SPEAKER_01 0:00

Dustin, episode 55. We're here. It's Wednesday. We're doing here. All right. What do we have today? We we well, first of all, the title, very, very provoking. What very provoking.

SPEAKER_03 0:16

Yeah, might get some extra clicks or might have people be like, what? They're trying to get extra clicks. I'm not going to watch this. You should watch it. It's going to be a great discussion. Um, so I the title being uh what happens if the AI bubble bursts? And we've talked about this a little bit, but we're gonna talk about it from a different angle this week. Uh, we're also gonna go over IRIN's latest earnings. OpenAI is pulling their models from Cursor, uh, Meta has some cool new AI functionality that they released. And we have what I would consider to be a major update with your portfolio that doesn't involve any buy or sell transactions. So let's jump into that. Um what what is what is going on with your portfolio this week? What announcement did you make?

SPEAKER_01 1:06

So previously I had said that um I might stop sharing my portfolio because um various reasons, but lar largely because uh it what when I get into something that's a micro cap or small cap companies under a billion dollars, it can actually uh move the stock both both in the positive direction when I'm buying uh and in the negative direction when I'm selling. This we we saw an example of this with Bumble, for example, uh and um BRR, uh BRR, right? Um so so going forward, uh so one of the things that I had considered is you know, possibly doing a hedge fund where other people could participate, or maybe some other kind of uh investment vehicle. I started doing a lot of research in that world. Uh, and the conclusion I came to is that um that's a lot of work and I don't want to complicate my life. I like my life the way it is, and um and uh a lot of regulatory jumps that I'd have to jump through, hoops that I'd have to jump through. Um so the decision I came to is that uh my portfolio on Savvy Trader is going to remain public, at least for for now. Uh and what I'm going to do is uh exclude a tiny portion of it, uh you know, probably less than 2%, I would say, for any kind of experimentations that I might do. Uh that would that would probably not it that would that might even result in negative returns if I was to be completely honest about it, because that's the reason I'm only experimenting with a few percentage of my portfolio as opposed to the bulk of it. So the bulk of it will continue to be shared publicly on Xavier Trader, and um for now I have no plans on taking it off. So that was the uh announcement. I made that through uh the um you know, as a comment to all of the subscribers. So people seem to be very excited about that. Um, and uh I'm happy to hear that that they're excited, but uh, I'm also excited to keep it going. So uh that was the big announcement there. So any questions?

SPEAKER_03 3:10

Yeah, yes, but I wish we had a poly market set up on if you were going to keep your portfolio public or not, because the CEO of Savvy Trader decides to keep using his portfolio publicly. I mean, I could have made a lot of money on that.

SPEAKER_01 3:26

Uh yeah. Well, I mean, I think that they they wouldn't have given you good odds, unfortunately. Even even in that announcement, I did say I might. It was it was not a definitive uh made a lot of people very worried though. I I did, and and I probably should have done the research before I did the announcement. But uh the result of it is that I am going to exclude, like in the future, if I was to ever go into a company that's uh as small as like Bumble is, I probably would not include that in my in my public portfolio, just uh so everybody is clear. But um and the reason for that is because uh you know, if if it moves the stock, if my actions move a stock uh specifically, then uh then having this sort of um uh I don't know, it just it just feels like it's not the right thing to do because uh any subscribers would be getting it post-move. Uh and then if any sale of my shares would also have the reverse effect. So um anyway, just uh this problem might come up in the future as well, uh, for larger stocks, but it's unlikely. That would that would mean that uh this show is way more successful than I expect it to be.

SPEAKER_03 4:44

So what do you mean by you mentioned experimentations? What what are what experiments and does this mean like let's say you were let's say you weren't in micron and you were would it like this count as an experiment where like you're gonna buy a couple shares of micron, see how it can be. Oh no, and then okay.

SPEAKER_01 5:07

No, no, no. Like uh in any uh sort of first of all, um if I'm choosing to go into a stock, I'm probably choosing to go into it with a uh you know percent or more of my portfolio with the intent of you know adding five, 10% of my portfolio into a particular stock. So uh something like Micron would not be considered an experimentation. So I think it's gonna be um much smaller uh things and uh probably much smaller amounts. And um and also like uh Robinhood, for example, announced their agentic uh trading platform. Uh I might dabble in that just to sort of see if there's any sort of thing that I want to experiment with there. Those don't those don't lend themselves well to sharing, and also um any kind of sort of agentic-based trading, if everybody was doing the same thing, it would actually like not be a good thing. It's not long-term type of investment. Um but it's it's more, I don't know, it's not like the way in which I view investing to be. And this this, therefore, like all of the main core of what I believe investments to be is still being shared publicly on Savvy Trader.

SPEAKER_03 6:27

Okay. Let's move on to uh the AI bubble potentially bursting, uh, which, like I said at the top of the show, we've we've talked about this before. Um, but we I got a listener question. Someone emailed me, which that's a life hack for anyone listening. They want a question on the pod. You could potentially email me and it'll get on this way. Um so they basically put out the question of there's a good chance there's going to be some sort of black swan event created by AI, some negative event, right? Um, the example kind of being a couple weeks ago, we had uh OpenAI or Hugging Face testing an open AI model, and it broke out of the testing environment to basically cheat the test, which didn't negatively impact anyone really. But, you know, push that out a few years, uh, push that out to a larger scale. Something bad or something unintended could potentially happen with one of these AI models uh that could be harmful uh for society. Do you I guess the the questions here are what do you think the likelihood is of something like this happening? And if so, what what's the likelihood of seeing uh a stronger push from the government potentially shutting the whole thing down?

SPEAKER_01 7:59

Yeah. So these this is a uh interesting scenario. And it it doesn't even have to be years from now where something terrible could potentially happen. So it could happen at any moment, really. Um I'm just trying to make everyone feel a little better. Yeah, but but what what are those terrible things that could potentially happen? It's kind of hard to uh imagine them before they actually occur, right? So uh if AI was uh to sort of uh build its own agenda uh and do something nefarious that then like poisoned the water system or you know, did something kind of crazy, um, and all of a sudden uh AI, which already has a very negative public sentiment in the US anyway, and and probably Europe, um could there be a huge push against, like, okay, we need to stop all of this acceleration of AI investments? Absolutely, that could happen. Uh, and that is a real risk. Now, what is the probability? It's very hard to know what the probability is. It's sort of like trying to determine what's the probability of a nuclear war post-World War II, right? Like every year seemed like it might happen. But you know, here we are 80 years later, and it hasn't happened yet. So um it's it's good that uh we uh are aware of these types of things. It's good that the people who are building these technologies are aware of the repercussions that something like that could cause. Uh, but let's play out the scenario where it might happen and all of a sudden uh the sentiment turns and we might put a halt on investing in AI. So the quote the next question is what would that do to uh AI-related investments? And uh is that is that fair to sort of like characterize your question as okay. So, you know, you you start down the down the list from the top, uh which is Nvidia, uh, to to the bottom, all the companies that are servicing AI, uh, Micron would be impacted, I would, I would imagine. Um but interestingly, the companies that have the highest uh revenue directly as a result of data center buildouts and whose revenue is completely tied to that, such as Iron, for example, um, such as Core Weave, uh, some of these sort of ancillary companies, they would be impacted the most, right? Uh Nvidia itself would probably be impacted pretty heavily, same with AMD, but maybe not as much with respect to Micron or memory companies, because those memory chips could still be used and storage chips could still be used in like all of the other consumer products that they uh they make. Um, of course, a significant portion of their revenue is coming from data centers. So that portion could potentially be diminished pretty significantly. So um, but also having a PE of six kind of helps uh because uh you know, if uh 75% of their profits go away tomorrow, uh you know, then and if their stock didn't move, they would only have a PE of 20. It's not that crazy. But if something already has a PE of 60 or 100, or maybe they haven't even made profits, like SpaceX, for example, um, you you know, all of a sudden their data center revenue doesn't goes away, and uh the hope for the future was all around uh the AI investments uh coming to fruition, uh then that would be a problem, right? Um, so uh some companies would be impacted much more greatly than others, but um uh some would uh weather it a little bit better, like uh Apple, uh Microsoft, Google, Meta would weather it a lot better than than some of the other companies that uh are uh most of their revenue comes from data center spend. So that that is the perspective I have on it. So it's not an it's not a zero probability event. It's definitely non-zero, but it's a low probability event, and which is why like I also don't worry about it in significant ways.

SPEAKER_03 12:02

Yeah, the also the the scale of uh the ban, I don't even know what to call it, but because it's imaginary here, but the scale of it does matter, right? So like maybe it is a ban in America, but it's not a global ban. So there's still global customers, or maybe a lot of these data centers. Well, I guess depending on some data centers are stuck in America, right? But like there are still Iron has data centers outside of America uh that would still be able to operate fully. Um another example, depending on how things go, or and again, I'm not even saying any of this is likely, just kind of thinking through the imaginary here. Maybe there's a ban on uh like neo-cloud um AIs, but you could still run your own AI locally, and that actually creates more of a incentive for consume individual consumers to buy more memory. Um that's right. You know, depending on what's available because it's hard to put the genie back in the bottle, right? Uh for these open weight uh open source models. Uh because the the code's already out there. You can make it illegal to own and run, but it's very difficult to regulate. It's similar to owning a uh an illegally downloaded movie, right? Like it's very hard to to for any crackdown to happen. Um in terms of my perspective on regulation, and again, it's hard to speak to this because I don't necessarily know what the event, the black swan is, but I like to think of AI as a mix between the internet and autonomous driving, meaning my perspective is it should be as accessible as possible. It's it should be a common good similar to the internet. Um with that said, it makes sense to have certain safeguards, which the internet also has safeguards, by the way. Um but it would be, I think it would be worse for humanity, again, not knowing what this event is, but it would be worse for humanity to completely shut down AI, uh, similar to if we just shut down the internet because there are some radical websites, right? Right. Right. Um the other framework is comparing it to autonomous driving, where the unfortunate reality is people are going to get hurt with autonomous vehicles, whether they are the driver or they're outside of the vehicle. But on the grand scheme of things, autonomous driving should dramatically decrease harm or or you know, car accidents uh by far, right? Like you're taking out the human error. So you basically you're there's more to simplify it, there's more good than bad that's coming with this technology. And I think that's the same for the internet, and I think that's the same for AI. So, you know, I just hope, again, it's hard to say with without knowing what the Black Swan event is, but I hope that that is what people will be thinking about and they won't be so um, I don't know, regulation happy uh whenever the time comes.

SPEAKER_01 15:38

Yeah, I I uh agree with that. And uh those are good analogies as well, the autonomous driving, or you know, like saving lives, but then obviously it's going to make mistakes also uh and cause some deaths. But you know, the question is uh how many lives are we saving from all of the human errors that uh that it saves? So uh absolutely a good good analogy. So you know, but the sentiment on AI in the US in particular has been surprisingly negative, and some of it based on misinformation or bad information. Um so that that part has been also uh kind of surprising that it has already formed formulated, where I think the uh there's this sort of angst, if you will, in the public where there might be a lot of negative backlash if there was a major incident of any kind that uh that either uh ends up hurting humans or like killing humans, where that that would that would definitely not be uh viewed as a um as something that would be um that would be viewed as an incident that might trigger a huge tsunami of regulation that would uh slow down AI in a significant way. Um but yeah, agreed on all those counts.

SPEAKER_03 16:53

And by the way, I've talked about this on the pod before. I think what is a very likely black swan event is not something going wrong with AI, but something going incredibly right where AI can achieve way more than we anticipated in a much quicker fashion than we expected, where a lot of people could potentially lose jobs due to its immense efficiency.

SPEAKER_01 17:23

This is this is the black swan event that the AI creators themselves have been anticipating and even fearing and putting the fear into the public for the past four years, uh expecting that you know uh we might have 50% unemployment type of thing. But none of that has come to fruition yet. But it could, it's still good. Right.

SPEAKER_03 17:42

And it's not even that you necessarily need layoffs, like it's companies just hiring less people because they're just now more efficient and they right. So like it can happen. I feel like it's going to happen slowly and then all at once. Obviously, I don't know, but that's just kind of the gist I'm getting.

SPEAKER_01 18:01

I think the surprise so far has been that like it hasn't happened so far, and uh the job numbers have only been growing over the past four years, despite all of this AI availability to us that has made companies so much more efficient. So they've utilized that efficiency to invest back into more people. Uh, or you know, those people are getting other jobs. Maybe, maybe they're building data centers, I'm not sure. But certainly the overall job numbers have still been going up uh so far. Yes, but I will humanoid robots might change that very quickly, too, by the way.

SPEAKER_03 18:34

So totally agree with that. And what I will also say is from my perspective, I feel like AI really got good with Opus 4.6. I'm gonna say that was a year ago, maybe it was six months ago. I don't remember. Um, but before that point, AI, the like the core use case was just can you summarize this? Which wasn't taking away any jobs. Um, so as AI becomes more capable, the risk of it taking more jobs just increases, right? And I and I think the assumption is AI will get better over time. So yeah. Um, okay, let's talk about Iron's earnings. They they released earnings, I believe it was last Thursday. Um, and it was a very interesting earnings call, or maybe I should say it was a very interesting reaction to the earnings call because it was a total inkblot test. Uh everyone had a different takeaway from this earnings. A lot of people uh thought it was fairly negative. Uh, a lot of people thought it was fairly positive. Um and I don't think I've seen so many people split on an individual earnings report uh before. Because normally it's pretty like not necessarily black or white, but like you kind of know the good points, you know the bad points. And then whether you think the sum of those points is good or bad, that could be debated. But this, like, no one could agree on anything, was my take. But how I felt on the earnings, I I was pleasantly surprised. So why was I pleasantly surprised? We are in the thick of their transition going from being a Bitcoin mining company to an AI data center company. This is the first quarter where their AI data center revenue uh surpassed their Bitcoin mining revenue because they're slowly taking the Bitcoin mining uh tech off the racks and installing these AI GPUs. So it's happening over time. Next quarter, it's going to be way more pronounced, uh, is the analyst expectation. So I thought next quarter was going to be the interesting one. Now, the reason why uh I en I I really enjoyed this earnings call is they provided a lot more details than they have in the past. And again, this was an example of the inkplot where people were a lot of people were saying they are being they're not being transparent enough, they're not giving enough details. And they gave uh to me, they gave a ton of detail. So I'll I'll go into it. Uh and then I'll and then I'll get into maybe where some other people are are are getting that from. Uh so they announced that the most recent contracts, they're getting around $15 million in ARR per megawatt for a five for five-year contracts and around $20 million in ARR per megawatt for three-year contracts. So before I was like doing rough math to kind of figure out what these numbers were, but now they're giving it more direct, which is huge. Um, and way better than I anticipated. Uh they also said that it takes roughly two years on a three year contract, so roughly 40 million. Million dollars to break even on the expenses that that they're the upfront expenses. So that's also really helpful and nice to hear.

SPEAKER_01 22:09

Um fast turnaround on return on investment.

SPEAKER_03 22:12

Way faster than I would have expected for the amount that they're spending. Um now we already know that they on their 2026 capacity, which is 480 megawatts, that they are going to be able to generate around $4 billion in ARR. We also know already that in 2027, they are their capacity target is 1,210 megawatts, or on this show, we like to call it 1.21 gigawatts. Uh so what you could do is you could take that uh the difference between those numbers, the 730 megawatts, assume that they're going to be making 15 to 12, 20 billion dollars in ARR based on the new numbers they gave us, um, and uh figure out that their total ARR by the end of 2027 should be around 15 to 19 billion dollars. Now, to put that in perspective, when I did this calculation last earnings, which was just based on their uh the 480 uh megawatts, my conclusion was they were going to get to $9 billion by the end of 2027. And again, this is ARR. So it's not that they are generating this revenue by the end of 2027, it's that that this is their expected recurring revenue by the end of 2027. So again, I was thinking about it. Assuming they they continue to get the rates, assuming that they are able to build the capacity. I think in terms of those two, it's the capacity build-out that's the bigger question because you know, there's a lot, it's you're it's operating in the physical world, a lot can go wrong, but they're able to generate higher confidence with uh investors by delivering, continuing to deliver data centers, which they just did with Microsoft with that 50 megawatt data center uh called Horizon One. And they're planning on doing 150 more megawatts by the end of the year for Microsoft as well. So, you know, as they continue to deliver, I think confidence will build. Plus, and they've mentioned this on the earnings call too, as they build out these data centers, they're going to learn how to do it more and more efficiently over time, similar to building rockets, right? Like as you keep doing it, and you're just gonna get better. Um but to your other point, assuming contract values stay uh at that level, I think it's even more likely that it it goes up over time than down. Um, but you know, I you don't know. So I'm for for the estimate, I'm just I'm just using um their the current levels. So again, my estimate just back in the napkin math, 15 to 19 billion dollars ARR by the end of 2027. Their market cap when earnings was over was around $13.2 billion. So their market cap, and I think it's it's higher now, they were up eight percent today, but their market cap when earnings was done was lower than the anticipated ARR by the end of next year, which I also thought was just interesting framing.

SPEAKER_01 25:32

Um so all of that one time yeah, one time revenue, one time future revenue, essentially, or future ARR.

SPEAKER_03 25:40

Yeah, right. And there's still a lot that needs to go right, but you know, I I think it I think the opportunity is very interesting for Iron. And I really liked hearing these details um from the leadership team. Now, the piece where some people where I think people uh grasped onto and was like they're not being transparent enough, is they announced that they signed a multi-year contract with a uh leading Frontier AI lab. But they didn't say who was. It's not that it's not that they didn't want to name them, of course they wanted to. There's no reason not to name them. Um so the market totally wrote off this announcement. Now, I will say, if this leading AI lab is not a big name, if it's not uh OpenAI or Anthropic or Google or Meta or uh I don't know, Group. SpaceX is on it. SpaceX, yeah. I don't think SpaceX is would be signing a deal with Iron, but um but if it's not one of those, this news could potentially hurt them because it was like a build-up for nothing. But at the same time, the stock didn't even run up when they announced it. So um I just thought that was like an extra win on top of the additional details they provided for a quarter that I was expecting there to really be no news. I thought it was going to be very quiet. So I thoroughly enjoyed uh this earnings report. I feel like I have a lot more clarity on the business and I have even more confidence than I did before.

SPEAKER_01 27:24

It it seems to have good visibility into 2027 at least, or end of 2027, which is really good news. And one-time uh sales for a company that's only trading at around 14, 15 billion dollar market cap is actually not bad. Uh it's it's or one-time future sales, I should say, you know, year and a half from now. Um it's uh yeah, it's it's very good. Uh you like there's a lot of potential there for sure. Um I think so. Yeah. So you, you know, uh I every now and then I have to ask myself, you know, would I invest in something like an iron? And uh I don't know if you want to know the answer to this, but oh that's why we do the podcast.

SPEAKER_03 28:09

Uh be, you know, don't hold any punches.

SPEAKER_01 28:12

But but okay, so so iron definitely seems interesting to me. So don't get me wrong, but but the uh issue that I have is that in order for iron to do well, it means data center and AI has to continue to do well. Yes, and if that is continuing to do well, so would Micron. And Micron has real profits right now, which are going to continue to grow if AI and data centers continue to do well. So, do I want another investment who whose risk profile is similar to Micron's, but not nearly as profitable or profitable at all in my in Iron's case? And if there was this sort of um AI bubble burst, if you will, uh, that um who would get affected? Well, the companies that don't have any profits would get wiped out, basically, unless there's more capital going into them. Because in order to survive, if you're not a profitable company, you have to have outside investment. And in an AI bubble burst scenario, there will be no outside investment. This is exactly what happened with the dot-com bus, where, or even the financial crisis in 2008, where once the VCs dried up in terms of investing into companies that um that are not yet profitable, those companies that are not profitable disappear. Like there's a huge sleuth of them that just go away. And this happened in 2009, 2010 time frame. This happened in 2000, 2001 timeframe. Uh, I've seen this several in several different cycles. Uh, and um uh iron, uh not just iron to sort of like single them out, would be the recipient of those that type of treatment. Whereas um it's unlikely that a company like Micron would be completely wiped out, right? Like, you know, maybe their profits are diminished significantly, but going from a hundred billion dollars of profits to you know, 10 wouldn't, you know, they still survive, right? Like it's a it's a survivability game at some point, um, and could come back from it, whereas some of the other companies wouldn't have a chance. So that that that's sort of the the perspective I I have on it and uh why I haven't gotten into any of the other um AI names essentially, uh other than Micron, which represents a huge chunk of my portfolio.

SPEAKER_03 30:33

I agree. I think Micron is a more balanced position in regards to offense and defense of if things go right, if things go wrong. What I think iron adds is if things go right, I expect it to do better than Micron. I expect the revenue growth. Yeah, I think the revenue growth from here is going to be a lot more. Um, and that and if I had to pick one, I'd pick Micron. And my portfolio shows that where Micron is around 8% of my portfolio, where iron is about 3% of my portfolio. Right, right. So positioning accordingly.

SPEAKER_01 31:09

And you're absolutely correct. And by the way, for a $14, $15 billion uh company, there's still 10x potential there, meaning uh iron could become a $150 billion company, and then all of a sudden your investment is worth 10 times as much if that were to happen. Uh and sometimes those things happen without the financial results necessarily having been realized yet, as for example, in the case of Palantir or Rocket Lab or whatever, those type of uh run-ups can easily happen in anticipation of a future that that continues to uh embrace AI. Whereas Micron, uh we have the reverse problem. The anticipation is that AI is going to slow down and micron is not gonna grow, and therefore it's getting sort of suppressed uh in that sense. But um uh but but you you know, if um uh so so you're absolutely right that there is more potential in an iron than there is in a micron, but there's more safety in what I would consider um a micron than there is in iron. Right.

SPEAKER_03 32:08

And if you're only investing in, I don't know how many stocks you have now, five stocks, like you need to pick the the smarter options where you're not going to you know lose your the risk of losing your investment. Um and arguably, not to go too off topic, but you already have some positions that we talked about where like in theory they could go to zero. For example, like a Rivian, um their future is not set in stone.

SPEAKER_01 32:34

Um where they are a company that's losing money and doesn't even anticipate having cash flow positivity and for at least another two, three years.

SPEAKER_03 32:43

Right. So to have two like several companies that could potentially go to zero for your type of portfolio would not be necessarily ideal.

SPEAKER_01 32:51

That's right, that's right. But but in uh yeah, I mean, so I guess Rivian is my investment to your iron essentially, even though you're also in Rivian. I'm also in Rivian, because I just I love risk.

SPEAKER_03 33:02

Um, but uh all my investments are a lot smaller than yours. So that's how I'd mitigate the risk.

SPEAKER_01 33:07

R right. Like and I think that is the right frame framing, by the way, especially if you're younger, if the bulk of your um uh money is yet to be made, you know, like uh and and is probably coming from salaries as opposed to investment. And like I'm in a totally different boat where I'm older, I don't have an income. Basically, I'm I'm I'm unemployable. But but yeah, so uh slight difference in terms of risk profiles.

SPEAKER_03 33:37

And I I think there's also just the mentality I have of like you don't need a big allocation to if you think a stock's going to, I'm just using your words, 100x. I'm not saying that's gonna happen with iron, but let's say it does. You don't need to own that much, right? Like if it's one percent of your portfolio and it does a hundred X, now it is after your portfolio, uh, you know, the future portfolio, it's uh it's a hundred percent.

SPEAKER_01 34:04

Technically, I think it's one third, but I'm not I haven't done the math. Okay, well then ignore what I say. And then you if it's one percent and in a hundred X isn't that double doubles your portfolio.

SPEAKER_03 34:20

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 34:22

Oh yeah, I yeah, no, no, I think you you might be right. It is uh it is gonna be 50% of your portfolio. Roughly 50, yeah. Yeah, assuming the rest of your portfolio hasn't moved, yeah. Right, it's stagnant. Yeah, sorry.

SPEAKER_03 34:34

Yeah, but anyway, my my point being you don't need to have these big swings for these risky companies in order for your portfolio to really grow. You could have plant very small seeds and just kind of let it grow. Um, so that's another thing is you have to manage the risk greed aspect, right? Like I'm not putting 50 50% of my portfolio in iron trying to like have some crazy returns. That is not my game. Okay. Yeah. Um, let's uh stick to your portfolio. I guess my portfolio too. Uh some news came out from Meta, uh, from Mark directly on on X that they released a new uh what they're calling Muse Voice Transcribe. I I think it's a model feature. Um, it's basically a speech-to-text model built around AI. Uh, they trained it on over 70 languages, and the claim is it is basically faster and more accurate than other speech-to-text models. Um, but you I think looked into this a decent amount. What are what are your thoughts?

SPEAKER_01 35:40

Um, I didn't actually use the model, so just to preface it with that, but uh I did oh you did? Oh, that's awesome. Really impressive. Really impressive. Yeah, so it just the demo that they put out was super impressive. It does seem like uh above and beyond what other um companies have demonstrated so far. And this goes to show that like uh Meta is not yet out of the game, and uh the team of uh AI experts that they paid hundreds of millions of dollars to recruit last year uh are starting to finally cook and put out models that are impressive and do things that you know maybe others have lagged behind on, such as this sort of uh transcription uh capabilities in 70 different languages right off the bat. So um this is exciting from my standpoint as a meta shareholder, is like, okay, you know, like uh the value of meta AI has been uh uh basically given a zero from by the market, and uh this is showing that it's got a non-zero value, right? So everything should be upside from here, in my in my perspective. Um, so yeah, I'm uh I'm I'm loving it. Yeah, I tried the model.

SPEAKER_03 36:53

If if you go to the link that Mark sent, it there's a way to just test it in the article. Um it was incredibly impressive. I was actively trying to trick the model where I was saying things in different tones at different speeds, it didn't matter how fast or slow I talked, it got my transcript down perfectly. It was crazy, crazy accurate. Um, and then in regards to speed, one interesting aspect that the article mentioned is that it's using like actively adaptive uh processing as opposed to just always processing every word the same amount of time. If it has high confidence of what you said, it's going to process it extremely quickly. And if it has lower confidence, it's gonna take a little bit more time uh to transcribe that word. And we're talking like milliseconds here, but that difference matters in terms of accuracy. So that's part of their edge here. But I yeah, I thought it was very impressive.

SPEAKER_01 37:51

Yeah. Yeah, in uh in the demo that he posted, there's like eight different speakers, some of them speaking in different languages, and it was just like transcribing it in real time, uh, with and and saying like speaker A, speaker B. And then you know, like if speaker A spoke again, it'd be speaker A again, and speaker, you know, D speaks next. And it could recognize who is speaking, which was the super impressive part as well. So yeah, I mean they're doing some cool stuff. Um, and that's gonna be especially important with uh when you combine that kind of capability and put it into the glasses. Now all of a sudden you have super superpowers. Um the Mina AI glasses, uh, like for example, just uh recently added a feature where um if you're in a crowded space, it can isolate the person in front of you's voice and and uh amplify it in your ears, right? Like uh in your glasses speakers. So capabilities like that are going to become extra important as they continue to build out these new platforms and you know, smart classes, smart AI devices. Um Meta might have a huge edge on hardware, especially when compared to anthropic or open AI. So integrating all of these things, the the it could be could be a very bright future for Meta on the AI.

SPEAKER_03 39:12

Meta, I think from a hardware perspective, Meta's kind of in the middle where like they have way more experience than open AI and anthropic, but not nearly as much experience as like Google and Apple.

SPEAKER_01 39:25

So well, I don't know about Google. Google doesn't really have their own hardware.

SPEAKER_03 39:30

They make their own phones and computers.

SPEAKER_01 39:32

The Google Pixel, isn't it, made by a third party for them? Not no, not anymore. That that's like a decade ago. Okay. But but I mean they have a phone, but but also like nobody has ARBR, uh, or or you know, like the form factor of uh what um what Meta has been able to do. Like their smart glasses is light years ahead of everybody else's.

SPEAKER_03 39:58

Google's getting close with the smart glasses. But without a product out, you know, like these guys have no Google has a product coming. Like I don't know what the release date is, but they they announced it. They they partnered with you should you should look at Google stuff. I think I think they're closer than you might think.

SPEAKER_01 40:15

Yeah, I thought so a year ago uh when I got a demo of Google's glasses. But the problem is it's not a product you can buy yet. And these guys are now selling millions of smart glasses every year. So you know, there everybody else is quite a way, ways behind Meta. But could they catch up? Absolutely. Like Apple could easily catch up because they their brand reputation for um for hardware is so good, but uh they would A need to have an appropriately priced product and one that has very good AI products under John Turnus. All of that could happen.

SPEAKER_03 40:51

That's what I was gonna say is the odds are probably higher that they could make a kick-ass product uh now versus a week ago. Yeah. I agree. Um yeah. Okay, let's uh get to our last topic and then we'll do listener questions. So OpenAI decided that they are going to pull their models from Cursor now that it was acquired by SpaceX. Basically, their claim is more or less they're concerned that SpaceX, um, SpaceX's acquisition of Cursor, there's potential IP theft risks, um, which is what the whole space is built on anyway, but that's besides the point. Um, so OpenAI's models are going to be available in cursor until November 12th, assuming that they don't get this resolved. They're OpenAI's newer models that aren't released yet, but will be released in theory before then. So I think the only model that's public knowledge is Astra. That will not show up in Cursor at all. Uh and Cursor noted that OpenAI only accounts for about 5% of their AI traffic, which seems incredibly low, like surprisingly low. Um, and I don't think that was gonna, I don't think that would have been the case a couple months ago. Cursor has changed a lot of things to kind of default the user to Grok, um where a year ago it would have been much higher.

SPEAKER_01 42:26

Also, even Cursor before was uh defaulting people to their own uh cursor model, weren't they?

SPEAKER_03 42:33

Yes, it to Composer, but Composer is garbage. So a lot of people would switch to um an anthropic model or an open AI model. But now with Brock, it's a very capable model, uh, and there's less reason to switch to uh a more expensive one. Um and even after OpenAI removes the models from cursor, you can still use their models in cursor. You just have to bring your own API keys. So you're not getting right now, if you if you wanted to use um uh codecs and cursor, you could just pay cursor's monthly plan uh and that's how you get access. But now you would have to pay open AI and then bring your keys over. So I guess the questions here are do you think this is the right move for open AI? And do you think that this is going to be a problem for either OpenAI or Cursor down the road?

SPEAKER_01 43:35

Is it the right move? It's uh it's hard to say for sure. We'll we'll we'll need to like look back at this to see whether or not it's the right move. If cursor becomes the default standard for developers as the way that they uh interact with models, then it would have been the wrong move. But you you know, if you take zoom out for a moment and say OpenAI chose to eliminate its partnership with. The uh guy who's vowed to destroy them and kill them legally or in any way which he can, Elon Musk, who considers himself the co-founder of OpenAI and uh uh betrayed because OpenAI went from nonprofit to for-profit. If you look at it from that perspective, I mean, like obviously it makes sense for them not to be partners, right? So so um the the decision makes sense from that standpoint, uh right. Like uh you don't want to be sharing or and partnering with a company that has vowed to destroy you, um, but you know, like and really has a lot of hate and criticism that comes your way on a daily basis, and your your CEO on a daily basis calls them scam altman, for example. Um, so uh yeah, I mean it's it doesn't surprise me that they've done that. Uh you know, I suspect it's probably not going to hurt OpenAI in a significant way unless Cursor becomes the standard way in which developers develop software. Um, that's unlikely to be the case. I feel like uh there's probably going to be at least three, maybe even four different uh platforms that end up emerging. Um they might converge to two down the road, but uh it's still questionable as to whether or not one of them is going to be cursor.

SPEAKER_03 45:25

You know, if I was running one of these uh frontier AI models, my perspective would be I would want it to be as accessible as possible, as available as possible. Yeah. But I do think OpenAI has a their claim is a real concern that Cursor is most likely uh distilling their model and and making Grok better. And we've already kind of seen that, right? Without necessarily seeing the exact steps, Grok has become immensely better um after uh they cursor did this partnership with SpaceX and now obviously SpaceX has owns them outright. Um so but at the same time, it this is hard to avoid, or or at least these models are not really trying to uh avoid this issue, at least thus far. Um, because that's also how these Chinese models are getting so good is they're distilling from the other models. Um, and not really and OpenAI anthropic aren't having true um know your customer uh guardrails in place to to limit excessive use. Right. Uh so it you know, to your point, it's really hard to know until you see, you know, a little while out. Um but I I understand the move. I don't think it's going to hurt Cursor unless if OpenAI takes the top spot. And right now, I think they're just right behind uh anthropic in my mind. But as you know, these companies leapfrog leapfrog each other. If they're able to have the best model, like if this Astra model ends up being, you know, levels above Fable, that could everyone is very adaptable right now because you have to be in this in this market. So that could definitely drive people out of cursor um and into codex directly. But at the same time, once you know Grok becomes better than Astra, people could go right back. So like it's hard to know what the permanent effects will be, but there could definitely be some uh temporary uh you know uh I don't know, misalignment in in the market. Yeah, uh, but but we'll see. Agreed. Okay, so that was it for main topics. Let's go to listener questions. Let's do it.

SPEAKER_00 48:03

Hello.

SPEAKER_01 48:04

Hi, Adrian.

SPEAKER_00 48:05

Hey, hi, okay, let's keep talking about SpaceX with this first question. When will you guys decide to buy SpaceX? What metrics would you need to see to purchase?

SPEAKER_01 48:19

I'll I'll go first. Um so the the valuation of SpaceX is what has been really rich, not the excitement of what they're doing. Um the excitement of what they're doing, especially with respect to Starlink and launches, has just like as a space enthusiast, I love what SpaceX has done. I love what they're doing and their future. Um, the issue is valuation for me. And um, and their current financials simply don't justify the the kind of valuation that they're getting. So that that is the big, big problem. Um if uh valuation stays the same and financials grow into it, that would attract me to SpaceX. Uh, if valuation goes down as their financials continue to get uh better, uh that too would uh would get me uh excited about it. But um but right now there's a lot of future uh uh financials baked into its current stock price uh because it's an Elon-based company. And if uh and if there wasn't slowdown in AI spend, for example, um, or any kind of AI risk, SpaceX, I think, would be one of the companies that would get hit pretty hard, uh, which is why I've chosen to just remain in Micron as far as my AI investment goes, as opposed to SpaceX. I wanna I I kind of wish SpaceX and uh XAI were separate because then I would still, you know, ideally SpaceX would have a lower valuation on their uh Starlink and launch business, and I would love to invest in that company because I think the future of that is bright, irrespective of what happens with AI.

SPEAKER_03 49:56

So yeah, the two considerations I'm making is one, the price to sales ratio is astronomical relative to all the other holdings I have in my portfolio. I think the highest PS ratio in my portfolio right now is from Rocket Lab, which is around 50. And SpaceX's uh price to sales ratio is over 200. So it, you know, it's over four times. Um so the valuation is just nuts, again, relative to my portfolio. And with that said, the argument for such a high valuation is that what Elon and the leadership team is saying is they're going to have a ton of revenue coming through uh very soon, right? So that PS ratio should, in theory, get smaller if the price of the stock uh remains the same. The other piece uh for me to consider is if I want to buy SpaceX, then I probably want to sell some similar stocks, right? So Mead mentioned Micron. I mean, there's other AI kind of plays or uh that iron, which we've already talked about at this point. Meta and Google are kind of AI plays too. Um, Rocket Lab, which I just talked about as well. So it overlaps with a lot of my portfolio, where it's not necessarily adding anything new outside of potentially being the top dog in the field and the Elon factor. So those are the two big considerations that I would make.

SPEAKER_01 51:36

Really quick, um I think we might have a bug with uh with our uh price sales calculation for companies that we don't have a lot of financials on because we are showing SpaceX having a peak price sales ratio of 237.

SPEAKER_03 51:50

Um that's where I grabbed it from.

SPEAKER_01 51:53

Yeah, but that that would imply that it only has annual or like the trailing 12 months revenue of 8.4 billion. And I suspect um that it we're just pulling that 8.4 from the latest quarter that we have data for. So um I don't think that price sales ratio is accurate. It's probably closer to 70. I would I would right. Yeah, I just googled it. Yeah, closer to like 80. Yeah, 70 or 80. That makes sense. So let's let's let's make sure that's thank you for that correction. It's like real-time bug detection uh over here in our software.

SPEAKER_03 52:29

But point still stands, it would be the the highest uh price to sales ratio in the portfolio, which always gives me pause if I'm adding uh on that front.

SPEAKER_01 52:41

Also, you know, let's say two companies have the same price to sales ratio of really high, both have 50 price to sales ratio, but one is a tiny company and the other is a multi-trillion dollar company. Well, uh the multi-trillion dollar company is gonna have a much, much more difficult time growing its revenues in a significant way to be able to justify future growth for that, uh for that stock price, uh, as opposed to the tiny company that uh you know it's it's playing in such an enormous space, it could easily grow 10x or even 50x before it sort of saturates the market. So SpaceX has to grow its market in order to grow its uh market cap, and it has to grow it in such a way that uh it justifies a 70 or 80 price sales ratio. Um whereas Robinhood uh Rocket Lab Rocket Lab rather uh would just need to get a uh uh bigger chunk of the already existing market. So all right.

SPEAKER_00 53:43

Okay, the same listener wants to know. Hamid, have you added to your micron position lately?

SPEAKER_01 53:51

If you click on a micron, it'll tell you exactly uh when I have most recently added, and I think it's been a couple weeks. Or if I'm your on your savvy trader portfolio. On my savvy trader portfolio, that's right. The link is in the description. Um the last time was August 3rd that I added, which is FYI.

SPEAKER_00 54:14

Okay, there's also someone just to keep on um Micron, there's uh oh no, that person might okay. Never mind. All right, let's go to the next one. Um someone wants to know about um Rivian. And okay, actually, let's do this one first. Regular people will have to have the feeling that they are participating in all the AI wealth creation in order to feel more positive about it in general. So that's just a comment that I wanted you to dive into a little bit more.

SPEAKER_01 54:57

Yeah. Uh in order to, I mean, this is this has been sort of one of the advice of uh uh various different politics or people who are like dealing with politicians on the AI front and data center build-outs in particular, is that to uh let let's distribute the wealth among the people. Uh couple of issues right now. One, the wealth hasn't come yet, meaning that there's some companies that have enormous amounts of revenues, uh, but though the enormous amounts are still tiny relative to the amount of money that is going into investing in AI for future revenues, right? So um just uh, you know, like roughly speaking, we're spending a trillion dollars on CapEx spending, for example, to build out these data centers, but the revenue of all of the companies combined is probably in the few hundred billion dollar uh area in terms of um uh revenue from AI. So the um the actual results haven't come about yet for there to be this abundance of distribution. But yeah, I think that that there is some future world where the AI companies that are benefiting the most from AI will have to tax themselves, if you will, for the benefit of humanity in general. And I and I think that to some degree that will happen in the future. Um both OpenAI and Anthropic have enormous nonprofit arms, by the way. Uh, they might be the largest nonprofits uh in the world, both both of them uh have these like in enormous nonprofit arms. So what those nonprofits will do still you know remains to be seen. But um but there is these multi-hundred billion dollar entities that are getting created as a result of anthropic and open AI in particular.

SPEAKER_03 56:47

So I think the public needs a stake in the AI wealth if we go back to the the topic at the beginning of the show, if AI is incredibly successful, meaning people are losing jobs and this is a band-aid fix. But let's say people aren't losing jobs and it's just making the entire world more productive with humans, um, then I don't think this is a realistic scenario. Uh that's like saying, you know, uh all the Mag 7 uh should be distributing their wealth to everyone. And it's like, why why would they do that? Unless if you're a shareholder, which is always an option, by the way. Right. Like if you want to do that.

SPEAKER_01 57:34

And they pay a ton of taxes too. So that the in a way they are like that through the tax system.

SPEAKER_03 57:40

But uh absolutely. Um but I I think the real issue here in terms of people feeling positive about AI is what benefits are they getting out of it? And it doesn't have to be financial. Like, yeah, it can make you potentially better at your job, maybe you get a promotion, and that's like an indirect way where you're where um you're you're getting compensated, but is it just helping you with your everyday life? And I think right now, while humans in general are extremely adaptable, I don't think as many people are utilizing AI as much as they can, or they don't even realize what it can do. Right. Like uh if I'm having an issue with uh my sync and I just point my camera at the plumbing underneath and I ask, you know, Gemini, if I turn this knob, what is it gonna do? Like that's incredible.

SPEAKER_01 58:35

Um and it's it is kind of incredible that I can tell you these right.

SPEAKER_03 58:39

Like I don't need to, I don't need to call a plumber. I don't need to watch a YouTube video. It's way more direct. I'm learning, I'm learning directly. Now I know how to do it next time. And that's just one example. Extrapolate that to a bunch of different little experiences I'm having on a day-to-day basis. Like I've me personally, I feel like I'm getting immense value from AI in my job, but also outside of my job in my in my personal life. So um I, if anything, I think what these AI companies need to be doing is promoting all of these little use cases that everyone could be doing. That's not just summarize this text, because it really can do way more.

SPEAKER_00 59:25

Okay, Hamid, a bunch or a couple people at least want to know your thoughts on this the strike, the Micron strike in Taiwan.

SPEAKER_01 59:33

I I don't know about it. I was gonna say I'm not I'm not sure what what that is, but um uh generally speaking, uh strikes are around compensation, and I am I'm sure they'll figure it out. Doesn't worry me uh from that perspective, from from like is Micron at risk because of strikes? I I doubt it.

SPEAKER_00 59:57

Okay, here's um this one's on EOS. Dustin, any comments regarding the deal with Google today? Thanks.

SPEAKER_03 1:00:04

Yeah, I thought about putting this as a main topic, uh, but didn't. So EOS is up almost 20% today. Um, they had an an announcement with Google uh and one other company, I forget, I forgot the name, it's like N8 or something, um, where they're the three of them are going to generate some power solution. I didn't look into it too much because at this point, EOS is less than 1% of my portfolio. So I'm not keeping up on them uh incredibly well. Uh, but I thought the news overall was very positive, especially at a time where EOS is hitting 52-week lows. Um the only thing that gave me a bit of pause is I don't believe EOS's part in the plan uh executes until 2029 or 2030. So it might be a little while before we see any validation from this deal. Um, but this is the type of news I want to see. And this is the type of news I expect from EOS. I just want the implementation of their products to happen a bit sooner because I think the market as a whole needs more validation right now with their products. But again, like overall, very bullish news. Um, I believe Google and again, this other company tested a lot of different partners and EOS won out. So again, this is this is exactly what I want to see from this company.

SPEAKER_01 1:01:40

Interesting. Is EOS just a $1.3 billion company? Like that that seems extremely small. Like considering how much I've heard of EOS's name, uh a $1 billion company with the $200, yeah. $200 million revenue run rate is pretty impressive.

SPEAKER_03 1:01:58

Yeah, the stock is down year to date, like almost 70%. So oh wow, yeah. So that they were not that small a couple of months ago, even you know, a couple weeks ago, arguably. Um, but yeah, I I believe uh 1.3 is accurate, unless if we have another bug, which I find hard to believe. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 1:02:18

Okay, another one for Dustin. Dustin, are you aware that Iron owns their power while their competitors have to rent power? School up Hamid.

SPEAKER_03 1:02:29

Um yeah, so I am well aware that Iron uh owns all their power. It's also renewable energy, which I think is an added benefit and makes it just easier when there's a lot of pushback on data centers right now. Uh in terms of schooling up Phamid, the problem is whenever I try to do that, he just points to his Kager versus mine, and then I feel like an idiot. So I don't I I'm not schooling him until my portfolio allows me to. Um, but I do think Iron is very attractive relative to its competitors, Core Weave, Nebius. The uh the way they're operating the business is to me is the right way, even though the stock price right now isn't reflecting that. And if anything, that's a benefit because it just gives me more time to add more.

SPEAKER_00 1:03:19

Okay, let's do this one real quick. He had to correct his question. Would love your take on Amazon's current legal situation. Could it play out like Meta? Also, which Mag 7 company other than Meta would you invest in net?

SPEAKER_01 1:03:35

Um, I don't know about Amazon's uh current legal situation. I feel like every large public company has lots of legal cases, uh lawsuits that are sort of pending or ongoing. Uh usually it doesn't give me huge pause. So, you know, I would probably view Amazon's lawsuits in the same light, is that like Amazon, from my perspective, doesn't seem to be a company that uh is going to be uh massively impacted by some wrongdoing. Um so that that that's just sort of overarching viewpoint that I have on on a lot of these lawsuits. Um, with respect to which other Mag 7 company other than Meta, uh I've mentioned a few times that I think Nvidia is uh is uh would probably be on my top list of investments that I would make because um NVIDIA is the fastest growing Mag 7 company uh with a valuation that's almost on par with Meta. So um the only reason I've chosen Meta over Nvidia is because Meta is safer from my perspective on what happens in the event of a major AI slowdown in investment. So NVIDIA would be impacted immediately in the event of major AI investment slowdown. Whereas Meta basically is getting a zero valuation for all of its AI investments. And if they just stop spending, it would just be this massive cash cow. Um so because all of the revenue comes from advertisements on uh Facebook and Instagram, so they're not as tied to the AI world yet from a revenue dependency perspective.

SPEAKER_00 1:05:24

Okay, let's just do this one last one.

SPEAKER_01 1:05:26

Well, do you want to get Dustin's? I'm sorry, go ahead.

SPEAKER_00 1:05:29

I'm sorry.

SPEAKER_01 1:05:30

No, no, I I I thought it might be good to get Dustin's.

SPEAKER_03 1:05:33

I was gonna say anything important. Uh I'll be quick. So from the legal perspective, agree with Hamid. From the Mag7 perspective, Nvidia has been way more attractive recently with the amount of growth it's had and the lack of stock price move, uh, or movement. In terms of what I actually own, in addition to Meta, I own Google and Amazon. Of those two, I'd probably lean towards Google, uh. Being the more interesting investment, at least for me, mainly because I have very strong belief that Gemini, their AI model, is going to absolutely kill it across the board. And they've done well so far, but they're not, they're not at the top. And I think they will be, is my anticipation.

SPEAKER_00 1:06:22

Okay, let's just talk about Rivian and then we'll we'll end the show. Rivian's flipping between 15 and 16 for a year. Can you explain, please?

SPEAKER_01 1:06:31

For three years now. Uh it's between uh 10 and 20, just uh expanding the uh uh boundaries a little bit more. Um, I mean the stock price is the stock price. I I uh I can't like I'm patient, but um, but my question, the questions I ask from the standpoint of like, do I want to keep this investment or not? Is is the company getting better? Is the thesis of why I invested in the first place uh continuing to be solid? So in Rivian's case, is the thesis solid? Meaning my my thesis in general is that like the future is gonna be all EVs, uh, and they're probably gonna be vastly a vast majority of vehicles are gonna be self-driving. Um, so uh I want to invest in companies that are building EVs and are building self-driving technologies in that standpoint. Um, Tesla is the number one uh uh player in that space. So, you know, that would be that was my choice of investment for a long time when Tesla was also in the tens of billions of dollars uh of valuation. Uh, but now Tesla is a one and a half trillion dollar company and it has um exploded 40 times uh from when I started investing in it. And now, in my view, it's overvalued. Whereas um Rubian is uh at like something like $25 billion valuation, which is or $20 billion valuation, is current uh rough valuation, uh seems extremely undervalued for the market size that it's playing in and the type of technologies that it has and the progress that it's making towards these goals of transitioning the world to EVs and self-driving and sustainable energy. So um Rivian seems to be on course to be able to do that. Uh and uh its revenues haven't really reflected that just yet because the R2 model hadn't been out yet. Now that it's out, now that it's growing, now that their deliveries have started, this second half of this year, 2026, they're gonna deliver twice as many cars as they did last year in the second half, uh, which is huge, right? So uh the revenue growth and delivery growth is just now getting going. And uh at some point, I suspect the market can't ignore that. Uh, but you know, um, I think Rivian's best days are ahead of it.

SPEAKER_03 1:08:54

I agree with all that. In terms of it staying in this range. Look, at the end of the day, I don't know why the market does what the market does. But if I had to guess, my sense would be like we talked about earlier in the episode, there's a real risk that Rivian goes to zero. There's also a real uh chance that Rivian succeeds wildly, right? So the market is also undecided of where it's going to go. And as it gets more and more obvious which direction it will be, and hopefully it's on the positive side, as Hamid said, the business is only getting stronger and stronger, especially after the release of R2. The market will eventually adjust and break out of this range once it's clear that Rivian is here to stay. Um, it's just hard because one, it's it's very capital intensive to create a new uh car company, especially a EV company. And it really, at least in the US, is hasn't really been done successfully except for Tesla. Most of the time these companies fail. Right. Most of the time these companies fail. So the odds are technically not in Rivian's favor if you're only looking at the odds. But if you're looking at how the company is executing and operating, then I would say the odds are actually in their favor.

SPEAKER_01 1:10:20

So that's my take. Agreed. And and every other A V startup has basically failed. I mean, Lucid is another uh example of one that is like on the verge of bankruptcy at any moment, right? Like uh and it's a major player in this, you know, it's like Tesla, Rivian, Lucid. So the the um the graveyard is full of dead companies, and it doesn't look good from that perspective. But but Rivian has a lot of money, it has a lot of backings from uh major players like Volkswagen and Amazon. Uh, it has partners and its revenues are growing, and its customer base is uh fanatics. Uh that they love their products, and they're again uh this R2 product seems to be a huge hit. So um awesome. Are we ending it there, Adrian?

SPEAKER_03 1:11:07

Yeah, we're ending it there.

SPEAKER_01 1:11:09

All right, very cool. That was a long slightly longer show. I was I was thinking we're gonna run out of material, but no, never, never.

SPEAKER_03 1:11:19

Uh okay, thanks everyone. Episode 55 in the books. In the books. Thanks, everyone. Bye.