Break up Google, Starbucks CEO out, Kamala’s price controls, Boeing disaster, Kursk offensive

all right everybody Welcome to the number one podcast in the world I am your boy J Cal the world's greatest moderator executive producer for life with me again on the all-in podcast is the Rainman David Sachs yeah looking healthy looking good looking trim the hair is great how you feeling brother good good haircut good haircut looks good now do you go to the barber The Stylist they come to you everybody wants to know they come to me yeah course they do of course and then with us of course your sulan of science he loves those

vegetables his name is David Friedberg uh from Burkle to the Bay our boy how you doing there brother are you living the lake lifestyle you have a nice restful August loving loving the outdoors good for you you look so healthy speaking of looking healthy celebrated birthday with Jason yesterday happy 39th Jason happy 39th Jason we did a long mountain bike ride with our other buddy Z and had a little family Barbecue last night everyone had a good time would you do a little portella mushrooms what did you do you put a little zucchini on the

grill let's just say I show up with my own food to a barbecue absolutely you do all right and everybody's favorite the chairman dictator chamath poly haaa you love him you hate him but you can't ignore him how you do look at the number of buttons here you got the M collar on and I don't think any of those buttons are butt none of them are button none of them are but you became a meme once again once again the Allen Podcast creating memes you were swirling you were swirling a little white wine last week

you were in the arena and uh I'm putting up all the numbers going macro and you're swirling wine the the audience loved it uh what's going on today do you have a bottle that was a 2019 K Bosco really really great one can you tell us the uh flavor profile the notes what did you what did you get as you were swirling there was some Plum there's a little TR there oh the PO and Beres little poisonberry Fant little moth it was a a touch of inflation with a hint of unemployment there he goes I

don't want to be political let your winners [Music] ride [Music] David we open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with Love Queen of well you know boys I had a big week I had a big week this week you know I'm at the lake still but uh I made a little trip to Silicon Valley I was uh hanging out with ruoff at seoa and as I'm prone to do I love to go to Bucks you guys been to Bucks before in Woodside yeah I went one a couple years and I and

I've never been back since okay well it's my favorite place to get breakfast or get my little Tuna Melt I've been going there for ages it's a little bit of a legendary place where Steve jinson made the Hotmail investment the Tesla investment all kinds of famous stuff happens bucks well it's where PayPal got its first funding round where John Malloy from Nokia Ventures beamed the money to Peter and Max at at bucks on a Palm Pilot on a PM pilot way back in 1999 yeah for those people who don't know PM pilot was the uh

most Innovative and poorly designed product nickname in college my god well done good so good but you know I'm wearing my buck hat and I got my buck menu here boys it it was like a pinnacle of my career I've been waiting for this if you go to bucks and you look at the sides you can get your crispy brussels sprouts there freeberg get your sweet potato fries but there it is J Cal's onion rings are now on the menu at bucks I have hit the big leagues folks wait is that is that real did

you really get that I did I'm the first person I I love a good tuna melt it's a weird sandwich but they do it so great there and I keep asking for onion rings for like a decade and then we don't do ons we don't do onion rings two yeah and so suddenly you know that the team there comes out they say Jal we have two different types of onion rinks please pick which one you like best I went with the panko crusted freeberg these are for you delicious panko crusted and uh they put them

on the menu so I was so touched I just while we're on while we're on sandwiches sure you know what I love what do you a Reuben made with turkey breast instead of pamies have you guys ever had a turkey Reuben I haven't it's incredible because I think a pastrami Reuben is a little too much it just feels too sclerotic too fat like your arteries are yeah it's terrible but like you get a good Thousand Island sauce and like some SAU Crow and some cheese it's amazing I took my I took when I was in

New York a couple weeks ago I took my daughter to cats's Deli I took her on a little tour of the Lowry side and we made a stop at cat's what's your favorite Sammy there Max's Deli by the way has a turkey mov Max why did you do a paid promo for bucks at Woodside I don't they gave you a hat every time they sell one of those uh onion rings they I get $1 on my account there t the gri Never Ends get us only podcast to sell onion rings perfect okay I mean you're

selling potatoes and shamat is Laur Piana to sell onion rings onion rings and Laura Piana what we go high we go low they go high we go low they go low we go high all right listen Tat's big old outcome is on the table the doj is looking at breaking up Google this is huge news in our industry last week we talked about the ruling that Google had an illegal Monopoly in Search and advertising the case was brought by Trump's doj back in 2020 shamat said two outcomes are possible little low Big O little low

consent degree you know like Microsoft did back in 2000 with the Internet Explorer decision the Big O we didn't think that was a major possibility but here we are Google getting broken broken up doj is going Big O on Wednesday Bloomberg reported the doj is considering a breakup according to the article most likely breakup targets are Android OS Google Chrome and AdWords okay last time the Government tried to break up a monopoly was 20 years ago when they tried and fail to dismantle Microsoft we know how that's gone that company's doing great so let's talk

about it aside from search and advertising there's kind of Five Pillars at Google and you're a former googler so we'll go to you first freeberg I think cloud 40 billion in Revenue grow 30 % YouTube 34 billion growing 15% little volatile because it's advertising that doesn't include like premium YouTube TV and that stuff but oh my Lord uh YouTube is up to 2.7 billion monthly active users World population's 8.2 so quite significant Netflix has 38 billion in Revenue they're worth almost 300 billion so that's an interesting corollary you got weo doing 50,000 PID trips a

week now 2.5 million a year and that's growing uh quite nicely you got Android right they don't disclose Revenue you got the G Suite so let's start with you freeberg and then I'll go to you chth because you made the prediction what do you think would be a creative or uh generally increase the market cap and be something that Google would be happy with and the government would be happy with if you had to like maybe shed one or two properties what what's a possible outcome here and your thoughts broadly on this I'll just start

by commenting I'm not really sure what the improve movement to Consumer pricing or competition would be in different breakup scenarios i' really like to understand the doj's analysis on that how does breaking up one of these things improve the uh the consumer experience I could see the case for Android because Android defaults to Google search but again Android's an open sourced operating system and so everyone has their own fork or a lot of the handset manufacturers will have their own Fork of Android obviously the Google Fork defaults to Google search so it benefits Google services

quite well I think that would be an analysis that the doj would really have to kind of prove out that there's real uh anti-competition associated with Google's influence over the open source Android operating system Fork that they manage and license out I think understanding that would be good I do think that there's a lot of value unlock in YouTube so if Google were to just generally spin out YouTube that is probably a business that on its own would attract an investor base that might otherwise not want to get into the conglomerate and you know there's

always this notion of what's called a conglomerate discount when you put a lot of different businesses together the businesses in aggregate get valued less than the individual Parts would would be valued on their own because different investors interested in a business investment thesis would like to bet on cloud would like to bet on YouTube would like to bet on AI and so and and so each one of these kind of like segments if they can be unlocked can actually be value creating in terms of overall market cap the challenge is the way YouTube's infrastructure operates

it operates on shared infrastructure with the rest of Google services so does cloud so does search so does AdWords so there's one common Cloud infrastructure that everything runs on and then there's um one common Advertiser pool there are dedicated advertising salespeople within YouTube but there's also dedicated shared infrastructure on Advertising between YouTube and search and AdSense and so on and there's ad sales teams that actually can sell across search and thirdparty publisher sites and YouTube and so you know breaking up those shared teams becomes a little more technically difficult but YouTube certainly seems like an

unlock the question is what happens with all the infrastructure layer does that go with cloud and if it does then YouTube AdWords and search all become customers of cloud so that might be one way that this could work but I think netn net if were to happen there could be a lot of um upside in the market cap I'll also say it just feels like the tenor of all of this is anti success and not anti-competition and anything that's kind of successful or big is automatically deemed to be a monopoly and I think we really

have to kind of understand how are consumers and the market for competition being affected by having all these things together and that's what should really be focused on and studied not just the fact that something is big and successful we'll see how that all plays out all right shath you predicted the possibility of a big O here we are your thoughts on what this might look like chances of it happening and then just maybe if you're interested in the uh anti- suuccess approach here or do you think this is more you know valid criticism of

Google's massive search Monopoly well when I pain Ed that series of outcomes just kind of like looking forward I really didn't think that this big O outcome was a very large probability I was like you know I would have handicapped that at single digit percentages and I think the reason why the doj leaked this thing and floated this trial balloon essentially is in part I didn't weigh enough what saxs was talking about which is that there really is a massive bipartisan amount of support against Google Now it cuts on two different dimensions I think that

there is one dimension which is more Republican oriented which is just about freedom of speech and putting your thumb on the scale but if you take the Democratic point of view it's more the anti successful vein that freeberg just mentioned the thing is though that it'll make strange bed fellows because it unites both sides against pushing for a big outcome if you go back to the last big outcome that we had in antitrust law which was AT&T in the 70s and 80s that lawsuit was a decade long right and essentially what happened was when it

looked like AT&T was going to lose the case they were the ones that proposed splitting itself up and so I think that it's this is going to start this really interesting chess game here where obviously Google has to appeal and fight this but if it looks like the political pressure is going to build and the courts aren't going to let them off the hook and have a little o outcome probably the best thing to do is for Google to initiate it themselves because they can answer a lot of the questions that freedberg just raised and

they'll do it in a way where going back to the people that matter along with the customers and the employees are the sh shareholders you can do it in a way where the sum of the parts will be greater than the value today of Google so I think that there's a shareholder win it needs to be offered by Google and then negotiated but to be really honest with you Jason when I when I kind of was thinking about it last week I really thought this was a single digit probability I still don't think it's a

single TI of probability and if it grows it's the most meaningful thing that's happened in technology quite honestly all right saaks from a business perspective cool saaks your thoughts I agree with chamath that Google has the opportunity to do something really interesting here which is get ahead of the curve and break itself up before the political system forces that onto it and the advantage of doing that is that it could partition the company in ways that are economically smart the big categories would be search advertising and YouTube and I think that would have two big

economic benefits for shareholders one is you unlock value by deong glomera like freeberg was saying second once you break up the company into these pieces there's less places for employees who aren't doing anything to hide you know for all this bureaucracy to hide I mean look Google is famous for employees who don't do anything right the guys sitting on the roof suning themselves all day if you break up the company into three or four smaller companies right there's just way less room for people to hide and I think that they could all be leaner more

efficient operations and that would ACR to the benefit of of shareholders so I think that would make a lot of sense and then furthermore I guess a third point is that you forall the possibility of the government doing something that could actually be very harmful and you know the the piece here is that I guess the doj is talking about spinning up Android and Chrome and I think it's worth pointing out that those aren't really businesses in and of themselves the reason why Google developed Android and chrome was to prevent anybody from getting Upstream of

them right they saw what Microsoft did in terms of capturing the operating system and then capturing the browser and they didn't want to potentially allow Microsoft or anyone else to essentially win The High Ground capture The High Ground Upstream of them and be able to divert traffic away from search to their own search engine or someone else's search engin so they began the strategy of commoditizing those layers of the stack and it worked brilliantly I mean Android and chrome have become very popular and it guarantees that nobody else can get Upstream of them and then

dis remediate them but the problem is if those things get spun out and have to become businesses on their own how would they function as businesses it's not clear to me that there's an obvious strategy there I would like to ask freeberg freeberg do you do you see a way that Chrome and Android could be spun out in and become viable businesses on their own or do you agree that they were essentially created to commoditize layers of the stack rather than become profitable businesses on their own yeah so they they were both created to avoid

third parties blocking access to Google search that's why they were both started and remember Sundar was the product manager on Chrome originally that was his big kind of product that he ran for quite some time so Android was all about making sure that the handset manufacturers didn't basically default consumers to do search and use the internet in a way that would disadvantage Google so Google said you know what just like Zuck is doing currently with llama Google said let's make an open- sourced mobile operating system that's better than any other mobile operating system and we'll

make sure that consumers have choice and they have the ability to go where they want to go and it's not just defaulted by the Telos or the handset manufacturers so that was the reason and obviously they ended up making their own Fork of Android which is the most popular Fork of Android that has Google as a default search engine so yeah and and they get license fees from that but fundamentally it's really just in service of making sure that people go to Google Search so where that ends up sitting in a split up company I

have no idea and chrome similarly you know Google originally supported Firefox and gave a lot of money to Firefox and then Firefox just wasn't moving fast enough so Google started hiring Firefox engine and built Chrome and house as a way to keep Netscape and Internet Explorer from blocking access to Google search and defaulting uh and they built a default to Google search obviously what do you think jao you know I I I have a long relationship with Google um as a content creator and they they do have a massive Monopoly in search that's absolutely true

and the justice department I think is um well within their rights to to take a deep dive on that they don't have it in ads if you look at the competition for Google in advertising you got met Tik Tok and Amazon which have very very significant advertising businesses and then like a bunch of new players um which are referred to basically as the shopping cart ad networks that's Uber instacart door Dash Etc and so when you look at this it's it's kind of paradoxical that it really does rhyme with what happened with Microsoft they're two

decades late on this the the search Monopoly has been squeezed for every dollar and to build every subcomponent of of Google's Monopoly flights shopping all of these things put into Google search and put at the top above organic search has basically killed hundreds hundreds of startups over the decades and so I actually don't think this is going to do much if they do a breakup the easy solution for Google and I agree with I think people who said that here is to just spin out YouTube and weo those who are perfect Standalone businesses yeah there's

some backend stuff but like you said freeberg they could become customers of the ad network of the cloud for some number of years but YouTube and weo those would be like a $400 billion company a $50 billion company and those are right in the Zeitgeist of the future and what advertisers want so I I think offering those two up would unlock massive shareholder value the most damaging one would be Android if they force them to sell Android that is going to be massively damaging because an independent Android company could then you know give their search

default to bang and Microsoft would happily not good not good they they must in order to to capture maximum economic value they auction it right and so I mean Los go Fork of Android right correct and so that is the dominant player and then they have handsets so that that worth how much is that worth because maybe that does make Android a viable business on its own you know it would be it's probably 30 billion of Revenue a year okay great so let's do it I take back what I said it can survive as an

independent business Chrome can't right Chrome can't but maybe Android and Chrome go together that would be incredibly damaging to Google that's the most damaging the easiest is YouTube and wayo in this whole mix but I'll give you the wild card in all of this think about the math sorry just real quick on think about the math on that so let's say it spins out and it generates 30 billion of Revenue a year and Google owns the majority of it and eventually they'll sell it down but that business will be valued on the money that Google's

paying so Google will make that Equity value back if they own the shares and they will lose onethird of their revenue to that new company now of course they'll get it back in the equity but then they don't have it because about a third of searches are mobile now and that's increasing the big wild card and all this is Apple um when I was doing Mahalo which was a human powered search in over 10 years ago that's Theo back I emailed it to Steve Jobs he opened it he played with it a bunch I won't

talk about anything else in that regard but they had a search Project in the works when Steve Jobs was in charge over there they were looking at search because he had such an ax to grind with Eric Schmidt because they launched Android and he kicked Eric Schmidt off the board and there was a lot of hand ringing there I think apple is and i' I've heard this from folks around Apple that they're looking at search again and there's duck. go and there's a company called Brave that has their own search engine and search API that's

gotten very popular I believe Apple's going to launch their own search engine and compete heads up with Google and so I think that's going to be the very interesting thing that happens in this market the question then becomes off does this distract management to a level like it did Microsoft and you have a lost decade and it takes their eyes off the prize of well Ai No and the reason I say no is that I think that people's reaction to these things become more sophisticated in time because folks go back and actually study what happened

in the Mell situation AT&T in the rbox what happened in Microsoft and so I suspect that they know how to Shield the rank and file employee from whatever is going to happen so I I think that that's less likely referring to management you know like do you think it distur do you think it distracts management from running the business Jamal I don't think so either because I think that these things get put into a very tight group of people mostly lawyers who then go and deal with this issue I think that there's an acute moment

where if they think that they're going to lose an appeal or that appeal is not going to get heard then yeah I do think management and the board are brought together and the again if if if history is a guide they should want to propose the terms on which they break their own company up because I think if the government tries to decide there's going to be so much imprecision that they'll break the and I think that would be a shame because I mean look take a step back the breaking up of Google is great

for competition and for startups but let's not forget Google is an incredible company that has created enormous amounts of good they have done way more good than bad way more like three four five orders of magnitude more good than bad and to break a company like that I think would be a really bad outcome from a competitive Dynamics perspective and Game Theory it's pretty reasonable to hobble them that's why I think the small o outcome is much more palatable and seems more fair to me a breakup is a really Draconian action and I'm not sure

that when you look at Google versus AT&T and the and the baby bells I don't think it's anywhere near the same but if there's the political will they'll be able to craft and change some of the laws that allow these folks to just keep going after them and if that happens I think it's going to be really important for Google to define the terms of their own breakup I want to just underline what Cham said real quick being big can be very good in the sense that it can drive an ability to invest in Innovation

that is not possible without the scale and the significant cash flow that's being generated by being that big and AT&T is a great example Labs so the way AT&T was set up is there was all the the local telephone companies under this this Bell system that AT&T owned and then Western Electric was the company that manufactured all the telephone equipment that was put into the uh the telephone system and then B Labs was the third entity it was the research arm and all that they did at Bell Labs was do research and they were fully

funded they had all this cash flow pouring into them so they could discover and work on and invent whatever they wanted with that capital B Labs is so insane if you go if you guys haven't read any of the books on Bell labs and what was discovered there and how it operated it truly is like the the most Innovative Center ever in human history but they invented like antenna arrays they invented microwaves they invented radar they invented the transistor they invented information Theory which was the basis for everything in the internet there was even some

efforts to try and invent a nuclear bomb before the Manhattan Project started they invented integrated circuits and on and on and on and on on and that's because they could invest all this money in doing this research that would have been very difficult for a small startup or a company that's trying to grow and is barely profitable to be able to do at Google they've invested billions of dollars in weo and I think as we all know weo really was if not the leader but the inspiration for a whole generation of autonomous driving that ultimately

will come to Market and will really transform our lives in a meaningful way in the same way Amazon and Microsoft and meta have all invested tens of billions of dollars in Innovation look at what Zuck is doing at meta with the open sourcing of the Llama models it's incredible that would have never been possible if you had a small company that was trying to get profitable so I just want to highlight like these businesses just because they're big and successful doesn't necessarily mean that they're stifling innovation in fact they may be accelerating Innovation and enabling

progress I'm just pointing out that the cash flows that are being generated and the way they're investing those cash flows is pretty pretty impressive and we lose that if we end up going after every big company just because they're big and saying hey we should take away their ability to do this I'm going to take the other side of that I think that what they can do with their massive amount of power is destructive to competition in the marketplace if you look at self-driving we have had tens of billions of dollars invested without weo it

would have been just fine there have been so much money Tesla Uber you know uh Cruise GM there's plenty of people out there there's plenty of capital out there from around the world and I think when these companies and Facebook Face's one I think proves my point what you're saying here is I think it would be better that you didn't have these companies that could put $20 billion into something and you had 50 startups go after it rather than these giant companies just steal it and overpower them flooding them with capital it makes the world

less Dynamic that Zuck can just and Google can keep taking the next category from the marketplace go ahead saak you had a point if you break Google up from a conglomerate of let's call it for monopolies or duopolies or with extraordinary Market power into four separate companies they're still going to be generating extraordinary profits and those could still be invested in a weo so I don't know that it stops The Innovation our workshopping this issue has pretty much convinced me that it should be four companies search advertising you YouTube and Android because I think Android

could be a stain low business because of the value of the search cloud is in search or advertising that's got to be figured out I don't know the answer to that yeah so I mean I guess it's a negotiation now maybe they put up one or two to be spun out and and then the negotiation happens and who knows you could have regime change in Washington okay let's keep moving through this incredibly juicy docket Starbucks CEO is out after a year and a half of underperformance star B's CEO laxman narim stepped down uh after just

16 months on the job uh I'll break down what went wrong and get your reaction to all this I know you have some strong feelings on it freeberg as well earlier this week Starbucks shares were down 20% year to date compared to the S&P up 12% companies are two straight quarters of declining Revenue the definition of recession in fact they've had to raise prices massively due to inflation that has annoyed customers and customers have been IR about the weight which has been caused by two things one they have a broken Staffing algorithm that's led to

massive understaffing and then the app has become the starbz app is incredibly complex and you can order ridiculous strengths that's causing a massive why do you keep saying star bees it's what the kids call it it's what the kids call it stares oh that's part of the problem to this that's yeah and they've added like all these like fruity drinks with and stuff that would be like along the Boba lines that have made have become incredibly popular with Millennials and gen Z so anyway laxman was the uh handpick successor by Howard Schultz and Schultz helped

prep and train laxman but he's been super critical of him recently kind of like the Bob Bob chapek relationship we saw play out in 2022 over at Disney Brian nickoll the currency of chipot is going to take over at the end of August investors love this move shares jumped 25% on Tuesday what you sorry what what did you call it it's called Chipotle normal people call itan the current CEO of chipot Chipotle Chipotle CEO of Chipotle no Chipotle Chipotle Chipotle chipot Chipotle don't need it this place anyway jump 25% on Tuesday lar sing day increase

y y meanwhile Chipotle dropped 8% Nicole is on a heater when he switches teams the odds go with him and Starbucks has a bunch of uh activist investors who are winning massively as part of putting pressure on this freeberg Starbucks and Nike both iconic Global Brands both have faltered what's your take well the one argument is there's a Founder Le problem here which is when the founder steps out and Professional Management takes over and you have the same expectations that you had when the founder was leading things go um sideways but Starbucks faces many more

kind of macroeconomic challenges Nick if you pull up Starbucks financial report so here you can see that their uh net revenue growth was only 1% year-over-year but their operating margin's been on the decline so they have not really been able to boost their operating margin very much in the past 5 years so while they've raised prices they've had a really hard time making more money and that's because the cost of food and the cost of Labor and the cost of rent and the capital expenditures needed to upgrade stores has far exceeded the ability for them

to grow revenue and compete and now revenue is flatlining because consumers are getting tapped out with respect to how much they can spend and there's only so much Innovation you can really do to charge more get people to come in the store more and drive up Revenue Brian nickel has an incredible reputation prior to Chipotle he ran Taco Bell and he ran Taco Bell for several years and made it one of the most profitable qsr Quick Serve restaurants in the world he did this by focusing on every nickel he is notorious for being a Cost

Cutter for being an efficiency driver for being a productivity Hound he goes into the business and he figures out every step in the supply chain every step of the operating activities of the employee in the stores and figures out ways to make sure did you say that Brian nickel focuses on every nickel was that say that want to say it he did say it he say don't interrupt him he doesn't like to be interrupted yeah no no it's good sorry keep going that was good and um and so he was recruited heavily I don't know

if you guys remember Chipotle's founder was running Chipotle and at the time there was a lot of investor activism around Chipotle because they were wasting money like no one's business the guy had a private J he was flying his management team back and forth between Denver and New York they were spending money on crazy projects and the board fired the CEO founder of Chipotle brought in nickel nickel came in and made Chipotle an incredibly profitable growing business and the expectation is he'll come and do the same here that maybe over the years Starbucks's success has

bred laziness Starbucks's success has bred fat slowness productivity Decline and that this guy is the right guy to come in and find all all the nickels and Brian Nicholls is probably the right guy which is why you're seeing the stock kind of rally as hard as it has saaks or chamat anybody have strong feelings here yeah I would just add something here which is I I do think that macroeconomic forces played a huge role here we've seen that we have had tremendous amount of inflation over the last few years and Starbucks has gotten more expensive

and if you're a worker whose wages have not kept up with inflation do you really want to spend 10 15 bucks on a cup of coffee that I mean it's pretty fancy cup of coffee I'm not saying it's it's not but when you could just go to your Commissary at work and pour yourself a cup of coffee for free do you really want to work roughly an hour every day to pay for your coffee fix and I think more and more consumers are just saying that this is a luxury good I'm looking at cut cost

when I go to the grocery store and buy groceries they're 30% more expensive than they were a few years ago I got a cut somewhere and a luxury cup of coffee just seems like a really easy place to cut so I think that's a huge part of this and I don't know how Brian Nichols going to fix that it's a macroeconomic force Jam I have a couple the first is that I think Starbucks is actually an incredible brand and it's actually a really good business and the mistakes here have nothing to do with the product

per se meaning Chipotle if you remember someone got poisoned there there was like botulism the chicken was bad so there was a core product problem but that's not the case here if you unpack what Starbucks is I think that they are a premium product and that's reinforced by what Sac said which is they price in such a way because they believe that they are a premium product the problem is they are not a premium brand and the difference is Hermes as an example is a premium brand they can charge whatever they want under all weather

conditions they have pricing power so if their inputs go up they can make sure they maintain margin by changing the final price that the customer paid Starbucks doesn't have that power so they charge like a premium product but they're not a premium brand that has pricing power and that's why you've seen this compression so very specifically when the new CEO came in he I think made one important mistake which is he came in on the of a very Rosy set of projections that Howard Schultz and the board put out to the street and I think

that he had an opportunity then and there to just cut it because they saw inflation they saw what it was doing and if you just looked around the corner you would have seen that there would have been this compression in the product and I think what he should have done is just cut the analyst projections in the forecast to give him room and time he didn't do that and by the way when you bring in somebody who ran Taco Bell that is proving that this is neither a premium product nor a premium brand anymore it

is a mass Market product that will EB and flow cyclically with the vicissitudes of inflation that doesn't mean it's a bad business I'm just saying it's just an observation I expect that Brian niichel if he is smart will look at this forecast and shred it to give himself time so that's the sort of the short-term thing the longterm thing though is in the following image which I just sent to Nick I think there's a real question mark on this company over the medium to long term and I think it's best represented in this graphic starbu

is a sugar company so for example a caramel macchiato 32 grams of sugar a mocha Frappuccino 60 gr of sugar this is three times what you're supposed to have as a human in a day a frappuccino 53 g of sugar a caramel ribbon crunch frappuccino 62 g of sugar and these products also average 4 to 500 calories per drink so the real issue is that more consumers as they question the repercussions of consuming a lot of sugar what will they do as more consumers get on gp1s what will they do as more people think about

about the fact that fat was never an enemy in fact fats are actually really good for you the problem was that the sugar Lobby convinced us that fat was bad and sugar was okay what will consumers do and I think that's a really big strategic question mark because the company has to embrace where the world is going the world is going away from sugar and I think become smarter they're going to have to really figure out what to do could Starbucks introduce uh line of low calorie drinks that use sugar substitutes to achieve the same

they already got that yeah the app they have every single syrup comes in sugar-free and regular so when I go there now that I'm on glps and I've lost all this weight and I drink less I just get the Nitro cold brew it's got zero calories or five calories I might throw a little cold foam on it and then my kids what the kids want that's not what the kids with the kids is is critical what I do with my kids is I do low sweet or like one3 sweet I ordered one giant one I

pour it into three glasses at home with ice and I cut it with water because it is like drinking an unbelievable amount of sugar it is nuts um and they I'm I'm going to go get an espresso after this this this is the thing about coffee coffee supposed to have zero calories and you put a little half and half in it and you get the fat and you're good but I mean here's what here's what happened the thing about Starbucks I I study Starbucks and I've spent some time with Howard Schultz actually um cou years

right maybe you could talk about your e a little retail you did a little retail side quest but the thing about Starbucks is they realized early on that when you can customize a consumer experience the consumer comes back more frequently so when you see your name written on that cup you feel like you're getting your product you're not buying an off the-shelf product you're getting a custom personalized experience what that led to is people customizing their drinks and what did they find that they liked when they customized their drinks sugary sweet add-ons and then that

became more and more of the standard menu and then that just kept evolving and that's just the consumer feedback mechanism working which is to chat's point led to 60 gram sugar drinks that are now the standard product at Starbucks not an espresso or a cappuccino which is how they started and it's really unfortunate I don't think that Brian Nichols gonna focus on that to be honest given his background with Taco Bell and chipotle that that was never anything to your point he'll be able to plug the leaks my my question is just more what does

a company that's selling product that people are learning is worse and worse for them what do they do they have to embrace a different alternative but I think it can be very hard because it may be so disruptive to the core product that they sell yeah J what do you think I mean what do you think about Starbucks I mean guy I my kids love Starbucks we are regular consumers the app is extraordinary uh and I think the key issue here uh you know is obviously the inputs in inflation that that's a major driver but

wage inflation is is a critical piece of this here's a chart for you you know just in terms of weekly earnings of full-time worker since Q4 2019 Starbucks started having a lot of Labor movements a lot of unionization a lot of complaints from the green aprons and they have massively raised salaries they they were at you know $15 $16 17 a lot of people were going into gig work door dashing you know Uber and so this competition for entry rung employees for Starbucks and I know this from the the Uber experience and then door Dash

people wanted to set their own schedules not be like in a shift work and so you could make 20 bucks working for Uber and door Dash You're making 15 and you have to drag your ass into Starbucks at 567 a.m and work a shift and not be able to pick up your kids that led them to go to like 2022 per hour for these Baristas and and they continue to raise those rates they've been very generous with employees and so I think that's a key piece of it I think the big story here is going

to be automation I think you're going to see a lot more robotics in these if you look at I just had the CEO of um what's the salad company that people sweet greens I just had the CEO of sweet Greens on this week startups and he is all in on Automation and they are making salad robots and they've already got two or three stores with them and his whole concept is it's going to take $3 out of every salad we have an investment in a company called Cafe X Nick you can play a clip of

it these two machines in fso have broke a million dollars a year in Revenue they are serving a massive number of them and they've sold a dozen of these to other people so I think automation is what's going to come to this I don't think you can sustain it and the money has to come out of somewhere and the two big cost it can come out of is the real estate and the employees and I think that's what's gonna we're going to see in in the very near future is dun I will also I will

predict yeah no doing it at right were you doing um yeah we had automation I I actually worked with Jonathan at GRE and Starbucks and chipot so I knew them all yeah and then the Chipotle CEO got fired we were going to roll out automation with Chipotle and he got fired and nickel came in and our deal blew up it killed the deal so explain how that might work and impact a business like that unpack it for oh my God so it was going to take out basically these businesses today are running a call it

30% IIT margins at Peak Performance that's like Chipotle's best class by taking out labor you could probably take out another 20 points of cost which could translate into lower prices for consumers higher throughput lower weight times all of these kind of experiential differentiators are going to be significant certainly true for Starbucks certainly true for sweet green I would expect that with nickel coming in you'll see some experimental stores as you point out jcal that'll be more highly automated but we'll also I think one of the first things you're going to see from nickel within the

first year at Starbucks is a reduction in the complexity of the menu this is something he he's done historically and he focuses like he did at Taco Bell he creates a couple of key highlight products and creates these Innovative product ideas and then those become the banners that bring people into the store but it's a simpler menu with kind of more attractive interesting products that bring people in and then if you couple automation to reduce some of the cost you can bring that labor cost down so yeah and this is a key point you know

the order complexity is what's killing the the the Barista there there's about four there's four quintilian ordering options at Starbucks today I and so the expectation has always been that that is what brings people coming back to the store but what nickel has shown in the past with Chipotle and with Taco Bells you can actually have a simpler menu with a few points of customization you don't need to have infinite uh customization around everything and is what Steve Jobs did right with his four quadrants when he took back over he was like listen what's business

what's consumer what's highend what's low what's portable what's desktop I forgot what the four quadrants were but he did it and and if you look freeberg to your point of the cost savings right now the majority of orders in Starbucks I believe are coming in through the app and what I was told you know and some of the buzz I heard from Baristas was that they are they are prioritizing mobile orders to punish the people online to get them to download the app uh because that gets rid of cashiers and McDonald's has no cashiers in

a lot of restaurants right now you just order at a giant touchscreen so the cashiers will be gone the cooks will be gone and eventually the Baristas will be gone and it'll just be the cashier the cashier problem also creates a time problem because it's a Serial ordering process everyone stands in line they order one at a time and there's only one so the Barista taking all of these are really good points I just think that the CEO would not have gotten fired had he just moved the forecast down by 20% when he came in

also did you see this incredible clip of him saying he doesn't want anybody working past 6m Nick play this clip this is likeu CEO the previous Starbucks CEO I mean this clip is so brutal we should talk about this in the context of Eric SCH smid and intervie as well J this a show the clip and then let's talk let's show Eric and talk about like work culture in America I think this is a really important Point yeah fantastic uh side quest let's do it all right so now there's a big culture thing going on

here freeberg of hard work in corporations I don't know if you saw Eric Schmidt at Stanford they took this talk down and Eric Schmidt is walking the comments back but here we go folks this is the money clip from Eric Schmid Google decided that work life balance and going home early and working from home was more important than winning and the startups the reason startups work is because the people work like hell and I'm sorry to be so blunt but the fact of the matter is if you all leave the university and go found a

company you're not going to let people work from home and only come in one day a week the Starbucks clip can you show the Starbucks clip well it's self-evidently true I mean he's basically making a a point similar to what I said about Google's so large that employees can hide and not do very much and you know they can kind of it's not just it's not just Google oh it's pervasive yeah let's pull up the um the Starbucks CEO I'm very disciplined about balance if there's anything after 6:00 p.m. and if I'm in town it's

got to be a pretty high bar to keep me away from the family anybody who gets a minute of time after that better be sure that it's important because if not it'll just wait for another day makes me so uncomfortable just hearing that I feel holy I mean retire bro just retire what is America value is the real question does America value success performance or does America value comfort and the problem is American American work culture has shifted to value and comfort and that is the inevitable outcome of Decades of extraordinary success and now the

performance culture is losing to the Comfort culture and I think you guys a lot of things together the problem is that I don't think that that's his truth actually I think that this guy's clip sounds very inauthentic I think what probably happened is the pr and policy group of Starbucks says Hey listen here's the average age of your employee and here's what they value and he probably spouted some politically correct nonsense to try to inspire the troops I think a lot of CEOs do this like I think we're seeing in modern media today that a

lot of CEOs have actually become the least version of their authentic self they are being packaged by people to dress and act and say things in a certain way and I think what happens as a result of that is that you have a wayward culture where nobody knows what people stand for that's when the corrosiveness of folks not working at all or having jobs at two different companies comes in like that's a total moral and ethical breach that happens because people think it's acceptable and I think people think it's acceptable because it's not in the

talking points of how the CEOs are trying to package themselves to tens of thousands of employee so you think this was a PR design genuflect I like that Insight saaks your thoughts overall well it could it could be a genu reflect I don't know um look I would say that there are a lot of Americans who do feel that way about work but I think it's not appropriate in in two cases number one is if you're ambitious and you really want to rise in your organization then you got to have more of the jcal attitude

which is I'm going to be the first to work and the last one to leave and I'm G to show my boss I'm gonna get promoted so if you want to be ambitious in your career that's not a good attitude to have and then on the Other Extreme if you're the CEO of the company your attitude has got to be I'm 247 with this you know it's like I'm always online I'm always reachable the buck stops with me now obviously you're going to cut out time to be protected that you can spend with your family

but your attitude's always got to be that I'm available you know I don't turn off my phone I don't do any of that stuff I just think that if you're running an organization you can't take this attitude that oh at 6m I'm Switched Off you know it just doesn't work that way yeah especially if you're one I don't think that's yeah yeah I mean an appropriate thing for someone like that to say when he's the CEO of a multinational corporation yeah I think that is the key Insight Saxon with you on this which is leadership

starts at the Top If the leader says Hey listen don't bother me after 6 I'll talk to you at 9:00 am then that's just gonna go through the entire organization and it's already hard enough to run these organizations now if you run a lifestyle business as your local cafe and you want to do that and you're running it at a break even that's fine this is a publicly traded company with shareholders with massive compet I who could get taken out by all these other brands that are that are trying to compete with it you have

to have this is a war we are at War we have to figure out how to lower prices we need to grind every nickel from you know the supply chain rent we have to renegotiate contracts and then you know just to speak on the work ethic issue this country is in a um a very significant War about going back to work and work ethic you mentioned overemployed and the ethics around that chth and then there's a group of Americans and I've been studying this a bit that are opting out of capitalism or hacking capitalism there's

a very interesting movement it's called fire financial Independence retire early and if you look at the two subreddits overemployed and the fire subreddit young people are saying H capitalism is there to be hacked and my way of hacking it is I'm going to have two jobs and I had a startup come to me and say we've got this great engineer literally from Google who wants to work from us and he's making 400k we can get him for Buck 50 and I said oh wow that's great why would he do that is he independently wealthy they

said no he's keeping his job at Google he says it takes 10 20 hours a week and he's going to work 60 hours a week for us and I said is that ethical or legal and they're like I don't know that's why we're asking you these are 20y old Founders we had backed and I was like this is incredibly unethical and you're going to get us in a lawsuit don't do it but that is what's you know the the give and take and if you look at what happened with Dell this past six months have

you been following that freeberg the Dell story no it's pretty incredible they told everybody coming back to office people were like yeah I don't want to come back to office okay reasonable you think you do a better job at home I get it what they said was if you want to be work from home you can't get a promotion and you can't get a salary increase and you know what employees said okay I don't want an increase I don't I if my choice is stay at home and and have no salary KS and I don't

care about a raise I don't care about a promotion then they said you know what we're cutting 12,000 people you have to come back to office Jay Pensky and his company told everybody have to come back to office so now that you know you have this era of Being Fit and you don't need as many people from AI I think everybody's coming back to the office unless you are part of the 20% of truly Elite workers thanks for coming to my TED Talk even then though I I struggle to understand why anybody who has any

ambition would think that they're going to achieve the same amount of stuff working by themselves than they will by working with the group of colleagues that you was back in a physical space together well influence our culture no no but I'm saying like when you when you look at the the great things that the world needs that we are building and should be building I don't see many good examples where those things are done in a remote way I see the necessity of people to be together whether it's to design something together to talk about

something together to debate something together to learn from each other to as a person and you're robbing yourself of all of that and so I just think that it is a shortterm optimization that a lot of people will regret not necessarily in the moment but when their career doesn't go where they want to or the company they work at doesn't go where it should go to or is capable of going to they'll start to look for a scapegoat but the real reason is that they've abandoned the idea that they need to be together and I

just think that that's that's a tragedy and as it turns out the best of our companies like when I rank my portfolio the ones that are doing the best are in total different Industries but the single consistent theme is we are all back together in person isn't that interesting makes total sense it's much more productive because I I think Innovation happens as a team you need collaboration and it's way EAS iier to do that when everyone is together in the same place there's more room for spontaneity more spontaneous interactions the reason why Steve Jobs designed

the the spaceship uh campus in that famous circle was because it maximized the opportunity for Serendipity right like there's nobs did the same thing Bel Labs had a quad that you had to walk through to go from meeting to meeting so everyone interacted inter the technical term for that is um collisions and there's been a lot of research on random collisions and I agree wholeheartedly with it yeah and look I just want to underscore this point I think there's nothing wrong if somebody says look my family is the most important thing in my life I

only want to work 40 hours a week I'm going to do a nine to6 job with an hour lunch break that's 40 hours don't call me after 6 PM you can design your career that way but that is not a career that's going to enable you to either run a company as a CEO or be a founder of a startup or be on a track to one day being a founder or a CEO it's just not compatible I mean or even just a senior executive right exactly so you have to decide what track you're going

to be on and I think there's a lot of millennial gen Z types who are confused about this and they have the entitlement of saying well I want to just do the 40 hour a week thing but then I also expect to rise rapidly and be an executive and be a Founder be a you know a CE both ways that's not gonna work yeah it's not gonna work and and you know In fairness I think a lot of young people have not been mentored because they came up in the co generation and we're now four

years later and they just haven't had the chance to be mentored or be in a in an office and a lot of senior Executives and CEOs are not coming to the office you know a part of my move to Austin is I'm building uh a theater to record the podcast in and I'm building an incubator space and we're moving back to iners I grire the existing employees and I'm only hiring people in person now because I feel something very big has been lost in terms of meeting Founders in person and young people seeing me interact

and my other senior team members with those Founders in person during a pitch meeting during a product jam session during a fundraising review go sh can I just say something about mentoring I also think mentoring can be described as capital M mentoring and small M mentoring capital M is where some person is assigned to you and they're going to imuse some magical phrase or saying or thing and all of a sudden everything is going to work out for you that form of capital M mentoring doesn't exists and has never worked for those that have tried

it the thing that's really productive is small M mentoring and that happens when you model behaviors of really smart people and really capable people really ethical people and again that happens because you're seeing them on a day-to-day basis not just in a meeting but in the gap between meetings and they'll include you in certain things or you'll have lunch with them and this is what I mean by all of these people that are looking for an accelerant in their career they've robbed themselves of the most powerful accelerant possible which is capable people to surround themselves

with yeah I think it's so well said they're going to look back on these decisions and they're going to agret them I agree 100% And my one of my first jobs working at land systems my mentor Mike Savino was always working late he was trying to move up in the organization and I wouldn't leave before he left and then he would walk by and he'd say it was in New York City hey what are you working on I'm say oh I'm reading these novel networking books I'm trying to get my certification I'm trying to learn

more I want to get out of hardware and get into software and he'd say oh um I'm gonna get some dinner you want to come now he was four levels above me in the organization I was the lowest he was second to the highest and then I got to go to dinner with him and then I got to hear about all the big clients I got to hear how you know they were doing the pitches and then he started including me in pitches and all of a sudden I went from four degrees from him to

reporting into him and that's how I learned you know look at the person on the left look at the person on the right I was uh I don't think I yeah I was actually I was a certified network engineer I was I was a certified novel engineer as well I I did it when I was like 16 shout out to Eric Schmid yeah yeah I mean if you had that in the 90s you could make you know 50 75 100K well the person that helped me little and mentored me he's like listen man I'm not

going to tell you how to do pitches or whatever but I'm going to teach you how to install this I'm going to teach you how to manage it and that was mentoring and that was really valuable and I sat beside this guy difference in my care absolutely and if you want to be a freelancer be a freelancer okay let's go to our little election update and some news about kamla and a little bit of socialism coming so here's how I I set it up today we'll see how this goes 2024 election update is here I'm

going to do two things gentlemen I'm going to just te up the latest polls um and then I ask our crack Allin research team to just give me the top you know a couple of issues in the principal's own words uh the principles being you know the Press on either side and the four people who are running for office so let's just go through the numbers here Nate silver a friend of the Pod now has come Harris at 57% favorite to win the electoral college there's your first chart you can compare this to what happened

with Biden before the hot swap Trump had a 73% probability to win the electoral college so that is the the swing of all swings and obviously a lot has happened since then as well as the assassination attempt on Trump massive swing for Harris as you can see in Nate Silver's chart he's doing something called Silver bulletin he's not a 538 anymore but this is the most telling chart you can see Biden Trump there and it's it's almost a clean sweep in red and then you go to Harris Trump and the shift has been 100% blue

pretty dramatic Harris is flipped according to Silver Pennsylvania Wisconsin Arizona Michigan Nevada and Virginia here's a couple of quotes and then we'll get into it the big critique from Republicans this past week is that Harris won't do interviews God it's just ridiculous that they have not sat for interviews and meanwhile Trump is doing every podcast and and Twitter spaces on the planet uh but the big news is that this might have changed by the time you listen to this podcast everybody knows we tape on Thursdays for the world's number one podcast and it comes out

on Fridays Washington Post Jeff Stein reported that Camala Harris will propose the first ever Federal ban on corporate price gouging for food and groceries on Friday we'll get I'm gonna hand that off to you freeberg toil oh I'm gonna throw up take it easy just we're gonna get there you're gonna get your um you're GNA get your rare vegetables in a [Laughter] second so uh the other going to get your get your V shimmy soon all right from the JD Vance uh corner he is questioning Tim waltz's service here's the quote well I wonder Tim

Waltz when were you ever in War when was this Harris campaign responding in his 24 years of service the governor carried fired and trained others to use weapons in War inum innumerable times yada yada yada a lot of back and forth there about that issue but let's get to um and there was an incredible uh twoh hour spaces audio was a little rough but the content was great Elon had a conversation with uh Trump and they talked about nuclear power Elon offered his Services two or three times to Trump saxs to uh do efficiency uh

in the uh government and maybe cut some but that's what happened notably in the last week freeberg what's your take on this reported by The Washington Post and I think confirmed by Politico uh move by Kamala Harris thank you for asking thank you for you have any feelings on it yes yeah I unequivocally hate socialism socialism destroys Innovation destroys productivity and destroys individual liberties Agriculture and Food Markets have insanely competitive Dynamics because there are commodity markets there are tons of competitors there is no Monopoly in making food there is no Monopoly in making cpg products

there is no Monopoly in retail there is no Monopoly in grocery stores it is a small margin highly competitive highly fragmented free market and the free market Works in that everyone is always competing with each other creating new productivity improvements and as a result over time prices come down except when the government intervenes and gets involved so I would argue that the real cause of price inflation in food is not the supposed price gouging by corporate players in the A and food industry all of whom are deeply competitive with one another but rather is the

result of the inflation associated with government spending and stimulus coming out of covid Nick exhibit one the FED balance sheet from Co to today the Fed balance sheet Grew From 4.2 trillion to $7.2 trillion a growth of 70% the Federal Reserve went out and they bought assets and they issued debt to Banks and introduced liquidity into the system if you go to the next slide as a result the M2 money supply increased from 15 trillion to 20 21 trillion since covid a 40% increase okay so now there is more money in the system so the

cost of everything should go up which is exactly what we've seen we can walk through a couple of the other commodity price charts from the St Louis fed here is the price of electricity as an example the price of electricity has gone up a little bit less than the M2 money supply but the truth is when you start to actually look at a commodity prices over time what's happened is there were certainly a boost coming from covid but the competition and the challenges in over production in the a markets has started to hit and started

to bring prices back down so here's the price of strawberry strawberries today are selling for less than they were preco potatoes are now back to where they were pre-o now let me give you some statistics on some of the supposed price gouging companies in the industry craft Hine stock preo was 29 bucks a share today craft Hine stock is 34 bucks a share 2019 revenue of 25 billion 2023 revenue of 26 billion EB on 2019 of 6.1 billion Eaton 2023 of 6.3 billion there's not a lot of profit gouging in fact craft hindes has not

been a B to keep up with the inflation Starbucks which we just talked about their stock was at $90 preo and today 93 bucks 2019 revenue of 26 billion operating income of 4.1 billion 2023 revenue of 36 billion but operating income only 5.9 margins have come down in Starbucks Nick if you pull up the McKenzie chart this is a study of the grocery industry the state of grocery in North America 2023 by McKenzie accelerating pressures on profitability to cope with the pandemic's upheaval grossers have had to dramatically increase capex increase supplies as a result they've

seen a significant impact on margins here's the margin profile pre pandemic and today gross margin has declined by two points from 47.6 to 45.6 ebit margin has declined by 1 and a half points and now let's just go to the final chart which is cpg companies the companies that make food and sell it to Consumers as you can see during the co era the three-year rolling TSR has declined since Co across the board so food companies are seeing food prices come down so farmers are really suffering labor costs have tripled since the pandemic but they're

still having to sell products at the same price cpg companies have lower margins and supermarkets have lower margins so there is nowhere in the aggr food supply chain that we are seeing fundamentally price gouging or profit taking happening what has happened is the cost of Labor the cost of moving stuff around the cost of fuel the cost of electricity the cost of goods has all risen with inflation because of the increase in the money supply and federal spending and the stimulus associated with the Federal Reserve buying assets onto their balance sheet so arguably I would

say that trying to step in and cap prices will reduce competition and as a result will reduce investment in improving productivity and we have seen this countless times with every socialist experiment in human history has started with caps on food and it has resulted in spread lines like you see in the image behind me today as we can see in Soviet Russia this is a mistake it is a problem it is anti-American it is anti-free Market it is anti- innovation it is anti- productivity and ultimately it's anti- liberty and I cannot stand it that's my

rant okay thanks for coming to freeberg Ted Talk sham so you're nodding strongly in agreement this is just Dum and pandering am I correct there is no sustainable solution to inflation if you cap what a company can charge because what they'll do is they'll just stop producing they'll manage to margin that they'll just stop and the reason they can stop is that they would rather contract and maintain their profitability than lose money and then what happens is there's less products in the market and so the prices go up so I think it stands to reason

that the Harris campaign has access to some reasonably smart people they also have access to really smart people like Larry Summers and so I think if they just make a few phone calls they'll figure out that this is a really terrible idea saaks any thoughts overall election and the specific issue you take it either way you like yeah so this story was reported by The Washington Post and by Bloomberg and others so it appears to be more than just a rumor conjecture I mean these are Publications that are apparently well sorted within the Harris campaign

so I think it is fair game for us to comment on this policy proposal that she apparently will be coming out with look I think freeberg is right about the policy the idea of price controls is widely discredited across the political Spectrum I mean I think virtually all economists agree on this this was Pride extensively in the 1970s not just under Jimmy Carter but Nixon tried wage and price controls and Gerald Ford had this whole program called whip inflation now where they printed out these buttons called these wind buttons and then Carter extended it that's

why we had huge lines to the gas pumps is because we had price controls on gas and those lines of the pump went away almost overnight when Ron Reagan came in and removed the price caps on on gas so we've tried price controls before it didn't work and it is remarkable that she would be proposing here potentially as her first major policy proposal on the economy to go back to this 1970s era failed policy and I think it's really tipping her hand in terms of where her economic proposals are going to come from and what

she really thinks keep in mind that throughout the the Biden presidency he rhetorically would blame corporate Greed for the rise in inflation we saw as like a scapegoat because he didn't want to blame him self for all the spending but she's going further now and actually instituting this as policy yeah and so just to be clear with everybody we don't have the actual policy here but it's been reported seems like it's true maybe it's not maybe they step it back we don't know the details of this at all what we do know is it's been

tried before what we do know is there are times when you could like in an economic emergency like during um what was the giant hurricane or Wars you know you can your eye on this um but the truth is as we just talked about with Starbucks you know sax is like I got a free cup of coffee or close to free I make my own C Brew uh C shout out Cafe dumon because I don't want to pay $8 for an the market responds and when you put your thumb on capitalism or you put 12

thumbs on capitalism and on the scale all kinds of weird behaviors occur it does not work and consumers can just simply opt out they can make breakfast at home they can Brown Bag their lunch and you know what then companies are going to be like holy sh people are not buying $8 coffees let's make a cheaper Happy Meal to support your point and what chamath was messaging on our on our chat look at Walmart stocks up 7% today because they offer lower priced solutions to Consumers and Dollar General and Dollar Tree are rallying as well

when the market competes consumers benefit and there are companies that will win and the companies that try to price gouge and the companies that try to charge too much will lose Starbucks has been trying to charge too much for sugar water they have a real problem they are now tackling Walmart is trying to bring value to Consumers they are winning that is how free markets work when the government steps in and says here's how much margin you can make or here's how much prices should be it ruins everything and the entire incentive structure goes away

and you end up with breadlines Saxy poo what do you got well there was a really interesting story in the Wall Street Journal this week called K Harris's economic team and agenda start to take shape and it was interesting because it said here in the first paragraph that the challenge of her economics team is quote differentiating the candidate which is Harris from her unpopular boss which is Biden without abandoning his policies and the problem that they have is that for the last three and a half years there has been no daylight between Harris and Biden

and in fact Ken Jean Pierre said exactly that in the article there's been no daylight they've been highly aligned now in response to that what the campaign has been trying to do is a not say anything about policy to try to redefine the candidate based on biography she's done no interviews with the media she's done no sort of unscripted speaking appearances and the media has cooperated with this so far the most egregious example was that Time Magazine cover story which was this really Gauzy profile that was heg geography even though she refused to even do

an interview with Time magazine in that story so strategy number one has been just to kind of hide from the media in terms of what she would really do strategy number two was adopting some of Donald Trump's most popular policies so she just announced no tax on tips she was I think widely kind of criticized for being a copycat on that and now we finally have strategy number three which is to tiptoe into the campaign with her own original proposal on price controls which I think is being criticized but it shows where her policy instincts

are coming from I mean this is somebody who has always been on the Progressive left when she was a member of the Senate GV track rated her as the most liberal member of the Senate even to the left of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and you're now seeing this come out in her policy proposals so look I think she's definitely gotten a bounce in the polls over the last few weeks because of this favorable media coverage but it's a sugar high based on something that's not substantive I mean she didn't put forward any proposals and

I think that now that she finally is putting out policy proposals that can be questioned and analyzed and criticized I think this is going to be the beginning of I would say a big correction in in her campaign J Kel do you agree do you think her strategy is off at this point and is it starting to hurt her to put out these proposals I I am I remain undecided moderate leftly moderate have voted Republican 35% of the time Democrat 65% of the time time and I've been studying the strategy here her strategy is crushing

Trump so obviously it's working now we I'm I don't like it I think everybody should be doing debates I was really upset that there wasn't a debate or a speedrun primary I I don't like the fact that Trump and Biden skipped out on the primary debates I think they should be forced to do debates forced to do interviews and so I you know on that front I hate what this is doing to democracy now pragmatically running at the clock as a strategy and not defining your positions too much and just you know selling The Vibes

is a brilliant strategy and it's working and you know as Trump said the VPS don't matter what she did as VP doesn't really matter what JD Vance thinks as VP doesn't matter VPS don't matter you're voting for the president the VPS get in line Trump Trump's positions JD Vance flipped a bunch of his positions to align with Trump and I think Cala did the same when she worked with Biden that's your job is to align with the president now that she's her own and Waltz is going to flip to her so I think they're putting

out moderate Vibes I think they're kind of socialists I think they're not as socialists as Bernie and Elizabeth Warren but they're not moderates but they're pretending to be moderates and that is working as a strategy they are demolishing Trump and then Trump is you know getting bad advice around him I think you know if I to handicap this and I'll wrap up it with just one more minute I think Trump was so good on all in he was so good at the RNC for the first half of his speech when he is presidential when he

has a big open tent I love him I think he's great and I think he's like World positive when he goes into grievance culture when he goes after the race stuff like he did with the black journalists when he goes after gender or JD does the gender stuff and the cat stuff I hate that stuff moderates hates that stuff women hate that stuff and the moderates and the women in the swing States will decide the election and Trump's campaign is lounder right now they have to get they have to flip it back to that Trump

2.0 I described many times where he's serious presidential not bullying people not doing the insult comic thing this going after Walts going after cat ladies it's just gross and not necessary so I think you know maybe Trump after the RNC after the DNC will go back to Trump 2.0 that would be much better and I think Trump has a chance of winning if he does that if Kamala goes moderate I think she's going to win so that that's my that's my strategic take I am UND I remain undecided as a voter but you just said

she's a socialist not a moderate I think in her heart she's between like if you had Clinton and a great question if you had Clinton and you had a you know Bernie Sanders I think she kind of Falls between the two but I think she's pretending to be a moderate to get votes right you know just like Trump will pretend to be super right-wing to get the you know po acted up but he's kind of a moderate too socially I think Trump is a moderate in this race and she's much more moderate than than she

is I think that actually is true look I think that she's pretending to be a lot of things she's pretending to be a moderate when really she was the most liberal member of the Senate she's pretending to be a change agent when really she's the incumbent keep in mind that she has been in office now for three and a half years as part of the Biden Harris Administration and she was perceived within that Administration as their Emissary to the left wi of the party I mean remember that when she was put on the ticket Biden

was perceived as the moderate and she was perceived as the person on the left and she was going to basically help consolidate those votes so she's pretending to be a lot of things that she isn't and the reason why it's working is because the Press has fully cooperated in letting her run a campaign without doing press interviews without doing unscripted appearances and the Press frankly is embarrassing Itself by revealing themselves to be effectively DNC operatives and that Time Magazine cover story was just the latest example of that I do think that this strategy can only

work for so long I think that the media is starting to feel a little bit embarrassed they're starting to get a little bit shamed about the fact they're letting her just give them the Heisman and I don't think she can run out the clock for three months without doing interviews I just think that I think she can do this for another week or so I think that they're going to run this Playbook through the convention but eventually she's going to have to start doing interviews and she's gonna have to start putting out more substantive policy

proposals and I think the fact that this price control proposal is their very first one that they've put out I think this shows that this is not going to be easy for her it certainly jolted me awake Zach I'll tell you that so yeah I mean this this idea that she can pretend to be a moderate and just run on Vibes with no interviews and no substance proposals I don't think it's going to work for three months I think she's going to reveal herself I think an educated voter base is going to wake up to

that and particularly in that independent segment there's going to be a lot of acknowledgement that maybe these are not going to be the right policies I think they're preparing their policies and they're going to drop them after the DNC Cham what's your take on strategy and then we'll move move on to science Corner we're in the middle of the relief rally that Biden isn't in the race I think that we had a different version of a relief rally when everybody realized that President Trump hadn't been assassinated so these are the pendulum swings I think of

an electorate that still hasn't been given a clear definition of a or b in this case I think what's happening is there's a lot of testing of language and ideas and Concepts that both sides are doing and I think we will not know where this election is going to go until after September the 10th in that first presidential debate because I think that these big issues will be put to the test the journalists asking the questions will Corner both candidates both of them will have points of view and then I think they'll have to go

into these five states that matter on these five issues that matter and I do think that this will will be one of those issues because this is a very aggressive proposal that has a lot of implications and that has a lot of historical context of never having work literally never so it's dumb we we haven't seen it but it it seems dumb on its face and just to be clear there is no proposal we're just commenting on reports of a proposal proposal will probably come out on Friday this weekend so you can read it for

yourselves and and we'll talk about the actual proposal if there is one who knows could be bad reporting could all be Capp freeberg you wanted to talk about Boeing well I wanted to just highlight the the the Starliner project and unbeliev the issues unbelievable give us an overview and then let's let's let's let's chop it up as we wrap two NASA astronauts flew on the Boeing Starliner capsule uh June 5th and they docked with the ISS and they're now stuck on the ISS and they might be stuck there until February because the Starliner has a

number of technical issues the astronauts cannot get back in the Starliner and just fly back to Earth NASA is kind of evaluating the options here on what to do and whether to put them on a SpaceX crew Dragon capsule in February to get them back so I just want to talk a little bit about the history of this project and provide a little context before we highlight the the particularly acute story of two astronauts being stuck in space right now which is an incredible story so this is a nextg Space Capsule that was designed to

take people to and from low earth orbit basically to the ISS and NASA if you guys remember in the 2000s decided to stop making their own vessels and they're going to start using thirdparty contractors so they went out and had a competitive bidding process and ultimately in 2010 they gave both SpaceX and Boeing the winning contracts to develop these commercial crew Transportation capabilities SpaceX obviously developed the crew Dragon capsule so it was unveiled in 10 is the CST 100 Boeing's first commercially developed Space Capsule the company would take on all the financial risk for developing

it with a fixed price contract from NASA of $4.2 billion to date by the way Boeing has taken a $1.6 billion Financial hit on the development of this program SpaceX by the way won a $2.6 billion contract to develop the crew Dragon capsule and just to give you guys a sense the crew Dragon capsule has flown 13 missions thus far to the ISS and this was the first crude Mission flown by Boeing both of which got contracts at the same time so originally it was going to be a 2017 launch timeline and I just want

to hit on some of the history of the Starliner problems 2016 it was delay you said just to confirm you said it was $4.2 billion that contract that contract with Boeing to develop this Starliner capsule so the first issues arose in 2016 when there were design problems the first crude flight was then pushed back to be scheduled for 2019 in 2018 they found issues with propellant leaks which led to more delays 2019 a test flight parachute failed December of 2019 they had their first uncrewed test flight and there were software errors that would have caused

destruction of the spacecraft this led to NASA and Boeing submitting 80 different changes that needed to happen before they did their next uncrewed test flight so they then pushed that all the way out to 2021 Boeing ended up saying it cost us half a billion dollars to do that then in August of 2021 13 propulsion system valve issues were discovered on the Launchpad the flight was aborted and the capsule was returned they eventually got it up again in space in May of 2022 and it docked with the ISS and it returned back to Earth even

though one of the parachutes failed when it returned to Earth it still made it down this again led to the 2023 first crude launch which means people are in the capsule this was originally supposed to be in 2017 and they kept pushing it back because of more issues with the parachute system and then they finally got it launched in June 5th of 2024 with two astronauts on board to go to ISS and come back on the way they discovered that five out of the 28 maneuvering thrusters which is how they can move this capsule through

space to get it to dock with the ISS and ultimately make its way back to Earth were malfunctioning they have now discovered five helium leaks helium is stored in a pressure ized system to actually control those thrusters and make it move through space and now they may not even be able to get this capsule to fly off of the ISS so on June 28th NASA announced that while the Starliner is theoretically capable of returning the astronauts to Earth in an emergency on the ISS the capsule is not approved to fly until these Thruster issues and

the leaking helium are figured out or better understood and they have now pushed the decision to the end of August it would be massively embarrassing for Boeing if these two astronauts had to be rescued by SpaceX it's a crew Dragon capsule had to find its way up to the ISS they hopped on and they came back to Earth clearly a massive problem but it's a certainly a personal and a human story now with these two astronauts stuck on the ISS I you've had a lot of comments on Boeing in the past but I mean does

this feel like like a continued underscoring of the issues at Boeing and and just to be clear chat the statistics are three four Starliner two unman one Mann and then for uh SpaceX with the dragon they did 11 eight with NASA 3 with commercial commercially with like other passengers yeah yeah so the NASA cargo Dragon which only has a cargo on it not people has completed nine successful missions to and from the ISS there are six more planned and they've obviously done 13 missions um with the crew dragon and by the way I don't know

if you guys know this this is a surprise but exciting to share that we are going to have a crew Dragon C from SpaceX at The all-in Summit in La parked on the lawn so you can actually go inside and check it out and take a little tour it's going be amazing so thank you to the SpaceX team for bringing the crew Dragon capsule chamach my gosh I mean where do I begin look Boeing is these three very complicated businesses that try to live as one so you have a commercial airline business you have a

defense business and you have the space business I'll be the first one to say that I think it's extremely difficult to be good at one of those three things and the probability of getting all of those three things right is basically next to Impossible that's just a general comment and I think that specialization is better the second thing that I'll say is that I observed this company about five years ago and I wrote about it in my annual letter and part of the reason why I wrote about it was there was a quote I'll never

be able to judge what motivated Dennis mullenberg whether it was a stock price that was going to continue to go up and up or whether it was just beating the other guy to the next rate increase he said he added later if anybody ran over the rainbow for a pot of gold on stock it would have been him who do you think said this it was the incoming CEO of Boeing and I was so flabbergasted because I'd never seen something like this so in a company where safety has to be the number one priority to

have an individual that's characterized by the incoming CEO as solely focused on their Compensation Plan sort of explains why there's all these fissures in this company because again back to that famous Charlie Monger quote show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome if the incentive is safety and worldclass Engineering that's what you'll get but if the incentive is earnings per share growth then that's what you will also get and Boeing was a darling of the stock market for a very long time and now what happen is underneath the other things that actually should

matter IE safety are slightly deprioritized and then you have these issues I really hope these two people get back safe it seems like they're doing a lot of experiments and they love being up there but it's a little bit unacceptable that they have to be there until February but I do trust that if Elon has to go and get them basx will do a great job and they'll be home safe sack's one of the great things about this thank God NASA gave two contracts out if they had given one you know oh my God could

you imagine if that was Lobby you would be asking the Russians to go get them and then like you know we're in a little I don't know if you've been watching this this is what I thought we could discuss it's like you know is there benefit in having being dependent on Putin at this moment in time when Ukraine is making massive gains into Russian territory I know this hasn't come up all that much but that would be really dangerous but by the way just back to what freeberg said before sorry to interrupt you before you

go suck but why is this even possible it's exactly as you said jcal we have competition but why is competition possible it's because of what fber talked about before we didn't have a set price the government didn't come and say you will build it for x and I'm only doing it one time the free market was able to solve this problem and it turned out the more capable solution was 40% cheaper than the one that they thought was going to work and the one that was 40% cheaper was also on time one was and reliable

and this other one seven eight n 10 years delayed it's 100% that's a perfect examp examples every day of the fact that these other ideas just don't work yeah I I think we've pretty much beaten that capitalism is the greatest Force for Innovation and lowering prices sxs your thoughts on this Humanity yeah yeah God forbid people will get air conditioning at a lower price you know and smartphones Etc saaks your thoughts here yeah I mean look if we're talking about capitalism I think about what the Austrian Economist Joseph Schumer said which is capitalism is a

process of creative destruction and the creativity happens in the early days when you've got a Founder who's creating a startup and the business gets big but then it gets older and the founder goes away and the company can drift and become bureaucratic and sometimes it can renew itself and maybe you get a Brian nickel and maybe to save it and sometimes it doesn't and the companies that get old and don't renew themselves eventually fade away and they get destroyed and replaced by other startups it's a system that has worked incredibly well in America and it's

the basis for all of our prosperity and Innovation when you compare that to the political process it's very different I mean the political process kind of has this knee-jerk resistance to change and Innovation and it has an pulse to control things it wants to control prices it thinks it can solve problems with just top- down mandates and it doesn't reform itself it creates new bureaucracies and never gets rid of them I mean we create new departments they never go away they just keep getting bigger and bigger there's never any crate of Destruction it's just like

a blob it's a one-way ratchet of bureaucratic growth so it's really clear what creates prosperity and I do think we have now reached a point where the government has gotten so big and so out of control and so expensive that it actually is threatening this engine of creative destruction and at some point I think voters are going to have to make a choice about whether they're going to try and reign in the government and create more room for capitalism Innovation or they're going to allow it to get overtaken I I love your capitalism quote and

reminds me of the Winston Churchill one which I'm sure you've heard the inherent Vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings the inherent virtue of socialism is the the equal sharing of miseries it's uh that's a great qu Winston Churchill is strong man strong he I'd like to hang with that dude that's a guy I would like to hang out with fun guy to hang out with Teddy Roosevelt oh my gosh I love to go drinking with Teddy guns wow I like to took a bath every day freberg please don't bring up this whole

thing about baths cuz then you're going to make me pull out of my phone the three or four times you called me from the bath and I took a screenshot I literally free BG's in the bath he lights candles he takes a picture of his pale stems and he sends it to me and calls me from the bath trth you can't see anything always I have PTSD he's called me from the bath I know he's in the bath because you hear this kind of like echoey kind of you know so it does and it's like

oh my God you're in the bathtub yeah calling he in the bathroom call from the bath I'll call you later right it's so dist by way I mean that invasion of of Russia that you're talking about is not what you think it is here we go so yes we haven't had a general fact update in a while I'm I actually want to hear your take on this sax like what is talk about the of Putin yeah tell us yeah what is the real story with the Ukraine counter Invasion into Russia I think you're falling for

a lot of lot of hype I mean what's happening is that the stage of the war is that the the fighting is in the donbass and along a 12200 kilometer front in Ukraine where the Russians have just been pounding the ukrainians the Russians have more soldiers they have more artillery they have more air power and they have air superiority and they've just been annihilating the ukrainians I mean Ukrainian casualties According to some sources are somewhere between 30,000 and 60,000 a month it's massive and unsustainable so what zalinsky did is he basically threw this Hail Mary

where he took some of their best forces their best reserves and had them attack this undefended part of Russia K and yeah they took a few hundred miles of undefended territory but there's nothing strategically important there and now Russian air power is basically creating significant casualties among those forces and the Ukrainian forces are now trying to figure out what to do I mean they're basically running around this part of Russia like headless chickens trying to figure out where they can dig in and find some defensive fortifications I don't know what zinski is trying to accomplish

I guess it's kind of a PR offensive a lot of people have been fooled into thinking that this is somehow a GameChanger in the war it's not all zalinsky has really done is take some of his best troops away from where the strategically important fighting is have them attack this part of Russia and over time Russia's just going to mop them up did the Russians get caught with their pants down yeah I guess they did is that an embarrassment to Putin I guess it can be spun that way does it change the outcome of this

war in any way no it's not and what we're on track for is at some point probably next year Ukraine is going to collapse I mean their position in this war is unsustainable and taking some of their top troops feeding them into curse where they can be easily picked off by the Russians is only going to accelerate that process and then saaks what about nordstream what we just found out about nordstream well the the nordstream story is is very strange because we're on our third or fourth explanation here of what what happened I mean it

was pretty clear that somehow the US was behind it and they've been blaming you know first they said that the Russians did it right which makes no sense that'd be like the Russians shooting their own legs off that was the first cover story then they kind of went with I guess delusion he did it from a yacht I guess that's the story they're on now yeah the Wall Street Journal report just to give people the background of why we're talking about this the Wall Street Journal reported that Germans investigation into this uh you know the

people who were impacted by it here's the quote the holding was born of a night of heavy boosting and the iron determination of a handful of people who had the guts to risk their lives for the country the Ukraine operation cost around 300,000 according to people who participated in it inv a small rented yacht with a six-member crew including trained civilian divers one was a woman whose presence helped create the illusion they were a group of friends on a pleasure Cruise so you're saying you don't believe that German report well no so this report about

that yacht being used and and how zusy was is like The Mastermind of this yeah that support is not anything new this has been out for I don't know at least six months I've always been skeptical about this the thing to understand about the northstream pipeline is that it was a massive structure surrounded by huge amounts of concrete on the ocean floor and blowing this thing up required some significant expertise in underwater demolition I'm just very skeptical that it could be accomplished by guys on a yacht under Zusi I mean the ukrainians have never had

a Navy this just doesn't seem like something that's in their wheelhouse of capabilities it all it always made more sense to me that the US was involved somehow but how do how do you think an article this detail that points to the Dutch intelligence Community the German intelligence Community American int how does an article like this with this much detail then get written and put into the Wall Street Journal how does that happen I think intelligence sources want it to happen I mean they have to get their sources from somewhere right and I'm I'm just

saying that this story about disillusioning The Yacht has this is not new this has been out there for many months look I mean it could be true I mean I I guess I don't know for sure but I I guess I'm also just saying that I'm a little bit skeptical about this I mean Seymour hsh had other reporting from different sources who claimed that the US was behind it and President Biden himself at at a press conference said that if Russia invades Ukraine we will bring an end to the northstream 2 Pipeline and when a

reporter asked him how will you do that he said we have ways we'll get it done and similarly Victoria newand warned at a press conference that northstream 2 will not move forward if Russia invades and then lo and behold the pipeline gets blown up and if you're comparing which of these two forces has the capability to do something like this I know for sure that the US does Ukraine I'm just a little more skeptical of just give you some facts to introduce some facts here it it was only 260 feet or so down where they

blew it up I've Dove to 130 140 feet many times you can easily dive three four 500 feet this is not difficult I could dive to 260 fet with you know one day of training and I've I've done half of that and I have only dived 25 times in my life so this is easily accomplished saxs and so this sounds like it's dead on I mean I know you don't what about the explosives yeah it's very simple I mean you're literally attaching it to a pipe and you hit boom it I mean these people are

the the Ukraine people are massive amount of explosives to do something like this no it does not in the face of Ukraine defending itself against Russia one of the greatest militaries on the planet this idea that that same group of people who have held Russian at Bay for two years plus can't go down 260 blow it up is ridiculous they could easily do this this is not a difficult task super easy for the Ukraine Army think you're in position to know I don't think you're because I have facts 260 feet down I've Dove to 130

it's very easy to go 260 end that's your facts I mean it's it's just called reality chth I'm sorry sax is the most biased person in the world when it comes to this it's hysterical to hear him it Jason Jason Jas said you what you just said was it here are the facts it's 260 ft down I've gone to half that so it's possible so they did it no no he's saying it's too sax is premise is this is too this is beyond the capability of the Ukraine Army that's ridiculous saxs easily well a lot

of people are dumb then it is the stupidest concept you're also an explosive expert as well as I'm an expert at he some firecrackers he knows what he's talking about as well dude I bought pineapples that's a quarter stick of dynamite when I was think six guys on a yacht did this easily easily six ukrainians these are hardcore mofos you you think these ukrainians are not hardcore they were they probably did drunk they did it drunk I bet you they were half in the bag when they blew that up that's why Russia can't beat them

I've also read the Seymour HS story and it just makes a lot more sense to me that's all I'm going to say is it just makes a lot more sense to me and by the way I've never taken away anything from the ukrainians as a fighting force I mean clearly they are fighting bravely and they are hardcore I've never taken that away from them and I'm certainly not saying that they're incompetent or anything like that and they've definitely been massively plused up by American weapons and you'd like to see them win versus Russia and get

Russia out of their country right I would like to see America stay out of other people's Wars and I would have liked to have seen them agree to a peace deal that would have avoided this war okay okay who would you rather win the war Russia or Ukraine if you had to pick who would you rather not my War I don't think America should take sides in other people's Wars I think we should stay out of them and I think we should agree to peace deal when we can and not sabotage those peace deals yeah

I'm for peace deals too I'm also I'm also for democracies beating autocracies okay everybody this has been another amazing episode let's canceled elections this has been another amazing episode of the Allin podcast for the Rainman yeah David Sachs the one and only Sultan of science David freeberg getting ready for the all-in summit sold out great speakers lots of surprises for y'all and our chairman dictator so rested so tan working 15 hours a day in Italy and we'll talk about wi I have I have something that I have something I have something for around 8090 that

I'll be able to talk about hopefully Sooners oh yum yum oh I SL a little bety in there all right everybody I am world's greatest moderator and the executive producer for life love you boys see you next time everybody byebye let your winners ride Rainman David and instead we open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it love queen [Music] of Besties my dog taking [Music] driveway oh man myit will meet me we should all just get a room and just have one big huge orgy cuz they're all this useless it's

like this like sexual tension that they just need to release Som we need to get mer [Music] I'm going all and now the plugs the all- in Summit is taking place in Los Angeles September 8th 9th and 10th you can apply for a tiet summit. Allin podcast.co and you can subscribe to this show on YouTube yes watch all the videos our YouTube channel has passed 500,000 subscribers shout out to Donnie from Queens follow the show x.com thee all inpod Tik Tok the Allin pod Instagram the Allin pod LinkedIn search for all in podcast and to

follow chth he's x.com chth sign up for his weekly email what I read this week at chat. substack docomond sign up for a developer account at console. ro.com and see what all the excitement is about follow sax at x.com davidx and sign up for glue at glue. follow freedberg x.com freedberg and ohal is hiring click on the careers page at ohal genetics.com I am the world's greatest moderator Jason cakenis if you are a founder and you want to come to my accelerators and my programs founder. University launch. closeapply to apply for funding from your boy

jcal for your startup and check out Athena wow.com this is the company I am most excited about at the moment Athena wow.com to get a virtual assistant for but $3,000 a month I have two of them thanks for tuning in to the world's number one podcast you can help by telling just two friends that's all I ask forward this podcast to friends and say this is the world's greatest podcast you got to check it out it'll make you smarter it'll make you laugh laugh while learning we'll see you all next time bye-bye