Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to What Are Your Thoughts? America's favorite investing live stream. I am your host, Downtown Josh Brown. My co-host is with me as always, introducing Michael Batnick for first-time viewers and listeners. Michael, say hello.
Hello, Josh. You are slowly morphing into Fabio before our very eyes. It's really incredible. The transformation is almost complete.
It's — I am assuming my final form. All I'm missing right now is a tan. I haven't — I haven't been in the sun in a minute.
I know. I'm going — I'm going back to Boca next week. All right, guys. This is — this is a show where Michael and I discuss the number one, two, three, four, and five most important things happening in the market at the present moment, or at least what we deem to be the ones most worth discussing. Want to thank everybody who's joining us on YouTube for the live premiere. We appreciate you guys. Have fun. Treat each other well. We have a sponsor tonight. Michael, tell us who the sponsor is.
That's right, Josh. This podcast is sponsored by Neuberger. Wondering how you might adjust your fixed income allocations in today's environment?
Yes. Oh, I'm in on this. With central bank policy diverging and economic growth shifting, staying parked in cash or ultra-short funds could mean yield left uncaptured as the market moves forward.
That's right, Josh. Moving out on the curve, even modestly, may offer a potential yield advantage without stretching for duration. That's why you might consider the Neuberger Short Duration Income ETF, ticker NBSD. NBSD aims for consistent and efficient income, investing across rates and credit markets at the front end of the curve, targeting an investment grade risk profile.
Explore NBSD, including risks and important information, at neuberger.com/nbsd. Investors should consider the fund's investment objectives, risks, fees, and expenses carefully before investing. This and other important information can be found in the fund's prospectus and, if available, summary prospectus, which you can obtain by calling 877-628-2583. Please read the prospectus and, if available, the summary prospectus carefully before making an investment. Neuberger Berman BD LLC is the distributor of the fund and a finder.
Josh, before we get into the first topic, which is a juicy one, I just want to say how much I missed you last week watching Chart Kid shine like the star that he is. I was at cruising altitude. Was I 30,000 feet in the air? I think so. And I was watching him just deliver. I was watching all of the people support him in the comment section, which I was beaming with pride. So thank you to everybody that came out and supported him, showered him with views and praise. He was awesome.
You know, we really try so hard to keep the show going every week, no matter what. And when it was just Michael and I all the time, it would be pretty tough to — you know, we're both executives at a wealth management firm. This is not — this is not so easy to balance actually being market participants and working in the industry with doing the show. But having Shawn and Chart Kid in reserve — these are not bench players. These are A-list players that arguably could easily run a show of their own. So it is really cool that when one of us is incapacitated, there's a ton of talent behind it. So I totally agree. All right. Michael, are we one step away from sell?
Does it feel that way at all, or not? Or do you not feel it?
Listen, I listen to the market. I listen. I feel it. And right now, I think the message is pretty clear, and I don't think it's telling you to sell, even though it's very easy to draw that conclusion. So I will present evidence to the jurors later in the show. But let's hear what Savita has to say.
Well, I would say if you're listening to the market and you're being at all intellectually honest about what's gone on over the last 17 years, almost 18 years, the message of the market is: I dare you to sell. Like, I dare you. Do it. Do it. Watch what happens. Because that's been the history. We're not even in a 5% pullback from the high, which is pretty remarkable given all of the things that we're contending with. But that's why my take is that's the message of the market. You said something on the show last week that I really wanted to expand because I thought it was the most important comment of the show. Or was that two weeks ago? I don't know. You said there's no fear in this market, pointing to a VIX at 16. But there's plenty of doubt, and the doubt, I think, can be measured in the contracting multiples as quarter after quarter we see record high earnings, above-consensus numbers, upside surprises, and increased forward guidance, and yet the multiple we're willing to pay for earnings is actually shrinking despite the fact that the market's up 14% on the year, earnings are up way more. So I think that's the perfect encapsulation of 2026. Like, if I had to explain it in one sentence, I would say: no fear, tons of doubt. What are your thoughts?
I mean, I agree with everything you said quoting me. Those are my thoughts. I totally agree.
All right, I want to show you something that we have periodically checked in on over the years. Savita Subramanian is like the equity quant strategist at Bank of America. She's one of our favorites here on the show. We can't get her to come on the show. But that's all — she's always like, 'Yeah, yeah, I want to do it.' And then we go to schedule it and...
She's on sabbatical. All right. Anyway, we love Savita. Okay. Her new note was pretty provocative. Came out over the weekend. This is her sell-side indicator. The sell-side indicator — thank you, John — sell-side indicator increased in September and is now just 30 basis points from a sell signal. The blue line is what you're paying attention to. And I guess what this is, is it's measuring — the red line is extreme bullishness based on strategists' recommended allocation, I believe, and then the green line is extreme bearishness. And we've been sort of in between going back to 2014, 2015, give or take. Like, we really haven't had a breakout above or below. And that's why this line continues to converge. So it's a much narrower band than it used to be. But I want to — can I — let me quote Savita and then I want to get your reaction to this. The sell-side indicator is a contrarian chart of sentiment signal that tracks sell-side strategists' average recommended allocation to equities in a balanced fund. So like, are they saying 70/30? Are they saying 50/50? That's how they get this number. And it's had incredible moments, this indicator, where it has picked up on extreme bullishness and has served as a good sell signal. It's also had great buy signal moments historically, which is why we pay attention to it. It's not perfect. It's not like an amazing timing tool to the day, but I think it gives you a pretty good idea of where the street is and how extreme that is in both directions. We're still on neutral, but we're approaching sell, and we're 30 basis points away, which is pretty much there. And she gets into the whole history of it, but I think the bottom line here is — I'll quote Savita: 'While our SSI suggests equity optimism approaching cautionary levels, AAII, which is a separate survey, indicates there are still some bears. The bull-bear spread fell to minus 25 percentage points in mid-September, roughly 1.5 standard deviations above its 10-year average, but has since ticked up. Historically, next 12-month S&P 500 total returns have been slightly stronger when the spread was 1 to 2 standard deviations below its 10-year average than when it was 1 to 2 standard deviations above.' So, the relationship is noisy. And I think just to focus on the strategists themselves one more time on the chart, I would not say a break above this red line puts a hard stop on the bull market, but it's just one more notable thing that the street has grown increasingly bullish in terms of their allocation recommendation. One more arrow in the quiver of people that want to be contrarian.
Do you feel — I understand that what you just showed us is quantitative. It's like measuring data, measuring people's feelings.
One particular group's feelings.
Yes. Yes. Who want to keep their jobs on Wall Street.
There are many other metrics that you can point to, such as — and this is just another data point — equity ETF inflows have cooled dramatically. That is not a feeling. That is a data point. This is a feeling, as you mentioned, the AAII bull-bear stuff has been pretty skewed to the bears. Does it feel, this note notwithstanding, that there is extreme bullishness for stocks?
No. You know what it feels like? Exactly what I started off saying, what you said. There's no fear. Like, we're not seeing this race to buy puts. We're not seeing this race to put on hedges. It's just — that's not what's happening. It could change today, but not yet. However, the amount of skepticism in the market — but the thing is, people who dictate portfolio allocations on Wall Street for a living are tired of being rug-pulled. And every time they get negative, and every time they suggest lower your equity exposure or they drop their target for the S&P or whatever the case may be, they look stupid a month later. And I really think that that's what's keeping the VIX in check and that's what's keeping the strategists' allocations high. So what I would say to Savita if she were here right now is, I'm going to give you this big fat asterisk, which does not show up in the data, but trust me, talk to enough people and you'll know it's real. These guys do not want to get bearish. They don't want to get Mike Wilson'd. Nobody wants — if you have that job, you want to keep that job. And again, the market is daring you to get bearish. It's saying, 'Go ahead, do it. Do it. Flip bearish. I dare you.' The index is at an all-time high right now. And I am surprised that the VIX is still at 16. I am surprised how the index is hitting new highs despite interest rates going up seemingly every single day.
Yeah. 36% earnings growth for the Nasdaq will do that to you. That's like — that'll happen. You'll get people saying, 'I can't get out yet.' That's why — that's the — By the way, I'm not mocking the Wall Street strategists. What are they supposed to do? You know how important a factor in their models earnings is? It might be — I mean, depending on the firm and depending on the strategist, it might be the most important factor that goes into their allocation advice. What would be more important than earnings growth? It's probably number one for all these guys and gals. So I sort of get it. The guys at Renaissance Macro are not as sanguine as the strategists on the street. So this is Jeff deGraaf. I want to show you him saying the VIX won't budge, feels ominous. Let me tell you what's in the chart and then you can react to it. He's showing the VIX index, which is on the bottom in black. It is literally flat. It has been flatlining since March. No uptick in sight. 16.39 as of, I guess, the weekend. The blue line is the J.P. Morgan Global FX Volatility Index. So there's a lot more happening in currency markets in terms of vol than we're seeing in stocks. And then the orange line — the maroon line, I should say — is the BofA MOVE Index. And so they're looking at bond yield volatility. So you've got volatility in bond yields, you've got volatility in currencies, the stock market is in a coma. What do you think? I have another one from Renaissance Macro, but what do you think about what we're looking at here?
I wonder if the VIX is the right measure. Like, I don't know enough about this in this day and age.
Yeah, but if — right, because of the concentration,
because of how well large tech has held up relative to everything else, I don't know that it really tells you the right story. If there was a VIX for the 493, for example, I think it would look a lot different.
There is. We've seen — like, Nick Colas has done this. He's done the VIX of the Russell 2000. He's done the VIX of the Nasdaq. I've seen it for semiconductors. He does have these alternatives, but I still think all of that stuff gets captured by the overall VIX number. It gets — look, Apple's in a product cycle and making record highs. Nvidia made a record high two days in a row. Just wild, wild. These are the number one and two largest stocks on earth. So when you have the index being buffeted by that sort of tranquilizer — you know, you look at the VIX, the VIX is supposed to capture the S&P. Those are the two most important stocks in the S&P mathematically. Microsoft is stabilized. Meta is now in rally mode. Like, these are gigantic stocks. Amazon is flat but not down. These are the gigantic stocks that are pacifying the VIX or the holders of the S&P. I want to show you the market cycle clock from Renaissance Macro. We have brought this on the show before. Basically, they're not saying use this for timing to the day, but what they are saying is bad stuff happens when we're up in this top right-hand quadrant. And I could barely read this, but...
Yeah, what are these? It looks like it's growth and inflation.
All right, this is Renaissance Macro. In 2018, rates were rising with a new Fed chair, and our market cycle clock was in the upper right. We know what happened then. In the year 2018, we had two separate bear markets. One negative 17, one negative 21. I think the first one started in February and the second one started in October or November. Very unusual to have two giant double-digit declines in the S&P inside of one year. And they're pointing out it was a moment where the market cycle clock was right on October 1st, 1987. Dun dun dun. Our market cycle clock was in a similar zone. We're not calling for a crash. Just a reminder: bad things tend to happen when growth and inflation are in a similar position with the Fed raising rates. The good news here is the Fed looks to be on pause through at least October, which is the month that we're in now. But as Neil Dutta points out, their bias is to remain tight. So I thought of this. The funniest outcome here would be more people paying attention to this and saying, 'Wait, economic growth is this, inflation is that, the Fed just tightened, may tighten again, probably a tightening before a cutting.' Funniest outcome would be everybody gets all worked up and then we have an October flush and then earnings season starts, which is right around the corner, and all the reports start coming out, jackpot one after another, and the whole market just rips into year end. Wouldn't that be hilarious?
Sure. The way that I see it, the market is not going to all of a sudden wake up to what's been happening for the past couple of weeks and months. That's usually not how it works. Like, all of a sudden, collectively, we're going to say, 'Holy —'
6% on the 10-year is what pushes everyone over.
Did you know that the 10-year is 5.3%? Yeah, everyone does know that. Do you know that inflation is this and the Fed is that? Yeah, everyone knows that. So in order for there to be a material come-down in the stock market, I think you're going to need something that we don't already know.
6% on the 10-year would get the job done.
Maybe. I mean, probably. I wouldn't argue that.
Okay. I don't see it happening, but a miss out of a big financial the first week of earnings season — Wells Fargo or Bank of America, both of which are in pretty big drawdowns — one of them comes out and says something messed up about their bond portfolio or like — I'm trying to contrive an out-of-left-field scenario that's somewhat plausible, but I think it's hard to do that because you know there's no evidence that that's what's going to happen. We're just — you have to literally make something up. Another potential reason for the stock market to sell off that didn't take: Meta and Microsoft talking about pulling back on the frontier models usage. Like, that could have been a chink in the armor and the stock market just does not want to sell off right now. Could change.
A successful rocket strike on a pipeline by the Houthis.
I mean, sure. Yeah. Saudi Arabia is in there driving over people on the beach. Like, it's becoming a literal conflagration in the Middle East that's expanding beyond this Strait of Hormuz theater. That's the other side of the Arabian Peninsula now, an active war zone. I mean, these are the things that you have to think about. My point is there are so many — not potential — there are so many risks today staring us in the face and the stock market is looking past it. I think you should listen to that.
Is all of the stock market looking past it, or just the meaningful companies that move the chains for the index?
Fair point, and we'll get into that later. I want to — anything else before we get to the bear case?
Why won't you flip bearish? Why is this so difficult?
I'm listening. The market is telling me to stay bullish. We'll get to that in a second. I have evidence later.
All right. Michael Burry tweeted this morning, the stock market is quite obviously in its first stage of grief, denial, per 2000 and 2008. This stage lasts six to nine months.
It sounds like the opening of a TheStreet.com column.
Yeah, maybe. Okay. I don't know.
Who is this for? The last five people following him that have money left? I don't even understand — like, why is he doing — why is he enjoying this? Does he think that he's like really gonna save everyone? Maybe that's what he — I want to ascribe to him like the most positive possible motivation because I don't think he's a supervillain. I don't think he's like, 'I'm going to trick everybody.' I don't think that at all about him. I think he means well.
I agree. I don't think that he's trying to lose anybody money. I think he's doing what he says he's doing. I think he believes — I think that he has the battle scars to remember what it's like to be 100% sure you're right and the market is wrong. So I think that he's — yeah, of course he's trying to do the right thing.
We talked about this before, though. There's also this element, and I know people that have been afflicted by this, where like their fondest professional memories were that one time where they were right and everyone else was wrong and they saved the day and they were carried off the floor of the New York Stock Exchange like they just won the NCAA championship. And in his case...
It was that on steroids. Not only did he really — he didn't save the day, but he was the one that was right when everyone told him he was wrong.
And it took three years for that to bear out, but it did bear out. And not only was he celebrated, they made a Hollywood movie about it.
He was played by Christian Bale. So, I'm not inside his head. I don't know him, but I can't imagine that not messing with you just as a normal person.
Totally. You're like — you're chasing that feeling now for the rest of your life. Like, I want to be that guy again. I want that thing to happen again. It's almost impossible not to. I would be the same way.
Yeah. Yeah. And guess what? Who knows what the world is going to look like in six to nine months.
Maybe he'll be right. Maybe lightning will strike twice and he will be the guy that called the bear market twice. You know, the thing is, I don't know if you can have credit for that if you're negative for 200%.
Okay, so that's the thing. He's been doing this for a long time. The goalposts keep moving. He keeps finding new reasons to be bearish. And the most recent credible bear case was from November 2025. So about a year ago, I'm sure everybody remembers when he talked about understating depreciation by extending the useful life of assets artificially boosts earnings — one of the more common frauds of the modern era. Basically, that these chips will lose their value fast and these companies aren't accounting for it. All right, fast forward to today. A16z did a state of the markets and they showed the reports of obsolescence greatly exaggerated. They showed the GPUs getting more valuable over time. So, look at this. I can't read this, but what's one of the earliest chips? Is it the H100? The blue line?
Yeah, I can't see which one it is.
There's still — I can't see it on my screen, but...
It doesn't matter. The point is...
They're still in use. They're still in active use.
The ones that are years old, years and years old, are not budging at all in terms of what people are willing to pay to rent them.
Not at all. There's still a massive shortage.
Yeah. And then the other thing, and we've talked about this on the show before, I understand that there's a political backlash to data centers. They're unpopular with pretty much everyone other than like, you know, 50,000 people who live in Northern California and private credit firms, rather. Nobody else likes it. The people that don't like it have like a whole spectrum of reasons ranging from environmental to 'oh my god, this factory you're building next to my town is also going to take my job.' It's super popular politically right now in the season that we're in for people of both parties to call for moratoriums, the governors in different states to harass these developments with more environmental red tape like that. We all understand that. But even still, there is enough construction currently in progress that's not going to be stopped. And there are enough states and municipalities that do want them. Which means when these companies come out and tell you — Micron just recently — what their guidance is going to be for next year, and not only is it not being tempered, it's actually being ratcheted up. Like, I sort of believe them. I think the orders are the orders, and more importantly the replacement cycle. And Burry's whole case about, you know, this whole buildout is based on false accounting because the depreciation — these chips are going to depreciate on a different schedule than what the guidance is saying. I sort of feel like it's melting like an ice sculpture right now, and maybe...
Yeah. Well, maybe he would say like, 'Oh, it's still early. You'll see. Inference is burning out chips faster than you think.' And that thesis has been proven to be incorrect. One of the hypothetical bear cases that we had pondered is eventually investors will not show up to the auctions.
Over the last couple of weeks, we've made a point to talk about — for bonds.
Yeah. We've made a point to talk about how much money — we talk a lot about the liabilities, but the assets are overwhelming. The amount of money looking for a home is changing a lot of things. Now, that is not a forever phenomenon, but for right now, that is certainly the case. And this idea that maybe investors won't show up for a hyperscaler bond auction, I think you could put that to bed. And I will present to you this as evidence. Potential investors — this is from the Journal, I believe — potential investors placed orders of $150 billion of Paramount debt. Paramount, dude. A strong showing that nearly tripled.
Well, they know it's really backed by Oracle.
Doesn't matter. Okay. Oh, and Oracle is the best money in the world, dude. Tripled. It was the largest — I don't think it was investment grade — it was one of the largest public bond offerings ever. They tried to get $52 billion and got $150 billion for Paramount.
Do we know what the yield was on that?
I don't know, 9% maybe. This idea that Amazon or Meta is going to have trouble building out the infrastructure from fixed income investors — not today. One of the things we touched on, and it's worth repeating in this conversation: for as long as I've been in this business, which is almost three decades, there's been this idea that the bond market is the smart money. And not that the bond market will front-run what's going to happen in the equity market, but just like that's where the people who are more cerebral are at play and therefore that signal is more important, which we know is complete nonsense. But I actually would say recently that's been flipped on its head. If the equity is strong, the bond buyers will show up for the bonds. And I think Meta is the best case in point. I actually think we stopped talking about these tech bond auctions the minute Meta launched Muse and the stock price ripped 30% in two weeks. All of a sudden, I think that changed the conversation about the bond offerings to fund the AI data centers because people looked at that and said, 'Oop, Meta has a new product. It's hot. Everybody's downloading it and they're going to find a way to monetize it and we should stop talking about Meta bonds the same way that we might talk about CoreWeave bonds.' And so I think that was the conversation changer, and it's only October 6th today. Like, that happened less than a month ago.
Microsoft too, for that matter, hitting 52-week highs pretty quietly, I should say.
Yes. And I think that — so I think this idea that the bond market is the stronger signal — no, I don't think so. I think the fixed income buyers pay a lot of attention to the prices of stocks, and when they see a stock price rally, I think they look at the bonds as well. The stock guys figured out that this is going to be an AI winner. I'm not so worried about the debt this time. So I agree with you that that pillar of the bear case, where we're going to lose the credit market, maybe in the future, but like not today. That is not a working thesis for right now. So I like it.
Can I give you a crazy stat to set up the FICO conversation?
So FICO is one of these interesting companies. It's called Fair Isaac Corporation, and your FICO score is in the public lexicon. It's like the widely accepted — when you talk about your credit, what's your FICO score? So it's actually interesting that the score takes its name from the ticker symbol of the company.
I can't think of any other examples of that.
So listen to this. So the stock is getting destroyed, which is the topic of the show, but chart off for a sec. So I had Charin and Sean look at this because prior to the current decline, which is — I don't know if it's off 70% off its highs — the stock peaked in November 2024.
So, there are 220 stocks in the S&P 500 right now that were also in the index in 1990.
Okay. Got it. So over the last 36 years, there are 220 stocks that were in the index that stayed or came in and out. And in November 2024, prior to the current decline, FICO was the number one performing S&P 500 stock since 1990. The number one.
Correct. Out of 220 stocks that were still in the index 36 years later. FICO. Okay. Why am I so surprised? Because I'm an idiot. I guess my assumption would have been — if you said to me, of the 220 stocks that have maintained index status from 1990 to today, what's the best performer? I would have made two comments. I would have said, it's got to be a big one.
Oh, 100%. That would have been my guess. But I would have said it has to be a big one. This is not even a big stock. Even at its peak in 2024, it was not a big stock. What's the market cap on this? So 230 companies. Okay, that's the number. Even including the decline, Josh. So even...
Including the 60 or 70% drawdown, whatever it is, it's the 10th best performer compounding at 20% a year, even including the crash. So it has been a massive winner because it is a monopoly, or it was.
If you held it for 36 years, which I'm guessing nobody in the shareholder base has done with the exception of one or two long-term shareholders. Put up the chart. So basically, this is a company that had a monopoly. Not like, oh, they're monopolistic. No, like an actual monopoly. Like they owned Boardwalk and had four hotels on it. Like the FICO score is FICO score and there's no other FICO. So for any kind of credit approval that you need, this was it. This was it. The stock has been falling since the advent of AI because I think the threat of, well, there are going to be new ways for people to calculate a better read on each consumer.
I think that was... You don't think that was in the stock at all?
Maybe a tiny bit. Nobody that actually knows anything is selling it for that reason.
You think the housing market weakness is part of it?
Two things. It's the housing market and software.
So this is at the epicenter of... you're [__] now.
The two worst things happening in the market right now: software disruption and housing.
So this stock, this company was a victim of its own success. John, fast forward to the two purple lines where you see the price and the margin.
So what happened was their margins were... their operating margins were like 20 to 30% for decades, and then...
And then they got greedy. They took their pricing up from like say a dollar a score up to $5, and then the FHFA, Federal Housing Finance Agency, said, wait a minute.
Bill Pulte said no, no [__].
So the three other... the three bureaus, which are TransUnion, Equifax and Experian,
But that's mostly credit card stuff.
So they have this company called VantageScore, which... that's not new.
They had that in 2006, but the federal government shot that down and said no FICO or nothing. So that regulation got shot down, got repealed, and since then Rocket and United are relying on this thing heavily from zero up to... show up this chart. So there's a subset called just value.
They're relying on the VantageScore.
VantageScore, which is coming from another company.
It's coming from the three bureaus. They own this thing collectively.
Right, like the banks collectively own Zelle.
Exactly. So Rocket was at zero. It's now 41%. United was at zero. It's now at 26%.
Stop. Explain. So 41% of people going for a mortgage with Rocket are being rated by...
VantageScore instead of FICO.
So people could have... So that just happened. That's the chart you showed me is showing that started at zero in May.
This monopoly was ripped away from Fair Isaac in the span of the summer of 2026. It's insane.
So this is a very, very interesting story. I was listening to the call this morning trying to get educated on this, and the CEO opened the call saying, with another strong quarter, we are increasing our fiscal 2026 guidance. They're buying back a [__]load of shares. All the numbers are going up and to the right. It's very unusual, very unusual to see a stock down 60% with little fundamental deterioration. Now, the street's not stupid. I'm not saying this stock is a buy. I have no idea. There is not a credible threat. There is a threat to the monopoly and the price.
An existing threat that exists today. Yes.
Yeah. So the same way that Salesforce was getting credit for being able to raise their price as far as the eye can see, that's over, and now Wall Street is rerating the stock, and who knows what the right value is for this new company.
Right. So the reason the FHFA and Bill Pulte's action was important is because that's Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac using that pricing framework. And now there is an option.
The consumer ultimately is bearing these costs because all of this goes into your closing costs. The banks are not eating it. They're passing it to you. Rocket Mortgage said they tested both systems and they determined that VantageScore qualified more prospective buyers while offering borrowers an average closing savings of $1,600 per loan. That's why it went from zero to 40%. Because priced in the millions of users, that is real money. FICO actually went from 60 cents to as high as $10.
And so I think I agree with you. This is fascinating.
You know it's the worst. It's the number one worst performing stock in the S&P 500 year to date. It's down 60%.
Yeah. And all the analysts had to cut it because it's like there was an earthquake that swallowed up this company's advantage overnight. So like Goldman cut it, Wells Fargo cut it. There's securities fraud investigations going on, whether or not management misled the public regarding regulatory risks. It's a really interesting story, and it got me thinking. Can you think of another company today where by the stroke of a pen, some government official or some act of Congress, their advantage could vanish in two seconds?
Apple with the App Store.
I was thinking that. Like somebody very powerful, it would probably come from the Democrats. They get somebody in position that can actually win, which takes years, could actually win an antitrust case that gets them to open up the App Store at less than a 30% vig.
Yeah, that'd be catastrophic.
The thing is that's slow moving. There's no one person like in the case of the FHFA that could say, I hereby demand competition. I don't think there's no one person powerful enough to do that, where Apple is that reliant on it. The other examples I thought of were the refiners. Like we haven't built a new refinery in this country I think since the 1970s. So you sort of have three companies that own all refining capacity: Valero, Phillips, and Marathon, which are the number one, two, and three performing stocks in the XLE this year. I think they've all doubled. But the stroke of a pen, like some jurisdiction says, we want a refiner here. We're going to allow new companies to submit bids for proposal. I mean, this is far-fetched, but like there are companies in the stock market that have these de facto or actual monopolies, and we don't see things like this very often where the government just takes it away. And I think the stock prices reacted appropriately because now you have to rethink all of your assumptions and their pricing power.
Yeah, very interesting story. All right, let's talk about the unbrodening. We spent a lot of, I guess, spring into summer celebrating the fact that so many stocks were participating in a rally. It was nice to see for a change, and right now...
