Anyone who's got

their profitability is all about the

future, not the present, then higher

interest rates hurt them. But what it

reveals is the vulnerability of parts of

this boom, which is if there's a bunch

of AI investments that make a lot of

sense when interest rates are 3%, but no

sense when interest rates are 5%,

[music] then that says fairly small

tweaks could have big effects on stocks,

which is literally what we saw on

Friday. So, I'm not saying anything new,

but it sort of says strap in because

changes in investor sentiment could have

big effects.

>> [music]

>> Welcome to Profiting Markets. [music]

I'm Ed Elson. It is June 9th. Let's

check in on yesterday's market vitals.

The S&P 500 and the NASDAQ rebounded

from Friday's sell-off. More on that in

a second. Chip makers rallied with Intel

jumping 10% on news that Google ordered

3 million chips from the company. Oil

eased as Israel and Iran pledged to halt

their strikes. And finally, Apple stock

fell nearly 2% on lackluster AI product

news at its developer conference.

Okay. What else is happening?

>> [music]

>> The May jobs report dropped on Friday,

and while it was a blowout, markets took

it as bad news. The economy added

172,000

jobs last month, more than double what

forecasters expected. The unemployment

rate held steady at 4.3% plus the March

and April reports were also revised

higher. Adding another 93,000

jobs. However, this strong report caused

a massive sell-off on Friday. The S&P

[music] closed down almost 3% and the

NASDAQ fell more than 4%. That was its

worst drop since liberation day. So,

here to unpack this report and also why

markets [music] reacted so badly, we are

speaking with Justin Wolfers, Professor

of Public Policy and Economics at the

University of Michigan and also founder

of platypus economics. Justin, great to

see you. Thank you for joining us again

on the show. I want to get into the

market's reaction, but before we do

that, let's first just make sense of

this jobs report which was seemingly

really strong. 172,000 jobs added in

May. The previous reports revised

upward.

Give us your read on on what we saw in

that jobs report.

>> I think we just saw really really good

news.

The re- I feel fairly confident and

comfortable saying that, but I want to

be clear. I will not normally see

172,000 and jump for joy. I'll normally

say look for confirmation with a few

other few more months. And so one of the

things that was so interesting is we're

now at three very strong months in a

row.

So I'm more impressed by the fact that

over the past 3 months we've averaged

job growth round about that pace. I

think it's 188,000 a month.

For folks who are keeping score at home,

that's the sort of my mom's a very very

hard taskmaster, but if I brought home

jobs numbers like that, my mom would

probably say, well done Justin. Good

job.

And so I'd say that to the US economy.

Well done.

>> What about people who who see this jobs

report and I've seen this online and

they say, I don't believe it. They're

lying.

You know, this is some sort of graft

from the president. I mean it seems that

a lot of people this is seemingly good

news. A lot of people don't want to hear

the good news because maybe their

experience of the economy isn't great or

they don't support the president. I

mean, what would you say to those people

who don't believe those numbers?

>> Yeah. So I'm actually going to put out a

piece tomorrow probably

if tomorrow's Wednesday

which dives into exactly that set of

issues and I'm going to like

relentlessly bore the hell out of my

audience. So let me instead be fun and

entertaining for yours.

Um

My favorite moment was look, I like to

read the data in the most honest way I

can. And so, when you see good news, you

say, "You beauty." Um

My favorite moment was by the way, I got

uh just an enormous amount of social

media vitriol

for It's completely clear that I've

spent far too much time praising the

president recently, and people are upset

at me.

Um

But, you know, my my attachments to the

truth not to a political narrative. My

favorite of these, by the way, is

Threads now has community notes.

And I there's a

post I I put out I mean

in which I say, you know, the economy's

going well, blah blah blah. There's now

a Threads community note

checking that and saying I'm wrong

quoting a different

uh post by Justin Wolfers.

Uh

>> Oh, wow.

>> Uh

So, I actually think it's it's great.

It's a good reminder for all of us to

have a little bit of intellectual

flexibility, to be willing to change our

minds, to be willing to update when the

moment demands it. I will say to you

very directly, there is no evidence

whatsoever

that this number has been in any way

falsified or tampered with.

Um

No data are perfect. This data surely is

not perfect. It's just an estimate. It

may later on turn out to be an

overestimate, but it's a good, honest,

totally serious estimate, and we should

update our views about the world

accordingly.

>> Yeah. Just in terms of where the

strength is in in the job market, and

what's something that we've been keeping

track of is over the past few months

really, the I guess

more than a year now, it seems as though

the one place where the job market is

really strengthening and growing is

health care, and then everything else

seems to be kind of lagging. Is that

still true?

>> Yes, absolutely. So, it's um it's

there's one sector called health care

and social services.

>> Yeah.

>> Uh which is since Trump became president

has created 901,000

jobs.

Everything else, every other part of the

economy, if you're not working in health

care and social services, the rest of

the economy actually has lost jobs.

Um,

now,

on its face, that's a very striking

claim. Um,

and you know, the last 3 months has been

a little bit more mixed than that, but

you know, you never want to go off 1

month, so that's why I'm saying, you

know, over the past year, it's all been

health care and social services.

Now, here's the thing, the rate at which

we're creating jobs overall is fairly

low.

That's because population growth is low.

So, the number of jobs we need to create

when there are fewer Americans is far

lower.

And so, what that in turn means is

there's always some industries doing

better than others,

but the closer you are to the whole not

growing very much, the e- the more

likely it is you'll end up in a world in

which one sector's doing all the

positive and everything else is a

negative. So,

the statistic, I think, is a very, very

interesting talking point, but it may

actually be somewhat less relevant than

it sounds like, simply because in a

low-growth economy, it's not unusual for

a bunch of sectors to be declining.

>> Yeah. Now, [snorts] just turning to the

stock market, uh, fell pretty

precipitously, and it's kind of

interesting why that is happening. Could

you just walk us through why are

investors not excited about this report

that seems to be showing that the

economy is doing well?

>> Yeah, so, um,

the first thing is, you know, very

strong jobs numbers. So, now, what you

want to do is go and play the game of

Federal Reserve. Um, and so, the Fed was

under some pressure to cut rates cuz it

was worried about the labor market.

We're not worried about it anymore, no

pressure to cut rates. It was under

pressure to raise rates cuz we're

worried about inflation.

So, we went from a somewhat balanced

argument to one of the arguments just

going off the table altogether. So, now,

the only question is, there's inflation

out there, what do you want to do about

it?

And the argument would be between those

who are like, well, it's a supply shock.

Let's just sit and wait for it to work

its way through the system. And others

who are like, I'm worried everything.

We're going to lose everything. Um,

let's hike rates, which is definitely

the position that young Kevin Walsh

would have taken.

We'll see what a grown-up one does in

just a few days time. So, step one,

strong economy. Step two, higher

interest rates for quite a quite a fair

way out now.

Um, and then step three

is as you said, markets overall um

shut the There's sort of two US stock

markets. So, you were just reporting on

the S&P 500 or on the the Nasdaq.

Uh, Goldman Sachs has recently put

together a very nice index, which is the

S&P 500. And we're going to take out of

it everyone who's AI or AI adjacent.

So, it's the non-AI

stock market.

And it turns out the non-AI stock market

rose by like a couple of hundredths of a

percentage point, but it rose. You know,

so I want you to think of it as flat.

So, all the market reaction, none of it

was in

Main Street.

It was all in Silicon Valley.

And that and then the question would be

why would that be? And that's because

the you know, the AI bet's a long-run

bet.

That OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and

Nvidia are going to be worth a lot in

the future in our new

AI driven future.

The higher our interest rates,

the less investors value profits that

are going to occur 10, 20, 30 years in

the future.

And so, that's exactly what happened.

So, uh the particularly startups, but

you know, generally anyone who's got

their profitability is all about the

future, not the present, then higher

interest rates hurt them. And so, I

think that's the story

for what happened. Now, I think the

somewhat broader and more interesting

thing is

the logic of that

pretty much makes sense. But what it

reveals is the vulnerability of parts of

this boom, which is if there's a bunch

of AI investments that make a lot of

sense when interest rates are 3% but no

sense when interest rates are 5%, then

that says fairly small tweaks could have

big effects on stocks, which is

literally what we saw on Friday. So I'm

not saying anything new, but it sort of

says strap in because um

changes in investor sentiment could have

big effects on the AI sector, which is

now such a big part

of US stocks.

>> Yes. And it was one of the key themes

going into 2026 from an investor

perspective, which is that we were

entering what we all thought was a

rate-cutting environment. And now it

appears after this data, which yes,

gives us good news, but it essentially

means that we all have one problem, and

that problem is inflation. What do we

want to do about it? The only real

solution to that, if you're at the

Federal Reserve, is you hike rates. And

now we look at the odds on Cal sheet of

of a rate hike before the end of the

year in 2026, it's gone up to around

52%. So it seems very probable. I guess

I think we're all on the same page if we

enter a rate-hiking environment, that's

not a great thing for stocks,

particularly these tech stocks that you

mentioned.

Uh but then there's a question of

how probable is it really?

And that probably goes back to

inflation. How bad is this inflation

problem? Yes, it's nice that we have

this employment problem out of the way,

we think, based on the jobs report. But

I guess my question to you is, given

what you're seeing in the inflation,

given given how quote-unquote good this

jobs report actually was, how likely is

a rate hike really?

>> I think it's currently more likely the

next move is up. Um it may not be too

far away.

There is an unknown, which is who is

Kevin Warsh. We're going to learn more

about that over the next few months.

Um

this old game it gets played out every

couple of years and then a bright young

explainer, in this case it's your turn

Ed, has to explain

good news is bad news.

And

>> [laughter]

>> I've always So, so you'd see this every

couple of years, which is something

unequivocally good happens, like the

labor market's healthier, the economy's

healthier, we haven't beaten it to

death.

And then Wall Street gets a little bit

too clever and it says, "Oh, well, so

that's going to cause the Fed to

overreact."

And the Fed will screw everything up, so

good news is bad news.

I've never been a fan of this story.

Um, because the other possibility is the

Fed could underreact.

Anytime you're confident you know which

way the Fed's going to screw things up,

you then have to say, "Well, and this is

how I know I'm smarter than the Fed."

And I know a lot of Fed economists and a

lot of them are smarter than a lot of

the rest of us on the outside and

collectively they're brilliant.

Um,

I think there's probably a reasonable

basis for the claim that

good news raises rates, which tilts the

playing field against firms whose

profits are a long way in the future. I

think that's not quite the full stupid

good news is bad news routine, but you

might start to see the good news is bad

news routine and then that's going to

It's going to be great for the show, Ed,

because every 2 weeks you're going to

have to explain it from first principles

slowly and um

>> [laughter]

>> you'll sound really clever. It'll be

good.

Have you already been doing it all week?

>> wait.

>> [laughter]

>> I can't wait. This is exactly what we

do.

>> Yeah.

>> Good news is bad news contradictions,

that's what it's all about. Just before

we we wrap here, the one thing I'd like

to point out is wage growth, which wages

rose 3.4%, but inflation's currently at

3.8%.

This is the bad thing if we're talking

just from a purely economics

perspective, which is that real wages

are falling. Um, I I just wanted to get

your read on what we're seeing in terms

of wages. This seems like

not a good trajectory. Uh, and I wonder

if it's going to continue.

>> Right. So, wages aren't keeping up with

prices. That's what you're seeing right

now. That's a magnificent talking point

if you live in DC and people in DC are

going to say it a lot. Now, part of that

is the spike in prices is very dramatic,

very recent, and very oil-based, and we

think probably temporary as in even if

oil prices stay high,

they're not going to continue to

contribute to inflation, which is the

rate of change of prices.

So, the idea that bosses aren't sitting

down and negotiating pay rises for

people minutes after the straight of one

was closed probably isn't that

surprising. I think the way to think

about this is wages move relatively

slowly and on average they tend to catch

up and the question is, you know, once

we've had a few months under our belt,

what are we seeing? So, I think it's

going to be a very

important political talking point while

surely premature

to say much about the slip in living

standards. And then

just one other story to brace yourself

for what is going to happen. I'm just

going to, you know, Ed, I know you're a

smart guy. You want to skate to where

the puck's going. And so, tell you what

next month's news stories are all going

to be. Um there'll be a bunch of think

tankers on Mass Ave in Washington, DC

releasing pieces saying um when real

wages are falling, no wonder Americans

are deeply unhappy.

And so, the fact that wages are half

point behind prices will lead them to a

completely different set of stories than

if wages are half point ahead of prices.

The idea that this is how we live our

lives strikes me as a little bit odd.

Um but I think also in terms of

storytelling misses the reality because

an important reality to remember is this

is what's happening on average.

On average, it's bad news that it it is

bad news that on average wages aren't

rising. But remember, each of us

actually lives our own independent lives

and we actually have very different life

cycles, right? So, Ed, my guess is the

last few years have been good for you.

You're a young bloke, so your wages are

rising every year. That's true of

everyone

round about your age. Turns out once

you're round about my age, it stops.

Um

and so what that means is

you will probably you and many people in

their 20s, 30s, and even 40s will

continue to experience wage rises ahead

of inflation. They'll just be a little

bit less than they might otherwise have

been.

And so these think pieces that people

are at home festering because they're

not getting real wage rises confounds

what's happening on average with what's

happening to most individuals.

Most individuals are going to continue

to be getting some form of real wage

rise, and I know someone's going to be

angry at me that I said that because

there are lots of exceptions to that

rule. There are lots of exceptions to

the rule. All I'm suggesting is

before you inhale those think pieces,

have a think about what it looks like at

the individual rather than the aggregate

level.

Um

plenty of people are going to be doing

okay. Plenty of people are suffering.

That's what the average tells us, but it

doesn't tell us that everyone out there

is suffering.

>> All right. Justin Wolfers, Professor of

Public Policy and Economics at the

University of Michigan, founder of

Platypus Economics. Justin, thank you

for cutting through [music] the noise

with us. We really appreciate it.

>> Great pleasure, mate.

>> We'll be right back, and if you're

enjoying the show, be sure to subscribe

to the Prof G Markets YouTube channel at

the link below.

Support for the show comes from

LinkedIn. It's a shame when the best B2B

marketing gets wasted [music] on the

wrong audience. Like imagine running an

ad for cataract surgery on Saturday

morning cartoons, or running a promo for

this show on a video about Roblox or

something. No offense to our Gen Alpha

listeners, but that would be a waste of

anyone's ad budget. [music]

So, when you want to reach the right

professionals, you can use LinkedIn ads.

LinkedIn has grown to a network of over

1 billion professionals and 130 million

decision makers, [music] according to

their data. That's where it stands apart

from other ad buys. You can target your

buyers by job title, industry, [music]

company, role, seniority, skills,

company revenue, all so you can stop

wasting budget on the wrong audience.

[music]

That's why LinkedIn Ads boasts one of

the highest B2B return on ad spend of

all online ad networks. [music]

Seriously, all of them. Spend $250 on

your first campaign on LinkedIn Ads and

get a free $250 credit for the next one.

Just go to linkedin.com/scott. [music]

That's linkedin.com/scott.

Terms and conditions apply.

Support for the show comes from

Anthropic. Some questions don't come

with obvious answers, [music] and when

you're working through a challenging

problem, it helps to have a partner to

bounce ideas off of and uncover deeper

issues beneath the surface. That's where

Claude [music] can help. Claude is the

AI for minds that don't stop at good

enough. It's a collaborator that

actually understands your entire

workflow and thinks [music] with you.

Whether you're debugging code at

midnight or strategizing your next

business move, Claude extends your

thinking [music] to tackle the problems

that matter. And Cohort brings the power

of Claude code to a desktop [music] app.

No terminal required. Just connect it to

a folder on your computer or service

like Google Drive and Gmail, describe

what you need, and it gets [music] to

work. Whether that's organizing files,

building spreadsheets, or turning

scattered notes into a polished report,

Cohort can handle the heavy lifting.

[music] You can even queue up tasks and

come back later to find the work already

done.

For problems worth solving,

>> [music]

>> get started with Claude today at

claude.ai/markets.

That's claude.ai/markets,

and check out Claude Pro, which includes

access to all of the features mentioned

in today's episode. claude.ai/markets.

>> We're back with Prof G Markets.

As the IPO race intensifies, even the

world's richest companies are competing

for fresh capital. Meta is the latest

company that is exploring a massive

equity raise following Google's

announcement of a record stock sale last

week. The company [snorts] is planning

to spend $145 billion on AI

infrastructure this year with even

higher investments expected in 2027.

Meanwhile, SpaceX hits the market in

just 3 days with plans to raise $75

billion,

which would of course make it the

largest IPO of all time. And [music]

then Open AI and Anthropic are expected

to follow with potentially even bigger

fundraisers on the horizon. Joining us

to [music] discuss Meta and the broader

equity supply, we are speaking with John

Foley, head of the Lex column at the

Financial Times.

John, thank you for joining me on

Property Markets.

Just a slew of headlines all kind of

related, which is that all of these tech

companies are about to raise a ton of

money. Uh Google, of course, just did

their their uh equity offering, $85

billion that is ongoing right now. But

then we learned from the Financial Times

that Meta is going to do the same thing.

And then I'm also hearing online that

maybe Amazon's going to do an equity

offering, maybe Microsoft's going to do

an equity offering. Everyone's going out

and raising a ton of money. I guess the

big question is what does this actually

mean for markets? And what does this

mean for investors?

>> Well, in terms of what it means for

markets, this is a lot of money. So

part of the thing about AI is that huge

numbers become absolutely meaningless.

So Google's $85 billion equity raise,

Meta will no doubt try something

similar. Amazon, who knows who'll be

next, Microsoft, Oracle, you name it.

These are all like relatively small

numbers for these big companies. So

Google's equity $85 billion is only

about 2% of its market capitalization,

but they start to add up. And in terms

of how much equity the market can

actually absorb, the numbers become

quite um quite staggering really,

especially when you add in things like

SpaceX's IPO, upcoming equity issuance

by Open AI and Anthropic. We're getting

into kind of record levels of equity

issuance. So, investors are going to

have to decide fairly carefully where

they put their money. Um in terms of the

companies themselves, they've got big

spending plans as you said. They've got

finite cash flows from their operations.

And really they're doing exactly what

you're supposed to do if you think your

shares are highly valued or dare we say

it overvalued, which is issue as much

equity as you can and get while the

getting's good.

>> Yeah, it seems as if if you're if the

idea is to sell your stock now, which is

what they're all doing. They're all

deciding that the time to sell is now,

you can [clears throat] see that as a

good thing or you can see that as a bad

thing and that is

they might believe that this is the top,

that this is the moment when investors

are most exuberant. You said that

spirits are boisterous in your recent

column. I mean, is this

a signal that we're kind of at the top

or at least the animal spirits are

running dangerously too high?

>> I mean, we're all waiting for some kind

of signal that we are near or at the

top. And when Google announced this

equity raising, it's, you know, we a few

of us were watching nervously thinking

is this it? Is this the moment the share

prices are going to start to collapse?

And they didn't. Um [snorts] and

everything was kind of okay. We had a

bit of a wobble afterwards with some of

the microchip companies.

Uh like it for these companies it is

actually kind of sensible to raise

equity to some degree because equity is

you don't have to pay it back. So, if

you're investing in data centers, debt

can be quite troublesome because you

have to service your interest costs. At

some point you have to pay back your

lenders. Equity you don't have to do

that. So, it does give them a lot of

flexibility. It's an expensive way of

raising capital for sure, but also all

of these companies are quite large and

they're experimenting with lots of

different things. Google has been

raising uh money through issuing bonds.

Meta did a huge bond issue earlier this

year. Google's also issuing

convertibles. It's also bringing in

Berkshire Hathaway, Warren Buffett's

company to into its um capital structure

by issuing shares at a discount to them.

So, So, they're sort of doing a bit of

everything, which is kind of what you

want the CFOs of these companies to be

doing. You want them to be exploring the

capital markets, working out where the

opportunity is, and to some degree, you

want them to be quite sharp-elbowed. You

want Google to try and get in ahead of

Anthropic and OpenAI. There's a bit of,

like, I think there's a bit of the

hyperscalers trolling each other. Well,

if you're going to raise some money,

we're going to get in first using some

of the same banks that you're using and

try and raise slightly more than you do

a couple of weeks beforehand.

>> It's a really interesting point that you

know, Google might be seeing that

Anthropic's about to go public, OpenAI's

about to go public. Why don't we go in

and steal all of that hungry capital out

there that wants to invest in AI? But

interestingly, in that in that thesis,

there is an implication that if we get

out first, we're going to suck all the

capital out of the ecosystem, and

there's not going to be enough left for

the rest of you. Do you think that that

is a legitimate concern as these IPOs

start to ramp up that maybe the last one

is going to be the loser, that they're

not going to be able to raise as much as

the rest of them?

>> It's got to be a fear that is in

everyone's minds. Whether it's real, I

kind of doubt so. I'd I'd like to think,

I hope that investors still have some

discernment, and they will pick the

stocks that are the most appealing at

any given time. They'll put the capital

where it's going to get the highest

return. But if you're in this

hyper-competitive industry where

everyone is kind of going for the same

goal, which is to, you know, perfect AI,

attract the maximum number of enterprise

customers for your large language models

and for your various apps, there is

going to be some fear that if the market

does change track, if people do lose

their exuberance, then you don't want to

be the one that failed to raise capital

in time for that. So, so I I do think

that rationally there is enough money to

go around. I think that investors will

hopefully be relatively smart about

where they put it, but it makes perfect

sense to try and get in ahead of your

rivals.

It's what I would do if I were them.

>> Yeah. We also mentioned just the sheer

scale of the equity issuance. You've got

you know, Google $85 billion,

SpaceX $75 billion, and then OpenAI and

Anthropic, we don't know, but

probably in that ballpark. I mean,

that's the amount that they've been

raising in their private rounds. There

are some concerns now about the amount

of supply that is about to just be

injected into the market, that it might

be a shocking level of supply. And as we

know from Econ 101, more supply

generally means lower prices, or it does

mean lower prices. Do you think that is

a concern

going into the second half of the year

as well, that the supply might reduce

prices in the equity markets?

>> So, it could There could be some kind of

sell-off as people sell out of one thing

to buy into another. I mean, the S&P is

enormous. It's whatever, like $70

trillion of market cap, round number.

So, so this is still

relatively small compared with the size

of the overall stock market. Um so, I

don't think we're going to kind of hit a

brick wall in terms of available

liquidity, but we have seen from various

investor surveys that that people aren't

holding a lot of cash at the moment. Um

they are There are going to be some

trade-offs, and it'll be interesting,

for example, to see whether

shareholders, as a lot of people are

speculating, sell Tesla, for example, to

buy SpaceX because they've already got a

certain amount of Elon Musk in their

portfolio, and they'd rather kind of

rebalance that by swapping a bit of

humanoid robots and electric vehicles

for space rockets and Starlink and data

centers, what have you. So, I I think

that's one of the things that we're

nervous about, but it we'll just have to

wait and see what happens.

>> Yeah.

Just before we let you go, you mentioned

SpaceX. SpaceX is going public at the

end of the week.

Um I personally can't wait to see what

happens here. It's just the scale of

this thing is just absolutely

mind-blowing. Do Do have any thoughts on

this IPO and what might happen?

Um

What do you make of this company and

then what we've seen?

>> It's a great question. So, SpaceX is a

is a real like I'm I'm sort of sick of

hearing the word moonshots in the last

few weeks, but it is

>> [laughter]

>> literally and figuratively a moonshot.

It's like you look at this company and

we and I sat down and rolled my sleeves

up, tried to value it, and you find

yourself doing all these like ridiculous

assumptions, you know, if the world

spends X% of its GDP on satellite

communications by 2035. But really it's

like a number go up thing.

>> Right.

>> I think. You just you either believe

that Elon Musk is capable of something

truly remarkable and that we're all

going to be mining asteroids and doing

like Martian vacation travel by 20

whatever whatever it is or not. So, it's

really hard to justify this company's

valuation on fundamentals, but Musk has

done this before with Tesla. Tesla is

mostly option value on you believing

that Elon Musk can do something truly

remarkable. And SpaceX is just that

again. So, if you like the sound of

asteroid mining and spaceships, then

you'll buy the shares and it really

doesn't matter where he prices them. So,

I'm guessing it's going to go up quite a

bit on the first day. Don't hold me to

that, but I think there is still a lot

of exuberance around him and I think

there are a lot of people who are

waiting to get into the stock.

>> Goes up a lot on the first day. I'm with

you on that. Do you think it comes down

on the second day or the third or the

fourth or the fifth?

>> I don't want to be responsible for a

collapse in SpaceX stock, but I

but I think I feel about it the way I

feel about Bitcoin. I'm like, "Sure, I

can see that there's some utility to

this. I can see what you're trying to

do. Is this the price? Is can I

construct a discounted cash flow model

that tells me that the price is whatever

it is, $135 a share?" No, I absolutely

cannot. I have no idea where the shares

will land. So, I I would not be a buyer

at this point, but maybe I'm the one

who's going to miss out.

>> [snorts]

>> John Authers is the head of the Lex

column at the Financial Times. John,

thank you for joining us on Property

Markets. We appreciate it.

>> Thanks.

>> We'll be right back. And if you're

enjoying the show, be sure to subscribe

to the Profit Markets YouTube channel at

the link below.

Support for the show comes from Odoo.

Running a business is hard [music]

enough, so why make it harder with a

dozen different apps that don't talk to

each other? One for sales, another for

inventory, [music] a separate one for

accounting. Before you know it, you are

drowning in software instead of growing

your business. [music]

This is where Odoo comes in. Odoo is the

only business software you'll ever need.

It's an all-in-one fully integrated

platform that handles [music]

everything. CRM, accounting, inventory,

e-commerce, HR, and more. No more app

overload. No more juggling logins. Just

one seamless system that makes [music]

work easier. And the best part? Odoo

replaces multiple expensive platforms

for a fraction of the cost. It's built

to grow with your business, whether

you're just starting out or already

[music] scaling up. Plus, it is easy to

use, customizable, and designed [music]

to streamline every process. So, you can

focus on what really matters, running

your business. Thousands of businesses

have made the switch, so why not you?

Try Odoo for free at odoo.com. That's

[music] odoo.com.

We're back with Profit Markers.

Just 3 more days until SpaceX goes

public. The company will raise $75

billion, making it the largest IPO of

all time. After that, Anthropic and

OpenAI

>> [music]

>> will go public. How much will they

raise? Unclear, but given the size of

their recent rounds, $65 billion and

$122 billion,

respectively, we can assume that those

IPOs will also be massive, likely around

$100 billion,

and almost certainly larger than

SpaceX's IPO. Then, there is Google,

which will raise $85 billion, the

largest equity financing event of all

time. And then after that, possibly

Meta, which supposedly wants to raise

tens of billions of dollars as well. So

that's already around $400 billion

in new equity supply. But wait, there is

more. Because according to Goldman

Sachs, nearly $500 billion worth of

shares are about to be unlocked after

their lockup periods expire this year.

So now we're actually up to roughly $900

billion, nearly a trillion dollars in

new equity supply that is about to hit

the stock market. Why does any of this

matter?

Well, it all goes back to supply and

demand. There are two reasons why the

price of a product falls. Either one,

demand goes down, or two, supply goes

up. This is Econ 101. It's the most

fundamental principle of economics, and

it's what makes Chinese electronics so

cheap and American houses so expensive.

Well, here we have a similar situation

about to play out in the stock market.

And that is that the supply of new stock

isn't just about to rise or increase, it

is about to explode. We are about to

inject the equivalent of the entire

stock market of Italy into the US equity

markets. What does it mean to

dramatically increase the supply of a

product? Well, it means dramatically

reducing the price of that product. The

US stock market is about to get hit with

a force more powerful than gravity, and

that is the force of supply and demand.

I talk more about this in the latest

edition of my newsletter on Substack,

but the thesis is quite simple. [music]

Supply is about to go way up, which

means this is likely the [music] top.

Look out below.

Thanks for listening to Property Markets

from Property Media. If you liked what

you heard, subscribe to our YouTube

channel and tune in tomorrow for [music]

more.

>> [music]