Hey, welcome to Market Hang. I'm Dan D.

Franchesco. I'm joined with Lauren,

Luke, Shai. We're here to chat about a

bunch of different things, but um happy

Monday, first of all, if if there's such

a thing as a happy Monday. I don't know

about you guys. I'm a little bit like

Garfield. Not a big fan of them. Uh but

let's jump right into uh AI safety,

right? We have to wait a couple months

for Avengers Doomsday, but the Avengers

taking on the AI Doomsday is already

here. Uh the White House announced that

there's an AISAR. um a lot on their

plate from you know concerns about AI

safety to potential doomsday but I want

to start with an even broader question

happy to open it up to the group is this

even a solvable problem is this a

possible test is this a fool's errand

because this tech move so quickly the

people who are building it don't seem to

know how to unpack how to you know build

safety guard rails how is the US

government going to figure it out

>> I mean I think if it was a solvable

problem the kind of current people who

are being put in charge of it might not

be the best place to do so. Like uh when

I when I think of people who would be

very well placed to solve this,

unfortunately, they're probably the same

ones who are either developing the

technology or screaming about the fact

that you know there's a 10% chance it's

going to kill us all. So I I think that

uh you know is a is a bit of a a hangup

here in terms of getting to a solution.

I remember last time I was here at Yahoo

was Caleb Silver who said you know we

didn't really put seat belts in cars

until there were deaths. We didn't get

you know drunk driving laws until there

were deaths. So it probably means the

best deterrent after a certain point of

time is, hey, here's how badly we're

going to punish you if things go wrong.

But I think, you know, that would need

the things going wrong part to happen

first,

>> right? Lauren, what do you think?

>> I think technology always moves way

faster than government. And I think Jay

coming in and making this binary rule of

120 days. What happens after the 120

days? The 120 days, that doesn't mean

that anything will be enforced. That

doesn't mean that regulation will be an

oversight. So really what what is the

120 days and do we need regulation over

AI to a capacity but we also know that

AI always just moves a lot faster than

what government could ever do.

>> As a journalist key to setting deadlines

is make them a little bit loose and

ambiguous so that if you don't hit them

you know it's fine. Sh I want to bring

you in. What's your what's your take on

the AISR and and the task ahead?

>> Listen the AI principle stepped in.

Nvidia, Nvidia is a perfect example of a

company trying to turn the problem into

uh an actual infrastructure opportunity

and you saw that last week. OpenShell is

going to create this kind of software

boundary around the agent while Sentry

is going to run on Bluefield 4. But

regardless, you're seeing that all

right, Jensen knows this is going to

become an issue and rather than just

waiting for someone else to create these

guard rails, we're going to create the

opportunity for everyone else. And

that's why you're seeing cyber security

companies just continue to go up to the

right. But yeah, like you guys

mentioned, I mean, we have to make sure

the narrative doesn't stick on slowing

the AI buildout, just making sure it

becomes more secure and letting the

progress continue. I think that Jetson

stepped in at the right time.

>> Oh, yeah.

>> Right. Like there's so far from from

what I've seen, this is like the first

uh real steps or things we're taking

towards in terms of trying to regulate

the the outputs. So far, like it seems

everything's been controlling the

inputs, people not liking data centers

in their community and so forth. So this

seems like it's a really kind of nent

tiptoeing into an area that's so far

kind of been wild wild west which means

you know we're probably going to get

things wrong but also means I think uh

mostly what we've seen from the

president is there's absolutely no

desire to fall behind. If you had to

kind of pick one single message from the

president and not I think would be you

know leadership and anything that

threatens that is bad. Well, also I

think that right now for AI like all the

AI issues have crossed the boundary of

like that shouldn't have happened.

They've been oopsies. They haven't been

intentional. So I think that's where

like you have to make sure you have some

guard rails before it becomes real

external threats where someone's

actually trying to attack these systems

and these autonomous systems are getting

more advanced. Like I think it's really

important right now to do it before uh

whatever financial health care system

all of a sudden gets violated and now we

have to go back five or 10 years and who

knows who was behind that attack aka

>> some other country or

>> I love AI oopsies. I love it. I can just

picture the open AI blog. We had an

oopsie. Sorry. But I think that gets to

a bigger question right about this like

what level of comfort do we have

sacrificing some safety in for the sake

of of innovation? Luke, you brought up

like the the the um seats, you know,

seat belts with cars. Um you know, and

I'll bring in Sam Alman here. We could

talk a lot about him. He had a big

Vanity Fair piece, um today, but kind of

one of the many things that he said

recently, um you know, is you need to

accept some bad things happening to reap

the benefits. So, it's the old like you

got to crack a couple eggs to make an

omelette. I I I do agree with that, but

at the same time, if you know, way back

when when they were building the Model

T, if Henry Ford was like, "Listen, some

of our cars are just going to blow up.

It's, you know, it's gonna happen." I

think a lot less people will be in cars.

So, I guess, you know, Lauren, where

where do you see the balance as far as

an acceptance of taking some amount of

risk versus not kind of throwing the

baby out with the bath water, so to

speak?

>> I mean, I think the question is what is

considered bad,

>> you know, and and how do we go from

there? Because is it bad?

Is it bad for the consumer or is it bad

or or is it good for the investor

>> but but the consumer is the one that

reaps the the terrible not even terrible

benefits but gets the the bad things

happening to them,

>> right? Well, is it bad if if is it bad

if my like my address my data gets

exposed from someone who's doing a

search on me or something like that?

Like I I would consider that bad. If an

agent did that, I would say, "Hey, we

should probably punish that agent or I

should get some kind of remuneration

from that agent." So, like, yeah, like I

I see the scope already for things that

have been, you know, bad and yet still

the underlying technology might be, you

know, very useful from a consumption

point of view. You know, Muse is the one

who, uh, you know, let me know when my

emails comes in of the of the topics

even for for what we're discussing

today. So, you know, kind of always

useful having the the personal

assistant,

>> right? Yeah. SH, I don't know if you

have thoughts on like where what's your

comfort level as far as taking a risk

taker.

>> Listen, I think AI AI has such a PR

issue and the unfortunate part is that

the two speakers are children. Like Sam

and Dario are just children. They should

not be like the figures of this once in

a generation movement. But

unfortunately, it is. So I think that

for Sam's comment for example

specifically like he was just talking

about zerorisk AI versus manage risk AI

but the way he presented it was just so

poor and the standard is just like not

he was like people are going to use AI

for scams. Nobody's going to ever hack

something with it. Of course they're

going to. So I think that there is going

to be case studies but it's going to be

the minority stake. Like it's not going

to be the bulk of them like fire. like

are we not going to create fire just

because someone might uh launch

something that's going to cause a

catastrophic boom? No. You just have to

contain it and make sure there's things

in place in order to make sure it

doesn't become catastrophic. So, I want

to um to the regulatory aspect of it and

and how we kind of manage the risk. I'm

going to do a little uh jump in the in

the time machine. Go back to 2010 and

I'll make this story quick, but there's

this thing called the flash crash. Some

of you might be familiar with it, might

have remembered it. market kind of drops

and then comes back in a couple seconds.

To make a long story short, people

freaked out. They were like, "Oh, what's

going on with this algorithmic training

and a lot of regulation, a lot of things

happen. Michael Lewis wrote a book about

it." But specifically, this thing came

called regulation at came out by the

CFTC. And part of it was we want all the

source code for all the algorithmic

traders and we want to be able to hold

it so we can understand who are these

people playing in these markets. Now,

the reason I bring this up is because

people had big issue with it at the

time, right? This is proprietary stuff

that these firms were making a lot of

money on. How this relates to AI is if

there's some type of regulation and the

regulation becomes well we need to

really look inside your models. We need

to understand these black boxes. I

wonder how comfortable especially some

of these people that have been screaming

to say we need more regulation are going

to be to hand over the keys to what are

according to their investors trillion

dollar valuation type companies. I I

that's where I think you know what I

brought up in the beginning. I think

there's a real issue as far as being

able to actually regulate this stuff

because ultimately you're going to have

to give the keys to the castle to people

that are the castle's worth trillions

and trillions of dollars. But I don't

maybe I'm not looking at it right. What

do you think?

>> Isn't isn't this kind of what they're

asking for though? Like isn't this what

isn't this the point of Dario's pacing

the frontier like please please invite

someone in make it someone you know

independent but probably third length

kind of at least government sponsored in

some way or who's looking for government

backing of this to to come in and

basically say like give us give us the

all clear serve as the red team

effectively in terms of you know testing

any new models we might want to come up

with poke holes in what we've done be

embedded it seems like you know to a

large extent this is what they're asking

for whether or not they'll they'll get

it from Jay Clayton another remains to

be seen,

>> right? Yeah. I don't know, Shai or

Lauren, you have your thoughts on on how

to kind of manage this risk or how to

regulate this.

>> Well, I I think uh Jensen's doing it for

us, acquiring hugging face, pushing on

open source. Like again, Sam and Dario,

I don't want to pick on them, but like

they're doing this out of defense. Like

if the open source narrative gains

momentum, like they have a duopoly right

now in a frontier model that has no

ceiling. So I think that right now it's

really important to put more focus on

technical standards that make these

companies actually implement these type

of um AI issues because if you can

create rules around agent permissions,

cyber security testing, external

enforcement layers for example like

doesn't matter about giving up the juice

that anthropic open AI has all that

matters is we cannot slow down American

companies from moving quickly on an AI

race. That's the number one northstar

across the board. But Dario and Sam,

they're they're doing a road show right

now for their IPO. So they are saying

some more self-fulfilling uh prophecies,

but Jensen stepping in again uh and

making sure you can see the smoke

between the fire.

>> So is your your pitch is that open

weights the future, open weights the way

to kind of avoid a lot of these these

issues. Basically,

>> it will be because we're going to see

the weight and parameters of these

models. There's going to essentially you

can customize it per enterprise use

case. You're going to see all the

nitty-gritty of it. And that's how every

revolution has gone by anyway like

software specifically cloud like

everyone starts with open source then

creates these managed source

applications that's benefit for your own

company. But right now there's the

exponential rate of AI anthropic and

open AI have gone from 0 billion of

revenue to hundred billion in a couple

years. That's never happened in

existence before in any revolution. So I

think that right now things are

happening too quickly and there is

somewhat of a prisoners dilemma that's

happening that they aren't caring as

much as they should as the

simplisticity of what should be good for

AI or not and I do believe that the open

source is a solution and you're seeing

the progress already this year. I do

wonder though with on the on the openw

weightight side the business model is a

little bit harder especially with the

valuations that a lot of these companies

are at when you're essentially opening

up the distribution right and you're not

necessarily gaining that revenue capture

that you would from a proprietary model

how does that work at the same time when

these companies are saying yeah we want

to go to market with a $2 trillion

valuation

token usage it's all tokens usage you're

going to start seeing you these comp

you're going to start seeing software

companies for example start being less

SAS and more utility the more they use

them, more that you see agents running

continuously, these the inference

consumptions are going to become outcome

based and then you're going to see all

these companies start charging based on

outcomes. And guess what? If you're a

client, you're going to love that

because you're only paying for what

you're actually using at the end of the

day. And it's going to just be a cut of

your whatever money you're saving on top

of whatever you're doing on your capex

and opex. So, I think that

>> yeah, it's going to be it's a different

lens. We all know yet things are

happening quickly. Luke, you I know you

mentioned talking about Muse and I don't

if you want to talk about token usage or

how you're kind of seeing value from the

AI usage you're having.

>> Well, I I think more to to Shay's point

like a lot of the things we've seen in

Agentic Finance at the enterprise level

like that's been at the sandbox or

testing point up until this time and I

think Q3 in the back half of this year

is is really when you're going to see

more of that actually accelerate in

practice. So I think kind of like the

next nine months are the kind of the

rubber hits the road moment. So far in

the AI boom, the the profitability

question has mainly been driven by

effectively capex beneficiaries and and

not having to realize much of the

depreciation yet. Uh whereas now I I

think we're in a bit of the phase where

you should see to the extent that agents

do improve ROI, you should start to see

that more and more and more in the

numbers. And you know, in terms of my

personal AIUS, it's a great um it's a

great fight me bro. It's a great, you

know, you you put in whatever you think

just um sometimes in the workplace it's

it's difficult to even engineer

constructive criticism back and forth.

Uh you can you can make this thing fight

with you and tell you why the thing

you've just written is absolute nonsense

and and pick apart and pick holes in

your argument. So I uh I I don't know,

maybe I'm a little off that way, but I

love having someone do that for me.

>> Yeah, Lauren, I want to um utter a very

scary phrase, but I promise it's not

that scary, which is I'm going to pull

up an old tweet of yours. Um, but it's

from a few months ago or a couple month,

I think last month where you said, "I

still believe we need to utilize AI

more." Um, you know, since then we've

had a lot of these agents come out, you

know, Muse and and Instinct and whatnot.

I'm just curious how maybe even that

short time, have you found utilizing AI

more? Do you still think there's room to

run? What's your what's your

perspective?

>> I mean, AI isn't going anywhere. I I do

think we should absolutely lean into AI.

But what I think the distinction is is

understanding that AI doesn't replace

humans. It doesn't replace risk. We

humans are the ones that put risk and

judgment into place. We should not just

be relying on a third party anything uh

to to make those judgment calls. So I

think as long as we understand that we

are the brains, we are the controllers,

we get to set the data points, we get

to, you know, strategically make the

next moves and not rely strictly on AI,

I think we'll be fine. I think the

problem is is that there are so many

people that think AI can make human

decisions. And I I don't know why people

feel so safe and comfortable doing that.

>> Yeah. And I also worry too about just

the deterioration of skills that come

from that, right? Like if you're going

to continue to outsource things to AI,

sure there's certain things maybe you

don't want to deal with, but like

ultimately you're going to lose the

ability to do that or it's going to

deteriorate. And that to me is is a big

issue, right? This like AI atrophy

that's kind of happening across the

board. Um I don't know does anyone here

like are there certain things that

you're like absolutely not that I'm I'm

keeping AI away from or or you guys all

in like I'll I'll throw it on whatever I

can. I mean writing I have to like I I

have to rate I have to rate myself right

or else uh you know what are what are

they paying me for. So that's a that's a

big thing I got to keep to me but uh you

know that's one place where there'll be

a hard hard fast wall. I I don't know

about you any place.

>> Um I mean not for me person I guess what

immediately comes to mind for me is

education. I think that there is a lot

of utilization in education and we're

seeing the impacts of it when it comes

to this younger generation and how they

are not as uh financially or um

as smart as the older generation when it

comes to their reading and and writing

skill set levels. I think there has to

be a balance and I'm education probably

was not the answer that you probably

thought I was going to come up with but

I just I'm hearing it more and more and

I think people are just relying too much

on the technology. Yeah, I think to your

like underlying point though, right?

Like most of our jobs if you had to like

distill them into basic functions, it's

either sales or quality assurance or

some kind of mix thereof. But like

there's a base of skills upon which

those rest and are built. And that's

that's probably where we are like

potentially seeing some more atrophy cuz

like hey, you know, at one point we were

all, you know, we were first we were you

welding parts, then the machine is doing

it, then we're just watching the widgets

come on the assembly line. And I feel

like we're at kind of the watching the

the knowledge widgets come off the

assembly line phase of AI. And it's, you

know, up to us to kind of hang on to to

what we have,

>> right? Yeah. So, I think um and and Shai

maybe interested to hear your

perspective on this. There was some

there was a report recently about deep

sea kind of closing the gap, right? And

and you talked a lot about the

importance for us to kind of maintain

pole position. Um h what's what's your

sense about how quickly that is closing

and whether you know us in the US need

to be a little bit nervous about them

catching up?

I actually fully believe they're closing

in on um the model part of the AI race,

but again I think models are probably

the easiest parts of the stack for

competitors to compress as research

spreads globally. Like I don't think

that's kind of really a differentiation

on the US dominance for us like we have

a much better durable advantage

underneath those models. When I say that

I mean compute, networking, memory,

cooling, power like all everything

that's required to deploy intelligence

at massive scale is a dramatically

harder problem than closing a benchmark

gap on some model on the latest and

greatest. So I think from that point

point of view, we are so far along and

China will not close the model that gap.

But on the model front, yeah,

absolutely. But go for it. It's a commod

that's the most that's the plumbing of

the entire stack is the model front. And

if they're uh closing the gap on that,

great. we have everything else.

>> I Well, I guess I I definitely

understand what you're saying about how

it's completely been commoditized now

and and the the value isn't necessarily

in there, but I imagine if we we don't

want to completely punt on it, right?

>> No, not at all. But I also think

Qualcomm like the Qualcomm example is a

perfect one for like you it's a great

reminder that tech leadership is isn't

permanent. So I think that we we kind of

we used to think about China as the

country trying to work around American

restrictions while here you have

Qualcomm essentially licensing IP tied

to a Chinese architecture that was

itself developed partly as a response to

manufacturing constraints. Like I think

there is a world where things are

happening so quickly that you just can't

like sit back and like know that this is

going to be a permanent thing. But we

have I sound like the biggest Jensen

fanboy, but like Nvidia just is helping

us have that gap with China. We also

have Broadcom like Brocom's huge for us

on AI networking. Micron's going to be a

much better bigger beneficiary on our

memory front, but the there's SK Hunx

obviously on that part of the world, but

and also we're not even talking about

power. Uh we have Vertive G, Verova,

like Constellation, like we have so many

US companies are going to help us

maintain this lead, but it's something a

mantra for sure.

>> I love it. All roads for you lead back

to Jensen and Nvidia. No matter what

it's Well, let me All right, let me I'll

give a little bit of the counter take.

The one thing that I found interesting

about Nvidia the past, you know, few

months is that it's definitely gone

from, okay, we're just we're not pock

committed in this, you know, gold mine

race. We're just selling the picks and

shovels to now it's okay, we're going to

own a hotel by the mine and okay, we're

going to transport the miners to the

hotel and okay, we'll maybe manage the

outside of the mine. Like, it's it's

getting more and more to just we're just

selling picks and shovels now. like

we're really banking on this whole thing

whether it's through the financing or

the funding or the investments. Does

that make you more you you I guess

ultimately view that as that's still

more bullish because they're becoming a

bigger part of the ecosystem. But I

don't know why why is that a good thing

that they've evolved from the pure play

of picks and shovels to now kind of a

little bit of everything.

>> They had to I think there's so many

competitors now all of a sudden like a

couple years ago was probably a handful.

Now there's dozens. There's going to be

hundreds. Like uh I think that for them

they had to kind of start selling the

narrative of full stack systems like the

most efficient way of getting the most

out of what you need for AI. And in

order to do that do that they had to

sell everything around just the actual

chip. Unfortunately the market is seeing

through it a bit and now they're like

we're not going to give you more than a

20 times earnings multiple which is the

market average until we see the bare

argument is wrong. And unfortunately

that takes time and time and doesn't

matter if aentic AI is taking off this

year, physical AI is taking off next

year and Nvidia is essentially going to

be picks and shovels of all these

graduating themes of AI.

>> Sure.

>> But it's but I think it's a little bit

more of just building around. It's also

like keeping it up, right? I mean this

point has been made obviously time and

again, but the circular financing I mean

it got to make you a little bit uneasy,

right?

>> Well, well the question is as a

shareholder, what do you want them to do

with all this cash then? Because they

can't acquire. They're going to get

blocked on any acquisitions they make.

So, in order for like them to have this

much cash, which they're producing a

stupid amount of cash every single

>> fair. No, they got a lot on the balance

sheet. Yeah. I mean, Luke, what do you

think?

>> Well, they they just did boost the

buyback authorization by what, you know,

135 billion. So, you know, jack that up

to 225 probably nobody's uh complaining

and you take the uh effectively the

circular financing concerns out of the

window. But no, I I think to SH's point,

one thing that's not only changed is

just the competitive environment for

Nvidia, but also just the financial

environment in general. If you're a a

borrower right now, uh given how both

just interest rates risk-f free have

gone up and also spreads have widened,

especially hyperscaler spreads, it's,

you know, it's getting a little tougher

to kind of clear hurdles. I think, you

know, nothing, you know, nothing crazy

when we're talking about some of the

revenue growth that a lot of these

companies are seeing. But uh to your

point and Dan, I I think you know for

the speed to continue in topline growth

across the industry, it does almost

require Nvidia to open up its its loving

arms, embrace everyone in this credit

wrapping and say, "Hey, actually these

risky companies, they are no longer as

risky as you think they are because

they're using our products and those

products have residual value." So, you

know, again, where do profits come from

in this? They're coming from, you know,

very large government deficits and very

large uh borrowing binges and capex from

the hyperscalers. Those are two very

very like safe blocks upon which to

build. But then you get into that kind

of Minskian realm of the safer something

looks. Every crash, every financial

crisis we have ever had, it's been based

on a safe product that looks safe for a

long time and then suddenly doesn't.

>> Mhm. Sure. I don't know, Lauren, do you

want to weigh in at all on Nvidia?

>> No, I think they they they've said it

all.

>> Perfect. Uh let's uh we can pivot here

for a little bit. Um we are now less

than a month away from midterms. Um as

crazy as that sounds. Uh so you know

affordability is a big thing on the uh

on the agenda. We wrote a big story

about how in all the swing states a big

focus has been affordability. From the

investors perspective, right? What what

do we think as far as trying to game

plan this? It seems like a lot of the

polling I'm seeing maybe split, maybe a

complete blue wave. It seems like a, you

know, the the red wall, so to speak, is

is a little bit of a um a pipe dream at

this point. Um, you know, maybe, uh,

Shai, we'll start with you on the

investing side. Is this something that

has already been priced into the

markets? Is this something that you need

to wait? We have so much more data than

we did maybe a decade ago as far as the

polling and the prediction markets. So,

it seems like we have a better sense of

where these races are going. What's how

is the market already or not yet pricing

out what could come in uh in November?

I think there's so much chaos that's

happening right now on the macro front

that it's not playing as much as I

thought it would. I think in back in

March uh future we dropped a note that

said that enjoy the summer because the

fall is going to be brutal with the

midterms essentially because what's the

lever that every politician is going to

pull uh heading into the midterms. AI is

too progressing too quickly. We need to

slow it down. Data centers, we need to

scrutinize it. That's the easiest lever

being pulled and that's what happened.

But the market's not caring as much as I

thought it would. Maybe because we're in

war mode with Iran still. Either way, I

do think that because there's so many

different aspects of the macro fund,

like I don't think investors should try

to predict one party winning, then

reposition your entire portfolio around

that result because the best takeaway is

like you mentioned, affordability is

going to become a constraint on policy

regardless of who wins. AI is a PR

problem, especially with electricity.

That's going to be one of the sleeper

issues because AI data centers, they

need enormous amounts of incremental

power while households are reading the

headlines. They see this. They don't

want their electricity bills going up

because the hyperscaler decided to build

a 2 gawatt campus 20 m away that's like

near their high school, middle school,

groceries, whatever it might be. So, I

think that there's a lot of political

pressure that's not going to go going

away from just the midterms. So, I think

just take take that bump along the way.

Know that's going to happen. But guess

what? power scarce and there's a way of

playing this that if data centers are

going to become harder and harder to

build the power theme the these data

centers whoever can make them the most

efficient will be the winners.

>> Sure. Yeah. Lauren, we were just talking

about uh electricity before but I know

as a you know trader, you know, youngest

on the stock exchange floor, what's your

what's your take? I mean, you've kind of

seen these these things before. How do

you kind of see it all playing out a

month out?

>> Um I think it's still a little bit

unpredictable. I don't think anything's

a shoe in. But what I am seeing or not

seeing enough of or what I'm looking for

is the private markets. What is going on

in the private markets? Because I think

a lot of what the information that is

being baked into uh where the market is

sitting has to do, you know, with

quarterly earnings and future quarterly

earnings. And you know, they're

projected to be doing well, but really

the private markets really tell a

different story as to what is going on.

And I don't think we are seeing enough

about you know the fallout of you know

energy oil

consumer spending you know what what is

actually going to happen and while there

are a lot of headlines of oh you know

consumer spending is is great and you

know people are spending you know more

money than ever in September um all of

that is is is noise because we know that

they're using debt to do a lot of their

spending.

>> Credit card bills are going up. Yeah.

So, what what is the what is it going to

look like when we actually are facing

reality, not when people are getting

supported by by

>> debt? What specifically stands out to

you in private markets that feels like a

real like, oh man, this is this is a

red.

>> It hasn't stood out at all. It hasn't

the story hasn't unfolded. And so,

that's what I'm trying to see because

we're just hearing only about the stock

market. We're only hearing positive

headlines and really the private markets

I think always kind of share more of a

story and that hasn't been told yet.

>> Right. Luke, what's your take on this?

more difficult story to tell, right?

That's the the liquidity does does some

damage both ways or helps you sometimes.

So, um something I'm watching for in the

the run to midterms is, you know, I

think we can agree no matter what side

of the political spectrum you you're on,

uh the past, you know, 10 12 years,

let's call it, they've uh coincided with

some uh more severe partisan rifts in

the United States. Uh, one thing that,

you know, this tells me is that the odds

of, you know, passing meaningfully

meaningful legislation, uh, after the

midterms, they generally go down,

particularly when there's been a change

of power. And, you know, the only thing

that might stop that is, you know, a

crisis in the event of, you know, a CO

2.0, which, you know, God willing, uh,

not not going to happen. So, one thing

that I've noticed after the past couple

midterms is they've been pretty pretty

big uh bonds over stocks events, which

is kind of not something that I think is

in the cards uh for, you know, for

everyone right now, especially given how

battered bonds have been. And, you know,

looking at two samples, a sample size of

two there. So, you know, this time is

always different and this time it just

happens to coincide with one of the

largest capex impulses of all time

starting to rely on external financing

about 6 months uh 6 months before the

tea date for the midterms. So, but you

know that's kind of something I keep in

mind as you know fiscal stimulus

probably just the impacts of you know

bills that have been passed in the past

are are waning. So, you're going to have

less of an impulse there and kind of

less scope to see growth there going

forward. So, you know, in terms of this

rally being built on a couple legs,

that's one of them. And you know that

one probably a little less supportive

for stocks, maybe a little more

supportive bonds going forward.

>> Yeah, I mean we got the Treasury yields

right there behind you. Um it's been

such a wild ride, right? I mean I think

someone compared it it's trading like a

meme stock, which is crazy to say, but

it it kind of feels that way. Um yeah, I

mean there there's so much to unpack

between now and November. I mean the the

private markets aspect is so

interesting, too, because the other kind

of big um elephant in the room is this

anthropic IPO, right? That's reportedly

coming, but we don't know. It's maybe,

you know, I I think the last report I

said is they're eyeing for

pre-Thanksgiving.

Um, that just feels like such a big

thing because one, obviously, it's it's

a massive AI player coming to market.

So, does the IPO open? How do investors,

you know, uh, digest that? Also, is

there a little bit of a is it almost

serving as a dam? Like we saw the other

day, um, one of the IPOs kind of delayed

like, you know, you don't necessarily

want to move around such a big whale.

You want to kind of give them their

space. So, you know, to your point about

the private markets, I'm really

interested to see like when that does

come to market, what's the kind of

knock-on effect across a bunch of

different um lanes.

>> Yeah. I mean, I think um I mean, it

it'll be an interesting story to see

what unfolds. I mean, I the one of the

things that I love about when companies

go public, we really get to see their

financials. We really get to see the

heart of the company. And I think

Anthropic will tell a really big story

of what potentially is going on in other

AI companies and especially ones that

are not public and what that

conversation looks like outside of just

having conversations about circular

money and and how that is, you know, I

feel like the topic of conversation. So,

I don't know. I'm curious to see will

they push that deadline? I don't know.

We'll see. But, you know, we'll see.

>> One thing Yeah. One one thing we can

kind of peek at there is like what

happened in the runup to SpaceX, right?

That's been the the biggest IPO so far,

you know, ever. And and this year, of

course, so what the data I've seen was

ahead of that investors sold

SpaceX likes like like companies. I

don't know how many companies there are

like SpaceX, but you know, they sold

mega cap tech in the runup to that and

to make room effectively for that. And

they also sold the biggest losers year

to date. You know, that we weren't too

deep in the year by that point. So I

what I find it very interesting about

the timing is kind of how it coincides

or doesn't coincide with tax law tax law

selling season which we are now for

mutual funds in the midst of this is you

know October should be the heart of it.

So, you know, I'm kind of looking to see

kind is there any pressure on, you know,

anthropic adjacent names in public

markets as you're kind of selling to

make room for this if you anticipate

getting an allocation in uh early to mid

November. And do the like the likes of

Nike continue to get pummeled, you know,

a stock that's been down every quarter

of of this year and, you know, continues

to set I think lowest since 2013 now.

So, I think those are some interesting

things, but so far this year, I'd say

the main thing the market has a problem

digesting is not equity supply, it's

bond supply. And that's cuz year to

date, if you look at hyperscaler

issuance and IG markets, that's 150

billion give or take in the US. And if

you tally up the two biggest IPOs in the

AI space, Sarah Bruss and SpaceX, you're

running at a little over 90 billion. So,

we we really had to digest a lot more

debt. We actually have that equity.

>> A lot of debt. Shai, what's your what's

your take on kind of anthropic? Will

they, won't they, and the impact it's

having on everybody else?

>> Yeah, I mean, I think the SpaceX IPO is

a great case study. I will say it's a

little different because a lot of the

space proxy names, the Rock Lollabs, AS,

Space Mobile, Plan Labs, like you can

see their charts. They're all down 50%

since the uh SpaceX IPO Halo effect. But

the difference in that uh ecosystem than

the AI ecosystem is a lot of people sell

those companies because they want the

category leader in SpaceX. They want

same theme, same exposure, but SpaceX

does connectivity category leader,

launch category leader. They do

everything. Anthropic, they don't really

do everything in the AI ecosystem. They

just do the model components. So I do

think that there is going to be somewhat

of a heartburn, I guess, in the AI theme

around the IPO just because capital's

finite. If you want to participate in

Enthropic, which I think a lot of the

big books out there, institutions are

going to want to, it's gonna have to

come from somewhere else. However, I

don't believe it's going to be as

disruptive as a SpaceX IPO was for the

whole space theme. Also, uh I do think

that like we get see what's under the

hood now finally on their frontier

models. Like what's the real margins?

Are they going to create something from

thin air of like, oh, this is a adjusted

frontier blah blah blah KPI that we're

going to use or is it going to be

somewhat real and we can actually judge

if there's a real ROI now on this AI

spend. And for me, I'm going to geek out

on that. I'm sure a lot of people will

do that as well.

>> Are they going to use the wei workbook

of accounting where it's like, well, if

you take out this and this and this and

this cost, then actually we're super

profitable. Uh Lauren, you you what

what's your you you kind of seemed to

make a sound there when he was talking

about anthropic not being as as hyper

involved. Do you see it as a little bit

different than that or

>> I mean no I mean AI is it's part of the

infrastructure. So I think there are

other companies out there that are that

are absolutely in the same realm of

space as well. So I don't know I for me

I just really want to collectively like

see what's under the hood, see what

their financials are looking like and

kind of assess from there what is

actually going on within the AI space.

It's going to be some fun. I I imag

>> I also think like the what's not being

discussed, which is the elephant in the

room, is Anthropic's going to have a

white check uh like a blank check they

can use now once they go public. They're

going to dilute like no one else. And

what's that going to do for the whole

environment, it's going to it's going to

improve it. They're going to spend so

much money across the board, across the

whole ecosystem. So I think that

semiconductors are a really interesting

angle on capitalizing and anthropic IPO

because they're going to spend a ton on

the whole ecosystem. Same with the cloud

computing companies. So I just think

that there is going to be you can make

the circular financing argument which I

I I agree it's kind of like

uncomfortable because we're in the first

stage of this big buildout. But I do

think it's going to lift the market a

bit more than people think. I one thing

that really sticks with me and and I use

the SpaceX comparison is so you look at

SpaceX right from where it opened to now

it's basically up about 4% give or take

right not from its IPO price from where

it opened to the the public right and

that's a business obviously that you

said does a ton of stuff I mean there's

I think the majority of satellites in

space right now are are are from espec

essentially SpaceX um and then you look

at anthropic and sh to your point like

just those miles pretty straightforward

now they're looking I the reports I saw

was a $2 trillion market cap. I like you

know now maybe I can't fathom how big of

a company is going to be and maybe my p

human brain can't understand the impact

AI is going to have but to think as an

investor when SpaceX again has like a

bunch of thriving businesses or or much

more mature businesses and open at a

much lower valuation is still kind of

holding steady who I guess I'm not

asking you guys to say buy or sell but I

guess do we think there's going to be a

massive appetite to buy in at such a

high price point it just feels like you

know to your point about the private

markets the VCs and the the private

investors have sucked all the value out.

There's nothing there's there's not much

left on the bone. I don't know but maybe

I'm missing something.

>> I I can tell you this stylist fact and

shy pointed out that you know might be a

lot of institutional demand for

anthropic. I can tell you the single

biggest day on Robin Hood of net

purchases of stocks was the SpaceX IPO.

The single biggest day. So will there

will there be appetite from place? I can

you know based on recent history I'm

counting there there will be one in

particular. Yes.

>> All right. That's fair. Also, also like

don't don't discount the doomer exposure

you need in your portfolio. Like if if

the world does turn uh oopsie, anthropic

is probably going to be the biggest

beneficiary off that. Uh but I also I

don't know. I I really do believe that

if you invest in Anthropic at $2

trillion, you fully believe that they

are going to be the ones that conquer

super intelligence or RSI for example.

And I think that if you do invest, don't

believe the 2026 numbers cuz like like

Robin Hood for example, like they were

kind of in the experimental phase with

AI oric AI. I think a lot of enterprise

usage on anthropic was experimental.

They heard the FOMO. They read it. They

want to implement it, see what they

could do with it. Nobody knows the

stickiness yet to it. It's not like

agentic AI where the more you put into

it, the more it remembers you and then

you're going to stay there forever. Like

not really for for claude. can just jump

between the models by copying and

pasting the memory. So, I think that I'm

curious on what the retention is going

to be in those metrics going forward

more than the actual revenue.

>> Lauren, do you have any thoughts on uh

>> I think for me as an investor or I guess

for novice investors, I personally

never, you know, when it comes to IPOs

immediately and looking to buy the stock

cuz the reality is most of the time it's

going to go down anyway. So, let the

numbers come out. let there be a

celebration and then maybe in a month or

two months, you know, before the new

year, decide if you want to if you want

to pick that up and put that part of

your portfolio.

>> Yeah, there is definitely a a risk

though always in not owning particularly

when things get added to indexes like at

a certain degree. It's not just

believing in the story. It's just not

wanting to be super super underweight

anthropic that can actually force a

little bit of buying. So, you know, and

I you can buy a lot of anthropic and

still be a complete unbeliever and

underweight it from from a lot of

perspectives. So, you know, I I think

that's kind of another underdisussed

part of the story of where IPO demand

kind of has to come from at the end of

the day. I look like you

>> also Yeah. Also, how funny would it be

that if Dario is the reason we have no

Santa Rally this year because he went

public end of November, like he would

just be the permanent Grinch forever.

>> The the timing is really interesting. I

mean the other obviously is is the

counter right is open AI has said we're

going to wait till 2027. I I do wonder

like on the one hand you get the

hindsight of seeing and you know how the

public receives anthropic and where it

makes missteps and what its S1 says and

all those different things. The downside

though is you don't get like you're not

the first mover advantage. So if you

know people are invested and it starts

performing really well are they really

going to want to pull out their money

from anthropic and go into your IPO? I I

don't know if there's a a right answer

there as far as being the first or

letting someone else blaze the path and

then kind of coming in behind them.

>> Yeah. I I don't know how to at all deal

with that horse race. Just that idea

because I think there's there's a lot of

confounding variables. You could be, you

know, very happy you've stayed on the

sidelines. However, I think, you know,

revealed preference is a thing. And I

don't think Open AI, if you, you know,

gave everyone truth serum in Q1 of this

year, did they want IPO this year? Did

they want IPO before Anthropic? Yes,

completely. So, the fact that they're

not is, you know, quote unquote bad.

That's kind of as far as I can go in

shaping up. It certainly doesn't seem to

be according to plan. Obviously, there's

been uh a lot of good reporting on

potential seuite battles over the

appropriateness of a potential OpenAI

IPO this year. And, you know, obviously

the kind of more financially uh savvy in

the group have have come out ahead, it

seems.

>> Yeah, sure. Um, I want to talk a little

bit too about just AI budgets in general

because that's like the big the big

overarching theme of all this is they

can build all these models, they can

build all these tools, but if people

aren't comfortable with the budgets that

they have or aren't feeling that they're

getting the ROI on it. Um, interesting

story in the journal a couple days ago

about um the fact that cheaper models

are actually more expensive because they

take more time to figure things out. Uh,

which I think is an interesting dynamic.

kind of reminded me of the idea of like

you buy a cheap pair of shoes versus an

expensive pair of shoes and you end up

going through three pairs of shoes

before your expensive pair of shoes

wears down. But um feels like a CFO

nightmare. I don't know. I'm I'm glad

I'm not in in that role. Uh Lauren, I

don't know if you had thoughts on the

the kind of continuations trying to find

the ROI on on AI and managing these

budgets.

>> Yeah. Um I do, but I'm going to let them

speak first and then I'm going to I'm

going to jump in. Luke,

>> yeah,

>> I think uh the the CEOs that have done

the best job of, you know, detailing

this and I I think J might agree are the

the ones who have focused on both

outcome based pricing and a lot of it

comes in the enterprise space where I

think even at Salesforce like Benning

off had a bunch of compete like a bunch

of customers you trotted them out on

their on their earnings call be like

this is what we're using it for these

are the results we've seen so on and so

forth. So, you know, on on the one hand,

I think we've had some kind of bad

examples like Google Sundar Pikai kind

of stumbled through an answer on like

what is it that you say that you do here

type of stuff on the AI ROI. the the

ones a little a little more downstream

seem to have no problems detailing,

okay, here's at least what our best

customers, our biggest adopters are are

getting from this kind of one thing that

I think though is is interesting is

that, you know, I'm reminded of a piece

that Matt Zaitlin wrote in 2022 about

why US productivity was bad because it

was everyone's first day on the job

effectively. That was, you know, hiring

was very high. that was the, you know,

the ratio of unemployed to job openings

was, you know, at a at a record low,

that kind of thing. And it seems like we

have the same thing in corporate America

of, you know, one reason productivity,

measured productivity might not be going

gang busters is because it's everyone's

first day triing an AI program and we're

trying to figure out, you know, what the

hell to do with it and make us a little

better,

>> right? We do forget like, you know,

really I for me, I don't know, and Chai,

I'm interested to hear your thoughts. I

feel like things really turned end of

last year, beginning of this year where

it was like, okay, this is I mean, it

was always interesting and powerful, but

this is really, you know, certainly from

I'm not an engineer, but on the coding

side, it seems like a flip really

switched. Um, but what's your

perspective on like kind of the ROI

you're seeing companies get on some of

their AI spend?

>> Yeah, so at Future, like we talked to

the tons of CFOs and CEOs of the biggest

companies in the world, and the

sentiment has changed drastically over

the year. I think a lot of CFOs are

starting to care less about what a

million tokens costs like and much more

about like what it costs to complete the

actual work outcome based like it's

going outcomes is probably the biggest

wording that we've heard uh in the past

couple weeks and I think it's going to

continue in 2027. If one agent costs

twice as much but resolves 10 times more

tickets, they're going to be much more

willing to spend. And like you mentioned

earlier, like the trial and error aspect

of AI, it's becoming a lot more costly

than a lot of the CFOs thought it would.

And that's going to start being more

intentional now go in 2027. And that's

why you're going to see like the Service

Now, for example, that they're going to

be one of the big biggest beneficiaries

of the next layer because they're going

to start selling businesses around the

outcomes rather than software seats.

You're seeing Palanteer literally

they're getting a cut of how much money

they're actually the companies are

actually saving in their in their actual

contract. their CRO at Palanteer. He

used to be a lawyer. That's not on

that's not on accident. That's on

purpose. These contracts are meant to

create outcomebased results. And I think

you're seeing Palanteer just kill it in

the application front. You're going to

see everyone else doing that too because

they're the only ones that really

produce an ROI and enterprise AI spend.

And you're going to see everyone else

follow suit.

>> Really interesting development for uh

the consultants of the world, right? to

switch from you know billable hours and

all that to now you got to put your

money in your mouth is uh Lauren I want

to come back to you on you any what's

your high level thoughts there

>> um I I think the question or what I

would like to be answered is okay we

we've seen enough of of the spending and

the AI where where is it actually

where is their productivity you know

where is the ROI and I think we have to

stop asking the question of okay yes

spending is going to help and what is

the actual return? And I think we are

just not seeing it enough. And so I

think when it comes to corporations or

these next earning calls,

>> where where is the money going? Like I

actually want to see the flow of it and

does it actually make sense? Because if

these cheaper models are supposed to be

cheaper and they're not,

>> then what what questions are actually

being answered and and I guess we'll

have to find out what what they say from

there. Shai, in the conversations you

have with the the CEOs and CFOs, what

about the idea of like when to upgrade

or when to make a switch because so many

of these developments are happening so

quickly and these new models are being

released. You have to kind of be nimble

as far as like, okay, we're bought in

now with this and this is working, but a

month later it could be someone else,

right?

>> I can tell you this, this past summer,

everyone was overspending on AI. I think

that you saw a lot of budgets budgets

get kind of ballooned up a bit. Uh end

of the year obviously everyone that's

when you can really tighten down the

upcoming year's budget so you realize

what do you actually want to spend

that's fixed. I think that right now

you're you're going to see AI behave

much more like a utility. I mentioned

that earlier on in our show where every

time an agent re reasons through a task

and decides what's wants to do do it's

going to have to do it 10 times 100

times over again. It's going to consume

so many more tokens. So, ironically, the

better the product becomes, the more

employees actually use it, then the

harder the bill can become to forecast.

And I think right now there is somewhat

of um it used to be like twice a year we

put together a budget for capex or opex.

It's becoming a monthly conversation now

that we've we've started noticing. I

think that you're seeing a lot of open

AI momentum the past month and anthropic

momentum. I think there is a left brain

right brain which is like a game of hot

potato between its duopolies of models

but also people are counting out Gemini.

Gemini 4 is actually was actually pretty

darn good and I think that a lot of

people already are in the workspace of

Google that they're going to care a lot

more about spending because inference is

just beginning. They're going to care a

lot more about the economics of it. So I

I do believe that it's the spending is

going to be tamed. I think right now

just everyone's overspending so it looks

way worse. Yeah, Google's an interesting

one because it was kind of they they

definitely had a moment there for a

while where everyone was kind of talking

them up and very very excited about it

and then it kind of drifted back which

kind of gets to u you know our quarterly

earnings right that are coming up. Uh

they're starting to trickle in now and

then big banks report next week and and

then the big ones the big tech. Um

anything standing out to you? It feels

like to me my perspective is every

earnings there's kind of one scapegoat

that gets the brunt of like all the

anger or or of you know uh questions or

pessimism about AI and that one stock

gets dinged and then everybody else does

better. You know for a while it was meta

there because of what they were trying

to push and they didn't have the cloud

infrastructure then you know sometimes

it's Microsoft. I do you see a similar

thing? do you think because it it feels

like always one is the one that gets hit

and then everybody else kind of is able

to escape by and this kind of also

speaks to how topheavy the market is but

I don't know is there anything Luke

we'll start with you anything top of

mind that you're thinking you know

looking at coming out

>> well it it almost speaks to the

dispersion that's been so important to

keeping the market at a high level like

if you had told me 3 years ago that hey

like some of the biggest companies in

the world are all going to be kind of

pursuing the same goal spending on the

same things to continue their dominant

positions in their markets and they'll

trade with extremely low correlations to

one another. I'd go like, you know,

that's crazy. No, there's no way that

happens. This is what has happened for

the entirety of the AI boom. So, you

know, it's almost like the same way in

which when uh, you know, Claude was

putting out a press or Anthropic was

putting out a press release about a new

cloud capability every day in Q1 and

software stocks, we get killed or more

recently how Muse has invented the

category of consumer inertia stocks,

which I don't think actually really

exists at all. We have to find victims.

like when one company does well to your

point, we almost have to find a loser in

the AI theme because that's almost just

how money moves around on a short-term

basis. But like when it comes to the the

broader story of earning season, I'm

more looking at like we have, you know,

pretty good nominal growth economy right

now. You a lot of it, you know, is

juiced by AI capex, but still even, you

know, median S&P 500 revenue growth has

been pretty pretty great. And right now

the equal weight S&P is further from its

record high than equal weight Europe

with you know diesel prices skyhigh,

food prices very high, yields high. I

this is a very unique environment for me

as an investor to see like the US

consumer stocks really be the outlet of

investor angst rather than you know

Europe in this kind of backdrop. So I'm

just looking to see if if it's enough

for companies to say hey like things are

pretty much the same as they were last

quarter and those stocks to to kind of

recover and bounce back. That's kind of

what I'm more looking for to see what

investor appetite is to embrace the many

given that the economy is still holding

up pretty darn well.

>> Sure. Lauren, what's what's your take

heading into earning season?

>> Um, you know, I there there's just so

much. I mean, I I think to say that the

economy is doing decent is interesting

take. Um, only because I I just I don't

know if the numbers are really

supported, right? like a lot of these

earnings are baking in the tariff

refunds that happened earlier in the

spring and so I don't to me I don't

I don't really have forecast for the

rest of the year. I'm looking to see

what 2027 holds. I mean a little bit

about you know with the midterm

elections and things like that but I

just don't think these numbers in my

opinion are realistic.

>> What does any sector in specific stand

out to you as a a better bellweather to

look at because obviously big tech is

kind of its own little animal.

>> Yeah. um consumer discretionaries that

that's where I look healthare uh seeing

>> where that goes. I just I I just don't

>> Yeah, tech is in its own space and I I

really don't know what I'm looking at

2027. Maybe we'll have a refresh and

we'll get way more clean numbers and

we'll go from there.

>> Sure. Shai, what's your take?

>> Yeah, I just think that everyone knows

AI demand's there. Infrastructure is

booming. I think that the cost required

to satisfy that AI demand is just moving

so much higher. I think a lot of people

are just doesn't matter what revenue

growth you have like you have Google

cloud AWS just producing like video game

like numbers on this scale is just like

it's unheard of like if you told me this

two years ago be like these are $5

trillion companies that's not the case.

It's disappointing investors cuz why is

that? free cash flow is not following

because they're just investing so

aggressively to build these AI cities

like they know it's going to uh be the

center of all the economy for decades to

come. They want to build as much real

estate as possible right now to benefit.

I do think that you're seeing names like

Micron being the beneficiary side of

that equation. Same with like uh

networking. But I think that like for

Metam Muse for example like everyone's

going to be hyping up that stock heading

up to that earnings. Why is that? first

Chad GBT moment in three years.

>> Guess what? Their capex, you think their

capex was high before they had an

application that would satisfy the

market. It's gonna balloon. Like Zuck is

the one of the few CEOs that could care

less about what the public thinks cuz

guess what? You can't fire him. Like

he's going to do whatever he feels like

he needs to do. Capex will balloon.

We'll see if the the street is satisfied

enough with the metrics they say on Muse

to justify the the bump. But again, like

I just think that big tech is kind of

dead money a little and I think that's

why semiconductors are kind of the

better place to be. They've gone

penalized due to some macro environments

like the tenure yield for example is

kind of really hitting the semiconductor

space due to funding these data centers

becoming more expensive, but that's

still the beneficiary.

>> Yeah. Uh so Mark's always going to do

what Mark's going to do. You know,

that's that's how he rolls. Uh we'll end

here on a fun one which is we had an

interesting story about this new concept

called loud working. Uh the idea that

job market as the most recent jobs port

still a little shaky still a little

uncertain. People are very uneasy. So

when you're at work you got to be loud.

I don't mean volume. I'm I talk with my

hands. I'm Italian. I always talk loud.

I mean more so just kind of letting your

achievements show through. Um and really

standing out. So uh you know we are all

in the media space. We're all loud

working constantly. This has been a, you

know, a thing. But, uh, what's your

take, Luke, on, you know, this idea of

people now trying to tout their

achievements and talk very loudly. Is

this something that you think has always

existed or or is really popping up now

more?

>> I mean, I'm happy it's spreading. Like,

I came in I came my first ever job, we

had a scoreboard with how many page

views you had up on up on a wall and how

many posts you had written that day. So,

like that's the environment in which

I've always worked. And so, the idea of

of loud working of saying like, "Hey,

this is what I've done. you better catch

me. It's like I I think that kind of

like healthy competition and as long as

it's kind of, you know, in the service

of teamwork and not putting down other

people's achievements, but constantly

racing to do more, do better. I think,

you know, that's how great organizations

operate. It's when people feel pride in

their work, pride in their

accomplishments, they're putting them

out there and others are following suit.

>> Mhm. Lauren, you cut your teeth on the

trading floor, right? Obviously, then

kind of continuing to go in in the

content game. What's What's your take?

>> I I love it. I mean, especially starting

in an environment, an allmile

environment such as the New York Stock

Exchange, um, it it is really healthy

competition and I and I think it only

motivates you to want to do more. So, I

I'm all for it.

>> Shai, what do you think?

>> It's the new age of Hunger Games. It's

going to be just intense and intense and

I think it honestly it it it's justified

because the we're in the stage of AI

where it's replacing the jobs of the old

economy in order to make room for the

new jobs of the new economy. So what I

would tell people is just to become more

leveraged. Like if you're in fear, like

don't scream it. Just over the next

couple years, like find ways to automate

repetitive workflow in your department

and make yourself irreplaceable because

guess what? You show the initiative and

you ended up winning the Hunger Games of

your department.

>> Yeah, I think it's it's definitely true

that the idea of, oh, we'll just put

your head down, work really hard, and

things will work out. Like those those

days are gone. It's it's it's long gone.

You have to be a self-starter. You have

to be willing to kind of jump in the

fray. And and I think Shay to your

point, you have to be real or sorry, you

have to be really uh specific about

finding sweet spots in your

organization. Like what's a problem that

I can fix that my boss or my boss's boss

will really notice? And then that kind

of puts you on the fast track as far as

like getting noticed and and getting

really thought out. So yeah. No, I mean

a lot to uh to chew on. What's uh you

know, anything you guys want to tout

>> shout? Has there has there ever been a

time where putting your head down and

just doing good work paid off? Like is

that is that a far gone time or does

that just never exist?

>> I don't think so. It seems like from the

movies.

>> Yeah, maybe that's me being too

nostalgic. Well, on that note, um

Lauren, Luke, Shay, thanks so much for

joining us. This was an awesome market

hang. And uh yeah, until next time.

We'll see you tomorrow.

>> All right, that was fun.

Heat.

Hey, heat. Hey, heat.

Heat. Heat. N.

Down.

Down.

Down.

Down.

Ah.

Heat. Heat.

Hey,

hey, hey.