passive community. There's going to be enough, more than enough stock for them to buy as, as, as these shares become unlocked. So, if you think this is some kind of opportunity to play a short squeeze on the backs of the Vanguards and the, and the, and the, and the, and the Invescos, think again.
>> It's 3% of the float trading or something.
>> On out of the gate, 4.3%. But, you know, you have got shares coming into the float incredibly quickly, right? Within 30 days, right? Then if the, if, if the share price performs by 30% from IPO price, a whole load more gets unlocked. So, just as, just as this thing's really getting going, there's a whole load more stock that comes out to hit, hit, hit.
>> It's not a six-month lockup, which is what investors are are accustomed to.
>> It would be a, typically it would be a typical clean 180-day lock.
>> Right.
>> Why? Why? Why don't you think the market is big enough to absorb this?
>> Or, or do you? I don't want to put words in your mouth.
>> No, I, I actually am. This is where I'm really concerned about the broader market right now because top-of-book liquidity in equities is not what it used to be, right? And actually, I don't know if you follow the work of Mike Green on passive. You know, you've got this inelastic market effect coming into play right now whereby, you know, 44 billion of, um, 440 billion of of of money that needs to be raised from those passive funds to fund, to fund their, to fund their participation is going to create an awful lot of damage on the top of the, on the top of the S&P, right? You know, all that, all that liquidity vanishes at any kind of, any kind of pressure. And if you've got all of the passive guys trying to sell 50 bits of Google,
>> Or Nvidia.
>> Who's picking up that tab, right?
>> Right.
>> How, how much money is, how much money is coming into index funds on any given week?
>> You know, you get the drip, drip, drip of the 401k flows every month. You used to have the drip, drip, drip or the suck, suck, suck of the buybacks every, every month provided you weren't in. Now, they're all, the hyperscalers are all spending money on, on data center capex right now. So, that, that bid has gone away. You know, you've got people worried about their jobs in 401k land. So, you know, there, there is, there is, there is, you know, I think that could go in, that could become a net supply of equity into the market over the next years. So, all of the positive US de-equitization dynamics that we've lived through for the last 10 years, like the perpetual money machine, a lot of that stuff is, well, I'm not saying screaming into reverse, but maybe kicking back into neutral right now, which is a really bad time to be really testing the depth of, of liquidity when these.
>> I want to do one of your charts real quick. Um, to, to the first point you made, all of the people that we're going to hear from are super long from a super low price. Put this, uh, SpaceX stock chart up. So, um, with the caveat that obviously this is privately held, but it's
>> I mean, this is the perspective. So, this goes back to 2020 and you could see that this company had a valuation of a couple of billion dollars. Uh, uh, what do you think the valuation was in 2020? $20 billion.
>> It's a, it's a fraction there. I don't know if you've got the other chart with the cap table. No problem. It's in the notes and people, people can look it up. And by the way, all of my stuff on SpaceX is is is completely free. Anyone can, anyone can take a look at it. But essentially, I think the really important, important point here, guys, is that for this $2 trillion company, have a guess what the total quantum of equity checks written to it are over the last 20 years?
>> Uh, is it a, is it like a, is it like a stupidly small number? A billion dollars?
>> No, no, not that stupid, but like, like, um, just under $11 billion.
>> It is a lot of.
>> Well.
>> All right. Well, this is why everybody loves Elon. He's, look how much money he makes people.
>> Well, he's the greatest stock, he's the biggest stock promoter that ever lived, right?
>> And he's, and he's a decent, uh, decent, decent company runner, inventor, whatever. Like, I understand that there's a lot of parlor tricks that he plays that pisses people off, but like, he's done some incredible [ __ ]. Let me ask you this, Rupert, and I'm not, I'm not like an Elon Stan, far from it. But I think credit where credit is due. So, I think everybody understands what you're saying, and I would encourage listeners to go read the piece because it was excellent. Very, very well done. Whenever people speak about, or call some warning shots, which is very fair game. Nothing that you're saying is like hyperbolic or inaccurate. There is going to be a lot of supply hitting the market. Not to, I'm going to put you on the spot and not to make you look like a jackass, but because I'm genuinely curious, the level of concern, zero, you have no conviction, 100, you have all the conviction in the world that this is going to go south for the broader market. Like, where are you in your conviction on that?
>> Um, 15 to 20 delta, roughly.
>> What does that mean?
>> 15 to 20% chance.
>> 15 to 20% chance of this get really nasty.
>> Which is a high, which is a high percentage.
>> Which, which is high. It's high when you think about the stakes around that, around this transaction, right? It's enough to be pretty wary, right? And, you know, people have not got their left tail, they haven't got their downside insured right now. I just, it's just something to keep a close eye on. Now, personally, you know, I am almost in the camp where I think this is too, too big, right? I think that this might not happen. And let's agree, let's agree on one thing, right? It makes sense for all of the Elon companies to be under one roof, right? Ultimately, the car company's got to go with the rocket ship/AI company and all, all makes sense. Um, I, I, this is, this is tinfoil hat territory, but, okay.
>> Let's get nuts.
>> Let's get nuts. So, so, so Goldman Sachs, my, my former employer, got appointed lead. Now, Morgan Stanley has been Elon's banker over the last two years. They went through a ton of pain financing, Michael Grimes, financing the Twitter buyout and were left holding the bag in terms of the LBO loan for a long period of time. And that must have been really painful. And then suddenly, you know, just because apparently DJ Soul slides into Elon's DMs on Twitter, picks up, you know, the trophy equity capital markets mandate of all time, right? Lead left on the SpaceX IPO. I just wonder, I just wonder if Grimes is working on plan B in the background. I mean, he's, he gets, he gets to be lead advisor on the shotgun marriage of SpaceX and Tesla when they realize.
>> He gets to represent Tesla. Yeah.
>> Okay. I mean,
>> The lead advisor on the combination. Listen, that's crazy. It's a 1% probability priced on Polymarket right now of a Tesla-SpaceX merger announced by June 30. 100 to one shot. I think that's, I think that's, I think that's worth doing. It's worth.
>> Things have happened.
>> Can I have, uh, Rupert's SpaceX IPO layout analysis?
>> So, no, that's not it. Well, that, that's something else. But that's that shows SpaceX on the chart.
>> Yeah, that was that was a while. So, yeah, this is great. This is great stuff. What are we looking at?
>> So, this is, this is incredible. And the red number toward the bottom middle, the shortfall. So, um, I know you gave us the, um, the 50,000-foot view, but basically like that's the dollar amount that you think we don't know where it's going to come from.
>> To get to the amount of money they're raising.
>> I'm being pretty charitable, right? About about 42 billion that that 30% sticking with retail, right? And also giving full credit to the passive demand.
>> With the proviso that that's got to find a warehouse, right, before the passive guys can buy it.
>> Right.
>> Okay.
>> So, you have to stress out a bit and anyone can download this from the, from the, the research piece.
>> Rupert, I have a question for you. Um, obviously I hope you're wrong and not because you don't seem like a very lovely guy, but nobody wants you to be right. Right. Okay.
>> I don't want to be Pollyanna either. I, I mean, I just, I'm just, you know.
>> That's why I was asking how, how much conviction you have, cuz I feel, I feel a lot better now. If you were saying like, no, I'm, I've been in this business a long time. I've done these deals, 90%, I would have said, "All right." Um, Josh.
>> So, I feel, I feel better about that. But let me ask you this. I, I would have, I, I would have thought that if, if this was going to go south, and obviously it might. We'll find out in a couple of weeks. I probably would have thought that shares of Tesla, in anticipation of raising money to buy this deal, I probably would have thought that shares of Tesla would sell off in front of this, and it hasn't. Does that, is that, is there any signal in there to you whatsoever?
>> So, you know, for me, the, the mid-curve trade into the SpaceX IPO was to short the hell out of Tesla, right? Because all of the fanboys were going to migrate into Musk's favorite baby,
>> Raise capital, the new one. That's the one thing that makes me think that 1% Polymarket price on the merger is the wrong price, right?
>> Okay.
>> Because because it, you know, the shorts would get completely run over if that trade happens, right?
>> Yeah.
>> Um, so that, that, that makes me pause for thought, certainly. Um, but yeah, I mean, I, I think that there's an interesting dynamic just if it happens, right? Think about all of that transit. You've got, you've got 60% of a two trillion and rising company transitioning, you know, from transitioning into the passive world, right? Because all of these guys that have got these really low basis, they've made their 40, 50, 60 baggers, they're selling now, right?
>> Yeah.
>> You know, they've got a, in most cases, they've got a fiduciary obligation to sell now that they've been in the investment for 10, 15 years. Uh, and this one, you're going to hate, Josh, because I know that you don't like equal weight indices. Um, but I, I think that I, I think that the RSP, the equal weight S&P is going to outperform the MAG 7, right? Until this deal is fully seasoned, right? That's my prediction. If this.
>> The season, the seasoning is what, two years before?
>> It's going to take, it's going to take, it's going to take 9, 12 months for this all to sort of equalize, right? So, even if I'm not predicting sort of fireworks of, you know, doom at 11, which, you know, I think there's a risk, right? But I think if, if the deal, if the syndicate and everyone thought that that was going to happen, right, I think they would move to plan B pretty quickly because, you know, there's a lot of people that have got a lot of skin in the game here and, you know, it's the investment bank's prime broker balance sheets are going to have to support that transition to the passive funds and if, if they're worried about liquidity generally, you know, that's going to contribute towards a plan B.
>> I want to ask you, um, during the Snowflake IPO, this was a, a situation. So, this is, uh, the fall of 2020.
>> It was the biggest IPO ever, I think, at that time, or maybe like neck and neck with Alibaba or something, but like it was huge.
>> And a lot of the hedge funds that were sort of had like a VC bent to them. I don't.
>> The D1s, the O2s, the, yeah, those guys.
>> Yeah. So, what they ended up, some of them ended up doing rather than make the sell decision or the hold decision, they distributed the stock to their LPs.
>> Which is the third option that people forget exists.
>> Yep.
>> Uh, depending on the fund, many funds have the ability to say, you know what, we don't know if it's the right time to sell Snowflake. We were smart enough to get you into it 100x ago and now we're going to put that decision in the hands of the LPs. We're actually going to distribute, um, the shares that they got. Do you think in a situation like this where like everybody understands that this is the ultimate unknowable, like there's no multiple, there's no real cash flow, like everybody gets that this is pixie dust. Do you think there will be a higher likelihood, um, of of funds just saying, as soon as they're able, you know what, you figure it out? Like, we made you money, take it.
>> I, I think, I think that would be the right thing to do. That's what I would be doing as a CIO.
>> That's what you would, that's what you would do if you were running a fund that owned this.
>> Because, because the, the, the insider, the insider stock is all loose anyway, right? So, you're not protecting your investors by staying strong and, you know, keeping the float tight. That's all loose. So, you, you should absolutely distribute, in specie, this investment to your LPs and say, right, you call it. Right. This is, this is a stock at 100 times revenues. You know, that may, may make sense in some universe and we can talk about universes here.
>> Okay. Um, last one I wanted to ask you. Do we start saying MAG 8, right, like right out of the gates because this is, I think instantly going to be, um, five or six in market cap. Um, and as sort of an ancillary, a lot of people are saying Nvidia is the thing that's going to get sold the hardest for in order for people to own SpaceX. I don't know why, but I'm seeing that everywhere. Do, do you have any insight into why people think that?
>> Doesn't make a great deal of sense to me. I mean, you know, Elon with a lot of money building space, building Colossus, and Colossus 2, and he's a big customer. He's, he's going to, he's going to keep the flywheel going for Jensen, right?
>> Yeah.
>> But I, I, I, I just think it's, I wouldn't try and single out. I, I, I'd keep it much more high level. Look at, you know, long RSP, short MAGs, right? And I think that I think that I think that works as a, as as a trade once this thing's priced. I, you know, once this thing's out of the gate, then the, the machinery is rolling now and that is just going to put a huge amount of pressure at the top of the stack on the top, at the top of the S&P.
>> Okay, we, I, I told you 15 minutes, we kept you for 30. I, I can't tell you how much the audience and I and Michael appreciate having your insights. This is obviously a major historic moment for the stock market and, uh, your, your writing has been, uh, really making this much more clear to people that don't have insights directly into these types of deals. So, we, we really appreciate it. Thank you so much, Rupert.
>> Thanks so much for having me on, guys. It's been fantastic.
>> Of course. And, and guys, we'll drop a link to, uh, Rupert's Substack. It's a Blind Squirrel Macro and he's also got a podcast. So, if you enjoyed learning from Rupert the way that Michael and I have, um, there's more where that came from. Thanks again, Rupert. Have an, have an awesome day.
>> All right. Cheers.
>> What do you think?
>> You know, it's interesting. I thought that a lot of the narratives that I'm seeing out there are an artificially low flow to inflate the stock.
>> Yeah.
>> And then the index inclusion is just further pumping. So, you know what? Who cares what I think? Throw up this Polymarket thing. By the way, this to me, this is, this is the vision and the premise in my opinion of prediction markets. This [ __ ] can't be gamed. Nobody knows where this is going to lay. But I take, uh, I take a decent amount of signal in something like this. I think this is very cool.
>> The, the dollar amounts are tiny though, still. I wish they were. I mean, well, they'll get there. They'll get there, but it's not, it's not nothing, dude. So, um, most of the money is, and this is the closing market cap, I guess, on day one. Most of the money, and to Josh's point, it's not a gigantic, but it's $143,000. It's not nothing. It's between 2 and $2.5 trillion.
>> Okay. So, that, that's where the market on Polymarket has settled out in terms of people's expectations of where this thing will. So, that would be bullish if that happens, frankly.
>> No.
>> Yeah. So, there was two different conversations that we were having with Rupert. One is what happens in the first two weeks in terms of like who supports the float until the NASDAQ 100 comes along and starts to buy. And then longer term, I think the valuation stuff to me is kind of boring. Um, I think we all.
>> He didn't, he didn't even want to do that, right? It's like everyone said, every anything that you could say has already been said.
>> Um, the, the mission, the mission, uh, did read a little weepy. The consciousness of the, the hell did we say?
>> Read, read it.
>> Um, "Our mission is to build the systems and technologies necessary to make life multi-planetary, to understand the true nature of the universe, come on, and to extend the light of consciousness to the stars." All right.
>> The light of, extend the light of consciousness to the stars. All right, I'll buy the crystal.
>> Right. So, so Eric Newcomer said, "This may be one of the largest leaps of faith Musk has ever asked investors to take." And.
>> What a great tagline that is. That's like for a movie.
>> It's good. And you know what? I'm so excited to see how far they leap with him. Like, he is a singular, um, inventor, creator, founder, entrepreneur, um, uh, carnival barker. Like, he is a one of one.
>> I was going to say, it's like a combination of Jobs,
>> Edison, but then also Barnum,
>> But also P.T. Barnum.
>> One.
>> All like all rolled up into one. It's.
>> He's a one. So, so here's another good quote and and think about something clever to say. Malik, uh, said, "At $1.75 trillion, SpaceX is asking investors to price in the orbital data centers, the Mars mission, the chip manufacturing, and the plan to build the infrastructure of a Type 2 civilization. The believers won't know the difference. The faithful have been well rewarded before. They have also occasionally learned that their messiah is known to blow air hotter than the exhaust of those rockets."
>> Well done, sir. So, I said this on TV the other day, not in defense of Elon or not that anyone cares if I defend him or not, but he does deliberately do this thing where he says self-driving cars in three years and then seven years goes by and they don't exist.
>> Yeah, they're coming.
>> But he, but he has, I don't know if this is in the Isaacson biography, but he has like explained it. He's like, "Well, if I give a realistic timeline that's further out, then everybody just takes their time. If I put a more ambitious timeline up, people break their neck to get there. And they may not get there, but imagine if they weren't killing themselves to get there, how long everything would take. So, there's a, there's a methodology to this. It's not, he's not crazy. Well, it might be crazy, but this particular thing that he does is, there's a point, I guess, there's a, a point to it. And.
>> How about raising money? You need to be a little bit crazy with with your goals in order to raise the amount of capital that he has. Here's another really good one and this is the stuff that pisses people off. Um, Musk's company, this is from, I think I pulled this from the Journal. I can't, forgive me, I can't remember where I pulled this from. Um, so SpaceX bought this is nuts, dude. SpaceX bought $131 million of Cybertrucks. What are they [ __ ] Armageddon? Remember the movie Armageddon? They had this, the Cybertruck on the planet.
>> So they bought a million of them. $131 million of Cybertrucks at the manufacturer suggested retail price. So, he can't even get a discount. Uh, here's another one. Um, okay. In 2025, SpaceX also purchased $56 million worth of Megapack energy storage products from Tesla. Meanwhile, Musk's XAI has paid Tesla about $731 million since the beginning of 2024 through February 2026. It's funny, a lot of people, myself included, thought that I thought Starlink was the company. Like, I really thought that that's what it was. That was like the backbone of this company. And apparently, he's, he's selling it. Like, no, forget about Starlink. Not forget about it. But it's, it's, it's the enterprise application at the, at the AI level. Showed this TAM that he made $22 trillion. So Starlink is whatever the, the Starlink broadband is, is sort of an afterthought. I thought that was the whole company.
>> It is the whole company fundamentally. It's the only, it's the, you know, there are NASA contracts and then there's the Starlink revenue, but like the, the, the cash flow is coming in from Starlink, which is hugely successful and is not even close to full penetration of its own individual TAM and really doesn't have and really doesn't have any competition to speak of. It's got companies that would like to compete and might in five years. Last week we talked about Amazon Kuiper, uh, and, and some of like the, some of the things holding them back, starting with they don't have their own rockets. They have to rent space on other rockets to put their satellites in space, whereas Elon's already got 8,000 satellites in orbit. Um, not a pipe dream. It exists right now. So, like Starlink is a great business.
>> But he has always done this where he's bootstrapped the growth of the company from like a starting point of like, here is some revenue coming in that we can then build on. Like that's not, if you're, if you've been long Tesla, then you recognize this playbook. Um, he's not selling this as though Starlink is the endpoint.
>> Starlink had 2.3 million subscribers at the end of 2023. The year later it was 4.6. Then it was 9.2. Now it's 10.3 million. You know, I said this to Ben on the pod today. I love people that do the work. There's a lot of people that read the headlines and they look at the numbers and they don't reach [ __ ]. And the one that got all the headlines or all the attention was Starlink's ARPU, the average revenue per user going down dramatically. And people are like, "What in the world? You got to be kidding me." Okay. Well, thankfully we have people like Malik, who actually took the time to read it and he said, "There's an explanation for this. It started with maritime terminals. They paid between $250,000 and $350 customers. And then it was, and then it was, uh, uh, in the airplanes and they spend, uh, $12,500 to $25,000 per month. He said consumer residential is where the growth is now. It is the lowest paying tier and outside of North America increasingly price sensitive." Fast forward. So the mix.
>> He's selling this to households in Brazil.
>> But he said.
>> They're not paying what the original buyers were paying.
>> It's not, it's not a mystery, is my point.
>> That mix explains the slide from $99 to $66 an ARPU in three years. Maritime and aviation grow slowly and pay well. Consumer grows fast and pays less each year. But I think the bigger point that I am genuinely so curious to fast forward, how does the market absorb all of this supply that is coming? And yes, it's a $2 trillion market cap. The float is, is relatively small. The numbers are big, $50, $75 billion dollars. But to Rupert's point, like if there was success early on, it unlocks more float faster. And what might that do to the market? So Chartkin made this chart. This is not inflation-adjusted, but whatever. Not whatever. It's not inflation-adjusted. Okay. Um, in the dot bubble, what fueled the bubble was a true, and Josh, you were there, a true IPO mania.
>> Yep.
>> Like an insatiable amount. Like three, three to five a day, five days a week.
>> Okay. So in 1998, the US markets, the US IPOs raised $34 billion in money and then 65, and then 65 the year later. From 1998 to 2000, nominal dollars, SpaceX's IPO is estimated to surpass all of the money raised in those three years.
>> Yeah. And these are the big difference is obviously the quantity of deals was much higher then, but lower quality. Not that I'm saying like these are all high quality or there aren't issues with these. Those were PE, people would, people would buy, would go to Verisign and buy a URL and call Goldman Sachs and start working on IPO paperwork. Like it was literally like, we just launched a website. You also had existing companies build a tracking stock for the online part of their business and IPO that. So like a really funny example, um, Donaldson, Lufkin, Jenrette, DLJ, sort of like, um, a smaller version of Goldman Sachs, but it was a big deal 25, 30 years ago. Um, they had an online brokerage website, barely any customers. They called it DLJ Direct. They IPOed it. Like you could do that just for, just because it would be like a way to raise equity capital to build your, um, to build your website. So we just, we just had, I don't know, a thousand IPOs and most of them were kind of a joke. We had some good ones, but most of them were a joke. So coming back, coming back to today, I think that.
>> Listen, I don't know if this is going to be a top or or this, the, you know, the obvious, I feel like in hindsight, if this is a top, this would be, with the benefit of hindsight, the most obvious top we've ever seen.
>> Which is why I have, that's what I, exactly what you just said, is what I have in the back of my head. It's too obvious.
>> It's too easy. It's too, what, how could it be so obvious that the biggest IPO of all time coming public via the biggest showman of all time who will literally say anything, um, and every big, every major investor is already looking for the exit. They've been in the stock forever. Like, how could this, how could it be so obvious? Of course, it won't be the top. You know, you know the Breaking Bad scene where Mike is like, "You stupid bastard, we had it all and you [ __ ] it all up." Or something like that.
>> Yeah.
>> Oh, is that how we're gonna look back at Elon? Is like, "You dumb asshole."
>> Um.
>> What you did?
>> The combination of this Anthropic and OpenAI all going public inside of a year might be too much.
>> It might be too much.
>> Uh, I don't know. I'm, you know, me, I'm the primary, where's the money coming from guy? Like, this is my whole thing. So for me, I just don't believe that there's $2 trillion on the sidelines.
>> Stop saying that. It's not, it's not $2 trillion. That's the market cap. It's not the buying power.
>> I understand. I don't think there is $80 billion for him. There's another $40 billion for OpenAI, another $40 billion for Anthropic.
>> It does sound like a lot of money when you put it that way.
>> I don't think it's in cash. I think it's, it's got to come from somewhere. Where is it going to come from? If they sell my stocks to buy this thing, I'm going to be pissed.
>> All right, let's, uh, I like your next topic.
>> All right, this is one of those things where this is, we're going to provide a service to the public.
>> We're going to, we're going to put an end to something.
>> That too many people do.
>> Too way too many people do. Um, they look at the consumer discretionary sector of the S&P and then they look at the consumer staples sector of the S&P and they tell a story about the economy and it's [ __ ] nonsense. It's a great intuition. Like, oo, if we look at maple syrup and and canned fruit, that's like the stuff people have to buy and we compare that to the things that people might want to buy like leather jackets and pickup trucks and we can sort of see like the priorities of the consumer or we could see how the investor, institutional investors are betting. Are they buying the staples because they're worried or are they buying the discretionary because they're bullish on the economy? Throw it out. It's garbage. It's always been garbage, but never more so than it is right now. Here's what I want to show you. This is the consumer discretionary ETF. Um, just the price. Okay. Uh, it is at or close to highs. That's fine. Let's not use this as a story to say that the consumer spending appetite is this or it's that or it's the other thing because when you actually decompose what's in here, you realize this is just being led around by two very large, very important stocks. But I want to make a different point which goes a little bit further. This is the, um, Staples ETF. Put this one up. Uh, and we're dividing it by the, uh, excuse me, we're dividing discretionary by staples here. So it's a ratio chart. So 1.4, the way to think about that is 40% move by the discretionary versus the staples. And a lot of people would look at that and say, well, that's indicative of how strong the consumer is or how good investors feel about the strength of consumer appetites. Do I have you so far? You with me on that so far? These are the things people would say. Okay. All right. Now, when we take a look at the equal weight consumer discretionary, this is going to control for those two gigantic stocks, which I'll mention in a second. Um, that's the purple line. So, now obviously doesn't look as good. So, we're comparing this to the consumer discretionary. The regular sector is in orange, the one that everyone talks about. Uh, that of course over the last year is up 16%. But the equal weight is up only six. And so if we're going to say.
That this says anything about the consumer, we're going to have to say that the equal weight is the more legitimate. Um, I don't agree with the premise that it's saying something about the consumer. But I would say, like, if we have to, let's at least equal weight it. And here is why.
This is the price of gasoline is in blue, up 58% over the last year. And what you can see in this chart is that the orange line, which is just the regular consumer discretionary sector, holding up pretty well, and the purple line starting to break down right around the time that gas prices really accelerated. And that's not an accident. I think that is the true state of the consumer discretionary situation is in purple. And I think the driver of a lot that happens in that equal weight index is the price of gasoline. Not the only, but right now the most important one.
Um, this comes from Ed Yardini. Give me the next chart. I want you guys to understand what's actually in the consumer discretionary. 10% uh is apparel, retail apparel. So this would be like Abercrombie & Fitch and Lululemon and Gap. Um, then we've got like all retailers, uh, 9.3%. And then when you look at everything else in this index, um, this is year-to-date. This is year-to-date. So all of that gain is coming from those two categories that I mentioned. Everything else is detracting. Casinos are down 17%. Auto parts are down 13%. Home improvements down 10%. Even hotels, resorts, and cruise lines are down almost 10%. Home building, we know the story there. It's [ __ ]. Restaurants are down. Automobile manufacturers, which are also in discretionary, are down. The sector is not in good shape. It's being artificially propped up.
Um, Ed points out, uh, give me this next chart. This is market cap and and the earnings. Um, and we're talking about the share of the index. So the sector is uh 9.8% of the S&P's market cap. Next chart shows you Amazon and Tesla, which are 62% of the market cap weighted consumer discretionary, 62 and rising pretty much every week for the last, uh, I don't know. Uh, the capitalization share is in blue. So that's the percentage of them. So in 2018, they were 18%. Now they're 62%. They're almost the entire average. Um, when when you think about that.
And, um, last one, this is just breaking it down in cap size. Um, the S&P 500 is in blue. This is the consumer discretionary stock price, but by cap size. So the discretionary names in the S&P 400, those would be mid-caps, that's in red. They look much worse than blue. And then of course, small cap discretionary in the S&P 600 look the worst. Um, actually are are negative versus, uh, versus 2021. So the more you go down in cap size, or the more you equal weight, the more the consumer discretionary theme comes back down to earth. And it's all being distorted by those two gigantic stocks that are now almost two-thirds of the index. So, doing ratio charts, doing storytelling surrounding, um, surrounding like consumer discretionary, consumer staples, it's always been nonsense. But these days, what you're really saying is, you know, stocks versus, uh, stocks versus two gigantic companies.
And, >> that that's my that's my stick. >> I agree with almost everything you just said. I don't think it's always been nonsense. I think there used to be simpler times. The market wasn't as dynamic and it used to make a lot more sense than it does today. But I completely agree with the premise of looking at these two, these two areas of the market and concluding anything about the economy. Pump the brakes. Here's why. Look at, uh, restaurants, for example. A lot of them are doing really poorly. Oh, the consumer must be not able to afford a lot of these prices. Yeah, partially true. Obviously, it's a part, part of it is an inflation story. You know what else is part of the story? Supply valuation. The valuations of a lot of these quick service restaurants were so stupid that they're now normalizing. Comps are tougher. There's too many Sweet Greens and Cava and and the Miami Pur. There's the competition tells you nothing about the consumer, okay? That's number one. Another area worth looking at or thinking about is the performance of the stock might tell you the opposite about the consumer and who knows in which case. So, for example, is Dollar General, would Dollar General or Dollar Tree be ripping because the lower-end consumer is in good shape and they're able to buy more stuff? Or would Dollar General be doing poorly because people that are trading down can no longer, like, where else are they going to go? Or or or a third scenario, no, the consumer is doing poorly, but the middle class is now trading down and therefore the stock is performing better. Like, it's so messy and you can craft.
>> Middle class people are going to Dollar General, therefore the economy is bad, but it helps Dollar General stock. >> Okay. It's just it's very convoluted. Yeah. So, I think you have to, you really have to look under the hood with this one. I totally agree. All right.
>> Yes. And for God and for God's sake, again, Tesla and Amazon are almost two-thirds of the index. So, you're not saying anything about the consumer. You're saying something about whether or not people want to buy those stocks or not.
>> Amen, sister. All right, let's skip topic three. That's evergreen. We could do that next week. Let's do, uh, you want to do, uh, immune to the news? >> Or do you want to skip? >> This was just a question I wanted to ask you. >> Okay. >> Are we immune to the to the news, Michael? >> No, no, no. I reject that. >> Okay. This is the this is the way I wanted to phrase it though. You have Iran, whatever the [ __ ] is going on there this week. Um, it's either a ceasefire or going to wipe them off the earth. It's like one or the other. A truce or World War II. Okay. Oil prices related, the Fed now on hold, maybe hiking, also related, inflation related, tariffs, sort of orthogonal. Um, all of these things though have basically become background noise. Made a record high last week. Um, the Dow is over 50,000. So, you can't tell me that people are actually reacting to the news, um, in any meaningful way. I think they're just ignoring it. Um, the next thing that's gonna h I bring this up because I think like in a few weeks we're having the midterms conversation. Like >> I may I don't want to have it. >> I don't either, but it's going to happen in the market. It's going to be in all those stupid surveys. Um, and it's going to start whipping the stock market back and forth. Are the Republicans going to lose the house? What does this mean for tax reform? What does this mean for this? What does it mean for that? That's going to be like the the market conversation. And part of me feels like, "Oh, that's going to be so annoying." But then part of me is like, "Actually, no, we're just going to ignore it. We're ignoring everything." Um, maybe this will be the thing that we don't ignore. I don't know. What are your thoughts?
>> Yeah. No, I just disagree with the whole premise of we're ignoring the news. The reason and you say ignoring it because with the backdrop of the market is at the all-time high and therefore we are ignoring the news. No, I I that's the part that I reject. The market is at an all-time high because earnings and profits are at an all-time high. The market would be >> therefore we're ignoring the news and focusing on earnings. >> That's the question. That's what I'm asking you. >> The premise of that, and maybe not you per se, but when everybody's saying, "Why aren't we reacting to this and this? Why are we ignoring everything?" We're not. We're focusing on what matters. And investors are focusing on the bottom. >> Stop. I agree. But that's You're not disagreeing with me. I know you want to. You You don't like the premise, but that's what the premise is. The premise is Yeah. There's there's [ __ ] going on in the Middle East. Um, there's geopolitics, whatever that means. The market doesn't care because it's focused on fundamentals, not news. >> Correct. >> The fundamentals are the earnings. >> Yes. >> So, we we we agree the market is better than ever at tuning this all out. I don't think Kevin Walsh got even a 24-hour cycle. Like, in the minds of the average investor, we used to talk about the new Fed chair like it was the new pope. >> This is so much better. >> And we were and we were Catholics that we're just No, it's like, all right, new Fed chair. It's it's Trump's son-in-law. Who is it? Whatever. I don't care. Next. Like, we're not doing the we're not doing these news discussions anymore in the stock market. And I'm sure at some point there will be big enough news. There's a guy outside the White House like two days ago firing an automatic rifle. Do you even know that it happened? Does anyone >> I saw that briefly? >> Could you imagine if that would have happened in 1997? >> No, it's crazy. >> Like it would it would have been on the like it would have been on the news for five nights straight. So I I think I'm sure something crazy is going to happen and and that's going to make this look crazy what I'm saying. I think we're sort of like in a post macro geopolitical news backdrop for a little while >> until something gets extreme enough. >> It It's because the AI story is so all-encompassing and engrossing. >> Yeah. Um All right. That's all I wanted that's all I wanted to ask you on that. >> All right. We keep moving. >> Let's skip everything else. Let's just go to your Make the Case. We could do the Micron stuff, uh, on TF. >> Good idea. Uh oh, we have a good guest for that too this week. Yeah, we do. >> Okay. Um, oh, I did want to mention the Halo ETF. So, uh, this actually ended up happening. Uh, we got the Halo ETF, finally began trading, and I have to read a disclosure because I am involved in it. Um, Halo is offered through Roundhill Financial. I, me, Josh Brown, have an outside business activity where I act in a limited consulting role for Roundhill to advise in their marketing efforts. Investing involves risk, possible loss of principal capital. Nothing discussed should be considered personal financial advice or a solicitation. All opinions are expressed on my own, not the opinions of Real Wealth.
Um, the way that they built this, I have the top 10 holdings. So, basically, it's a rules-based strategy. Roundhill is the ETF company behind DRAM, which I think is the most successful, uh, ETF of the year. And they've done some other thematics. What jumps out at you about this top 10 holding, um, screen that we have up here?
>> Obviously, you have a limited role because I see this is equal weighted. So, of course, they don't care what you think at all. >> They don't care what I think. No, I didn't create the index at all. >> I know. I know. I'm teasing. What jumps out to me? Uh, these are names that these are not individual stocks anybody buys except for Philip Morris.
>> Okay. So for people listening, AutoZone, TFI, Cummins, JB Hunt, Lamar Advertising, Lennox International, Ryder System, Magna, Philip Morris, and Autolive. >> I would say >> nobody in our audience owns these stocks individually except for maybe Philip Morris. >> Philip Morris is Yeah. So, um, no tech, no financials, and in fact, the index was built by a company called Acro, which is an index provider to the ETF industry. And, um, financials are explicitly ruled out of being owned by the the Halo ETF ticker is LOHA, by the way, for people that want to check it out. Uh, apparently Halo was actual Halo was taken by a biotech company. Um, can't own financials because the rules that they're applying to determine heavy assets, low obsolescence risk, don't apply to financial companies. >> Right. >> Um, there's one tech stock in the index and I've never heard of it. Right now, the index will change, but right now, the companies that made the criteria, and there's one communications services stock, that's it. So, in other words, like tech is 1%, communication services. >> You know which one it is? >> I think communications is Charter. Um, >> we need to have like we need to have a broadband conversation. We'll do that one of these weeks. Holy [ __ ] dude. >> What's that? A broadband conversation. >> Oh my god, they look like they're going to zero.
>> Um, and then the other thing, the other All right, so I have two charts of some holdings in here. Um, here's Cummins, CMI. >> Wow. Okay, so we're not talking about sleepy stocks. This thing is, uh, I want to say it was $150. It was, uh, $200 a share a couple years ago. It's almost 700. And the other one, Southern Copper. Um, obviously, like this is a rock and roll stock. It doesn't only go up. Of course, it goes up and down, but like >> nobody here's a name that's gone from 60 to almost 200. Um, the reason I bring those two up is I think they're ve they're emblematic of this moment. They're Halo because they have heavy assets and very low obsolescence risk. No one's going to disrupt the copper mine, like for obvious, like for obvious reasons. >> And, uh, you know, Cummins is making engines. >> You can't just decide I'm going to chat GPT myself an engine. So these are like, um, quintessential Halo stocks and they're in the index. Um, but they also benefit from the AI story. So, while we're betting on stocks that we think aren't disruptible by AI, we also sort of in some of the names get the tailwind of all the AI activity. I think 36% of the portfolio is industrials. >> Oh, wow. >> And you bet Yeah. And you better believe a lot of the industrials in that index are AI beneficiaries. So, um, just thought it was interesting the way they constructed the index. Anyway, that's my spiel on Halo. I know we talked a lot on the show about me suing people. Um, we're going to do the we're going to do the next best thing. We're we're, uh, I'm going to help Roundhill out with their product and I'm pretty excited that I have I've birthed this into the world. And in many ways, you're a midwife to this to this product. >> Whoa. Whoa. You have helped to shepherd its its, uh, its birth. So, that's the story. >> Love it. Um All right. Let's, uh, Was that Wait, you have a different Make the Case, don't you? >> Yeah, we're not going to do that tonight. We're out of time. >> All right, good. Um, let's do a mystery chart real quick. >> Let's knock it out. >> All right. Um >> Oo, >> okay. So, the purple line is the S&P 500. All right. This is the last five years. The orange line, and don't guess yet, the orange line is a country. Okay, next chart. This is an equal weight version. This is an equal weight sector version. You're definitely not going to get this. You're probably not going to get the other one, but I just want >> Stop. Stop. Stop. Stop. Equal weight sector version. What does that mean? >> It's an equal weight sector of of that country. >> So, chart, first chart. >> All right. This is a country that has beaten the Yeah, you could say beating the pants. >> So, the orange becomes purple in the next chart. >> The orange is a country ETF. Let's start. >> All right. What am I guessing at? The second chart or the first chart? >> Let's do, let's start this one. >> All right. Uh, it's a country. >> Is this a G7? I don't even know what that means. This is like >> I'm going to say, I'm going to say, I'm going to say Korea. >> No, that would have been more vertical. This is a neighbor of ours. >> Oo. Our neighbor to the north. >> Yeah. >> Is it Canada? >> How would you know? >> Oh, this is oil. Okay. >> This is oil and oil and gold. >> Okay, I'll I'll better one. Do you next chart? You're not going to guess this. So, let me just tell you this is this is EWC, Financials of Canada. What in the world is happening here? >> Oo, that's interesting. >> Literally, >> like it's the Wait, it's EWC that it owns all the Canadian financials. >> How bizarre is this? The bank. >> What is Canadian financial, like the like the five big, the cartel banks? >> Like Royal Bank of Canada? No. Is there a Nova Scotia up there? I guess they benefit, they well, they benefit from higher oil and gas prices and activity and probably a little bit of >> sprinkle a little bit of gold on that and uh so Dak Jason in the chat is saying it's all Brian Bellski. That could also be >> so for as much as we rightly talk, so by the way, by the way, it's 40% of the index is financials. 40% is financials. >> Then it's 19% uh energy, 15% uh materials, and 10% industrial. So, it's not just, it's not just energy. >> Financials are rocking and rolling. >> Can I say one, Can I say one funny thing? >> Go ahead. >> Everyone thinks Bilski is from Canada. >> He's from Minnesota. >> He's from Minnesota. He worked, he worked at a Canadian bank called BMO for a long time. He's no longer there. >> And people just, they think he's Canadian. It drives >> He's going to be back on the show this summer. It drives him up a wall. Well, he because he sounds it too. That's the problem. >> He used to write research on Canadian stocks also. So, he kind of >> Anyway, anyway, just do the exercise. If you're thinking that the the valuations don't make sense, we're ignoring the news. It's a bubble. Look at global stock markets. >> They're doing really well. It's not just us. >> That's a really great point. It's a great place to end. Uh, we have, as Michael mentioned, we have an all-new edition of the Compounded Friends coming at the end of the week. So much to talk about. I'm super excited about it. Uh, once again, special thanks to our guest, uh, Rupert, who joined us to talk about SpaceX. If you were into his stuff, make sure to check out Blind Squirrel Macro on Substack.
Um, tomorrow's an all-new Animal Spirits coming out with Michael and Ben. Any Nicks talk? >> I love >> you guys. Like Ben doesn't give a [ __ ] at all. He doesn't want to hear it. >> All right. Um, and we'll do Ask the Compound this week. So, there's a lot happening. Um, I also wanted to mention we dropped this like two hours ago. Also on the channel, we did sort of like a, I don't know if you'd call it a trailer or a mini documentary. It's 3 minutes. >> Good stuff. >> Uh, um, but we had a we had a big launch party for our, uh, Porterhouse portfolio strategy, and a lot of the people that you guys have seen on this channel, a lot of the, uh, financial rock stars in our orbit came out, and I think it'll be a fun watch for you. So, go look for that. It's on the Compound channel. All right, that's it from us. Thank you guys so much for tuning in. Thanks for coming live. We'll talk to you soon.