Today's number, 3.5 million. That's how

many Epstein files were released by the

Department of Justice last week.

Mentioned in the files was Elon Musk,

who apparently did not go to the island,

but he did try before being politely

rejected. [music]

We're not sure what's worse.

Welcome to Profy Markets. I'm Edson. It

is February 4th. Let's check in on

yesterday's market vitals.

The major indices declined amid a broad

tech sell-off. Software companies

weighed down the market after anthropic

released an automation tool for legal

work. The tech draw down hit Bitcoin as

well, dragging it to its lowest level

since November 2024. Meanwhile, Disney

shares slid again after the company

named Josh Dearo, chairman of the

experiences division as its next CEO. By

the way, Rich Greenfield predicted that

on our episode yesterday. And Netflix

shares fell as the Senate antitrust

hearing on the Warner Brothers deal

kicked off. A couple of stocks bucked

the downward trend. Walmart rose as much

as 3% and joined the $1 trillion market

cap club. And Palanteer gained more than

6% after reporting record revenues and

profits for the past quarter. Outside of

the stock market, gold and silver paired

some of their losses. And finally, oil

rose after the US shot down an Iranian

drone headed towards an aircraft carrier

in the Arabian Sea. Okay, what else is

happening?

Elon Musk's empire is consolidating.

SpaceX has acquired XAI, creating a

combined entity worth $1.25 trillion.

That makes it the most valuable private

company in history. Musk is calling it

quote the most ambitious vertically

integrated innovation engine on and off

Earth. And the logic behind the deal is

bold. It is a bet on space-based data

centers, which Musk believes are quote

obviously the only way to scale AI. The

Allstar deal comes just a week after

Musk announced that SpaceX will go

public later this year. Okay, here to

discuss the deal, we are speaking with

one of the reporters who actually broke

this story, Ed Lllo, co-host of

Bloomberg Technology on Bloomberg

television. Ed, thank you very much for

joining us again on Profy Markets.

>> Yeah, thank you for having me in Big

Story.

>> Big Story. Um, so I guess just tell us

the basics. You're the one who who broke

this SpaceX and XAI merging together.

Um, what do we know so far? Yeah, it's

an all stock transaction that values the

kind of entire entity at $1.25 trillion,

the SpaceX bit1 trillion, the XAI bit

$250 billion. But there's like some

structural things that are important,

which is the XAI basically operates as a

subsidiary of SpaceX, which is important

because SpaceX is subject to ITAR rules,

right? Rules that govern the use of

technology and defense applications. And

so like my understanding and our

understanding and our reporting is that

you know even though they're now

combined XAI kind of continues to

operate independently as its own

company.

>> How does this change things for the IPO?

Because obviously SpaceX is going to be

the biggest IPO of the year, one of the

biggest of all time. Does this change

things there?

>> Isn't that the the $ 1.5 trillion or

more question? you know, our our

reporting and our understanding is that

the work continues for SpaceX and now

the combined entity to do an IPO. In the

summer, we had reported it would be at

the midpoint of of this year. And while

like out there from the cell side, from

from lots of people that follow these

companies closely, there are still

questions about whether it happens. The

ultimate rationale behind this right is

uh data centers in space. And at the

time that we broke the story on why

SpaceX would go public um and and its

motivations for needing to raise tens of

billions of dollars, it was quite simple

that there is an ambition in place for

for space-based data center

infrastructure, but somebody's got to

buy the GPUs, right? That's that's the

kind of fixed cost. Um and and based on

our reporting and the days around this,

all of that is still holding true. So

this data centers in space thing which

yes that is what they've said he wrote

the idea is space-based AI that's the

only way to scale. So could you just

break down what that is? That is

literally let's take these data centers

that exist on the ground and instead of

having them on the ground we're going to

have them in orbit in space because

there's not enough space in the ground.

I mean why do we need to put data

centers in space? to to Elon Musk's mind

literally, you know, pardon the pun,

there's more space in space. You know,

the simple way that that that Musk

explains it is that right now the

limiting factor for scaling AI on Earth

is energy, right? You know, there's a

great um burden on grids across North

America and and other countries and

other jurisdictions. Water consumption

is an issue, impact on communities and

literal space to build the data centers.

If you put a data center in the form of

a satellite and put it into orbit, the

energy question is solved by solar. To

the mind of those advocating for this,

uh, you have to handle cooling and and

space is a vacuum and and to the the

mind of the engineers working on it,

that's easily solved. And you have

plenty of real estate, let's call it, in

space to to build on. And and that is

the vision that that Elon Musk is

pitching here. It's it's a horrible term

when you're when you're a financial news

journalist, but but what we're talking

about basically is vertical integration,

deeper vertical integration, right?

Starship provides the rocket that

carries these satellites into orbit and

deploys them. They are data centers to

all intents and purposes. XAI has

trained the models, but also those

models need to be run inference, which

you guys know that that is all outlined

in in the public coms that that SpaceX

and XI put out there, but also the

internal coms that we've reported on

around this too.

>> As I I am somewhat of a Elon Musk

skeptic and as the Musk skeptic, my view

when I see this is he's saying that the

idea is that we got to put these data

centers in space. How do we do it? Don't

ask too many questions. The idea is

we'll we'll get there. We'll figure it

out. At the same time, XAI is a company

that is competing with the likes of Open

AI and Anthropic, these companies that

are burning through billions of dollars

in cash and are having to raise billions

of dollars in cash. And XAI is itself

burning, I believe, a billion dollars a

month. And so when I see this, my

initial reaction is this is the saving

grace of XAI. If things aren't are

looking difficult over at the AI

company, well then why not just roll it

up into the bigger company which perhaps

has more uh cash to play with to invest

in in the AI models and training. Is

that too cynical? Uh what do you think

of that perspective? There are lots of

uh investors uh and people in the

markets that are are skeptical about the

the financial rationale for this

arrangement combining private XAI with

private SpaceX. And what we had also

reported last week is that Elon Musk had

looked at two distinct scenarios. One

scenario involved SpaceX combining with

Tesla which is of course a public

company. Bloomberg has reported that XAI

is burning a billion dollars of cash per

month and on a a quarter basis, you

know, you can put that in aggregate. It

also has a large debt burden which is

now on the balance sheet of SpaceX

technically. Um, those that would push

back against those concerns would say,

well, we also learned quite a bit about

SpaceX's financials. Revenue is growing

with Starlink now a majority contributor

as opposed to Launch being a majority

contributor. and on a an EBIT basis at

least it is profitable and so they're

not concerned about SpaceX needing to

service the XAI debt or account for the

losses at the XAI unit. Um but again,

you know, the the public commentary from

from SpaceX and from Musk is that this

is about deep vertical integration. It

makes the use of the talents and

resources of both companies to the

maximum effect which is AI development

whether that's here on Earth or up in

space. So Ed, I know you've been looking

at this for a long time, reporting on

it, observing what's happening, and you

know, your job is to be objective on

both sides. I would love to know what

you think the real motivation is because

it seems like there there are two things

at odds here. There's the financial

picture. You bring up the amount of cash

they're burning. You bring up the debt

picture at XAI, which is, you know, a

question. And then there's the deep

vertical integration pitch which is

coming from SpaceX and they're probably

saying no it's not about the financials.

It's because there are synergies here on

the business side. What do you think?

What what is the true uh strongest

primary motivator for Elon Musk to merge

these two things together?

>> Yeah. And none of this is that big a

surprise. You know, it's kind of

consistent with with what we've called

Elon Inc., right? You know, Elon Musk

has many ventures. They've always had

historically close engineering and

financial ties, right? There have been

engineers that have worked on materials

at Tesla and worked at SpaceX. You know,

some of the results of of SpaceX's more

recent success like um the heat

shielding on Starship. You know, a lot

of Tesla engineers touch those hands. A

lot of Tesla engineers were the reason

that XAI could build its data centers in

Tennessee so quickly. you know, this

kind of intercomp cooperation is is not

new. The financial part is also not that

new, right? XAI has been a buyer of

Tesla's energy products from Tesla's

earnings recently. The company disclosed

a $2 billion equity investment in XAI.

It's all kind of linked. Last August, we

we did this as the cover of Business

Week magazine. You know, 6 months into

the the Trump administration's term in

office. What was it that Elon Musk was

trying to get out of being in and around

the White House working with Doge? And

it was that a lot of the priorities that

he had for his different companies were

kind of aligned all around AI, you know,

and and having proximity to that

administration allowed him to try and

influence things that would help those

those priorities. But yeah, it is AI at

the end of the day. Tesla has hard

pivoted away from cars. it now needs,

you know, to develop the software part

of AI for for autonomous driving and and

the Optimus humanoid robot program. Um,

XAI per the the regulatory filing in the

week. It's not just a financial

investment that Tesla's made. They have

a framework to now share and work on the

technology. So, fast forward, the future

is that all of these companies kind of

work in parallel. What will the space

data centers actually be doing?

Inference in space, right? running

inference on Optimus or running

inference on on models that are that are

underpinning something else, be it the

the robo taxi network. It's kind of been

hiding in plain sight a little bit.

>> Do you think ultimately they all merge

with Tesla? I mean, the way you describe

it, Elon, Inc., it's a good point.

They're all kind of collaborating. It

seems as though maybe the ultimate goal

is, yeah, just roll it all up into one

company. How likely do you think that

is? Yeah, our reporting is still that

like this SpaceX XAI combined entity is

going to do an IPO later this year, but

actually loads and loads of people's

immediate reaction to the news was okay

Tesla must be next. You know, fold Tesla

in in in some way. People just think

that that is the logical step to make.

Um when we did the August edition of

Business Week, you know, it was it was

well reported and and in conversation

with all of these sources in close

proximity to the companies and Elon

Musk, there is a a perceive a

perception, you know, a realization that

if you took these massive companies and

tried to to fold them into one

conglomerate in any environment, that

would be tricky. You know, regulators

would look at it for one reason or

another. The mechanics of it um would be

difficult. And again, I go back just to

the reporting about um the two options

that we believe were looked at, SpaceX

plus Tesla or SpaceX plus XAI. And in in

the first instance, they went with

SpaceX plus X AI. But there were a body

of SpaceX investors, you know, with with

a meaningful footprint on the cap table

that that looked at it and and to them,

the Tesla combination made a lot more

sense um than the XAI one did. Not just

because of the sort of financial health

of such a transaction but because that

what they were working on you know at

scale manufacturing vertical integration

of of those more analogous industries to

that to those investors it it was

completely obvious. It's

>> really fascinating. Ed Lllo co-host of

Bloomberg Technology on Bloomberg

television. Ed, thank you very much for

joining us.

>> Thank you for having me. We'll be right

back. And if you're enjoying the show so

far, be sure to like and subscribe to

the Profod YouTube channel at the link

below.

Support for the show comes from Public,

the investing platform for those who

take it seriously. On Public, you can

build a multi-asset portfolio of stocks,

bonds, and options. And now, generated

assets, which allow you to turn any idea

into an investable index with AI. It all

starts with your prompt. From renewable

energy companies with high free cash

flow to semiconductor suppliers growing

revenue over 20% a year overear. You can

literally type any prompt and put the AI

to work. It screens thousands of stocks,

builds a one-of-a-kind index, and let

you back test it against the S&P 500.

Then you can invest in a few clicks.

Generated assets are like ETFs with

infinite possibilities, completely

customizable, and based on your thesis,

not someone else's. Go to

public.com/provg

and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you

transfer your portfolio. That's

public.com/provg.

Paid for by public investing, broker

services by Open to the Public

Investing, Inc., member FINRA and SIPC.

The advisory services by public advisors

LLC SEC registered advisor generated

assets is an interactive analysis tool.

Output is forformational purposes only

and is not an investment recommendation

or advice. [music] Complete disclosures

available at public.com/disclosures.

We're back with Profy Markets.

Oracle has set investors on edge. On

Sunday night, the company announced

plans to raise up to $50 billion to fund

its cloud infrastructure. It launched

the first part of that financing on

Monday with a $25 billion bond sale that

actually drew record demand. But

enthusiasm quickly turned to concern as

questions resurfaced about a related

matter, specifically Nvidia's investment

in open AI. As a reminder, back in

September, Nvidia announced it plan to

invest up to hundred billion in open AI.

However, CEO Jensen Huang recently

clarified that that figure was quote

never a commitment. and it appears that

the investment has stalled. That poses a

serious risk for Oracle as roughly half

of its $625 billion in future revenues

are made up of spending commitments from

OpenAI. So, the question is now louder

than ever. Will Open AI be able to pay

up. In total, Oracle stock has fallen

roughly 10% since Sunday [music] night.

All right, here to walk us through what

is going on at Oracle, we're speaking

with Gil Lura, head of technology

research at DAD Davidson. Gil, thank you

for joining us again on Profy Markets.

>> Thanks for having me.

>> So, there are a lot of moving parts

here. Um, Oracle says that they're going

to raise uh $50 billion worth of debt

and equity. they go out and they raise

the debt successfully,

but the stock is sliding

um down around 10% in the past couple of

days, and it seems to all have to do

with Open AI. Can you just give us the

the playbyplay? What on earth is going

on with Oracle right now?

>> No, you're exactly right. There's just a

lot of moving pieces, especially the

last couple of days. So let's just start

with the fact that all of software is

down a lot and um all of more than all

of Oracle's cash flow comes from its

software business. Let's not forget that

Oracle is mostly almost entirely a

company that sells database software uh

enterprise resource planning software.

That's where they get more than all

their profits. And and right now the

market feels like software is just a bad

idea in general. So that's been

happening at once. And then you have the

the fact that they're raising capital

and then they said that this is all the

capital they're going to need this year.

That's good. The fact they were able to

do at least part of the debt. We're not

sure they're done, but at least part of

the debt, that's good. Then you start

getting into some of the other

challenges. one is that's that's it for

this year. But for them to be able to

build the capacity that they promised

Open AI, they're going to have to do

this again next year and probably again

the year after that. Meaning raise

another $50 billion next year and the

year after that. What's happened is if

you look closely at this debt issuance,

it was not cheap. the rating agencies

gave their secured debt, the the senior

secured debt a triple B minus rating,

which is to say just above junk bond

status. This is a 50-year-old company

that is now issuing debt, almost a junk

bond rate. So that's not good. They

won't have any cash to pay that debt

down. They're going to have negative

cash flow this year. So a year from now

when they need to go back to the debt

markets, that's going to be junk bonds.

So even higher yield, higher interest

expense. To add insult to injury,

there's also the equity offering.

They're doing what's called an at the

market offering. That means that instead

of doing a full issuance uh overnight,

they're going to sell a little bit of

stock every day. And our back of the

envelope method, I could walk you

through it, is that that's probably 10

weeks of them selling 10% of the daily

active trading volume. uh every trading

day. So that's going to keep putting

pressure on the stock possibly for the

next 10 weeks. So those are those are

some of the puts and takes here in in

what is a very dynamic complicated

situation. And where does OpenAI fit

into all of this? Because there was

reporting that OpenAI had this deal with

Nvidia that maybe isn't as secure as

people once thought. Uh and then Oracle

puts out this really fascinating

statement. They say, quote, "The NVIDIA

OpenAI deal has zero impact on our

financial relationship with OpenAI. We

remain highly confident in OpenAI's

ability to raise funds and meet its

commitments." And then that statement

goes viral and everyone's kind of

laughing and pointing fingers at the

statement and at Oracle right now. So

talk a little bit about how Open AI fits

into this slightly ugly picture for

Oracle.

>> Yeah. Well, then there's all that and

and that [laughter] that tweet was also

unfortunate that that would do protest

too much, right? And this is what a

corporate account should be tweeting. I

I would take a look at that and and I'm

not sure who what the instructions were,

but I I we've talked about the fact that

Oracle is raising all this capital to

build data centers for open AI. So open

Oracle has to raise a lot of capital to

build data service for open air

>> for open to be able to pay for this

compute capacity. They need to raise a

lot of capital as well. And in fact if

you think about where Oracle stands in

line it's important to see how much

OpenAI can raise. If they can't raise

enough Oracle's not getting paid because

Oracle is probably third or fourth in

line in terms of who OpenAI is going to

get paid who opened AAI is going to pay

when they raise the capital. If open

doesn't raise enough capital only

Microsoft gets paid maybe Amazon

if we Oracle has to hope that open

raises hundred billion dollars or more

to be able to afford its grand ambitions

which include this open AI capacity. So

one company raising debt at almost junk

ratings in order to build capacity for a

startup a money losing startup that's

still struggling to raise capital so it

can pay for it. We've talked about this.

this is bubbleicious behavior. This is

not okay. This is unhealthy behavior. It

may still work out because this AI stuff

is great, but it's very very risky uh

type of situation for really for both

companies.

>> And it's really fascinating how it all

kind of ties back to Nvidia because it

was all about Nvidia investing the money

into Open AI and then that's the money

they're going to use to pay Oracle. But

there was this fascinating interview

with Jensen Huang which I would love to

to get your reactions to. He was asked

about this 100 billion dollar commitment

deal that was talked about with OpenAI.

Uh he was asked about what's going to

happen with that and this is what he

said.

>> There was never a commitment. They

invited us to uh invest up to a hundred

million dollars

>> and of course we were we were uh very

happy and honored that they invited us

but we will invest uh one step at a

time.

>> It seems that he's kind of frustrated in

that video um that people are saying

that oh you're going to you're going to

invest hundred billion dollars and he's

saying no that's not what's happening. I

would just love to get your reactions to

how he sounded and also what he said.

Yeah, there's a lot of things going on

there, too. So, uh, first of all, that

hund00 million that was talked about a

while ago, that was really just a

framework for what I would call a

rebate. Nvidia Nvidia talked to Nvidia

agreed with OpenAI for every gigawatt of

capacity that you get out there, we'll

invest $10 billion at your current

valuation, which at the time was $500

billion. Um, OpenAI hasn't even deployed

a gigawatt yet. So, they haven't gotten

that first 10 billion. So that was a

framework and and and I understand that

Jensen's saying that. By the way, the

conversation now is for Nvidia to

actually invest tens of billions of

dollars actually at this level, not as a

rebate, as is the discussion for

Microsoft and Amazon and and to also

invest in OpenAI. So it again it is

quite possible that OpenAI raised this

capital but there's a lot of noise and

the last couple of days there were news

items about Nvidia being frustrated with

OpenAI spreading itself too thin in

terms of the businesses it's it's in

deploying in terms of the chips that

it's buying. So there was frustration

Nvidia and coincidentally or not there

was a leak from open air that they're

frustrated with Nvidia's chip

performance. So, a little bit of uh

childish um conflict here, but at some

point the adults are in the room. Nvidia

has a very significant interest that

OpenAI does well, right? Remember, if if

there's no OpenAI, there's no anthropic.

Everybody's using Google TPUs. So,

Nvidia needs OpenAI to do well and it

has the capital to invest as does

Microsoft, as does Amazon. So it is

likely that those three will fund the

continued expansion of OpenAI at least

this year. But if you can imagine that

if Nvidia invested OpenAI, there's

strings attached. There's no more

discussion of other chips and there

certainly will not be communication out

of OpenAI about Nvidia chips not

performing. So that's where we're at. A

little bit of middle school drama, but

at the end of the day, uh there's a lot

of incentives going around to make sure

that the investment continues.

the debt picture that you described at

Oracle in concert with the capital

problem over at OpenAI and the fact that

they need more money to spend on these

commitments than they actually have. I

it's all very concerning. It just like

very flashing bright red signs when you

hear that. We were, you know, when when

or a couple of years ago when Oracle

started to position itself as a real AI

player, we were quite bullish on the

company and that actually uh, you know,

paid dividends going forward. But it's

now getting to the point where there are

so many red flags here. Do you think

that this is just a company that

investors probably shouldn't touch at

this point? Are we getting into a a

territory that is genuinely uh dangerous

if you're if you're buying Oracle or is

or is is it safer than than I'm

portraying? No, it is risky. And let me

just put it in context. Oracle is still

trading at 20 times forward earnings on

what what looks like low teens growth

next year. Salesforce is going to grow

low teens growth next year. It's trading

at 16 times. Adobe is going to grow low

teens next year. It's trading at 12

times. So Oracle by Again, given where

we are on software, Oracle is not cheap

by any stretch of the imagination. They

have good business the the the baseline

database business does generate a lot of

cash. The baseline Oracle cloud business

was okay. It was growing fast, not very

profitably, growing fast. [snorts] The

AI part of the business, the AI compute

part of the business appears to be such

low margin that it's not even clear that

it that they should be investing in it.

And yet again, to your point, they just

borrowed a lot and they're issuing at

least 5% of their shares in order to

fund this, which again may grow their

revenue a lot, but may not add any

profit anytime soon. Certainly not any

cash flow anytime soon.

>> So very risky, especially compared to

much better software companies that are

trading at a lower multiple right now.

>> Okay, Gil Larry, head of technology

research at DA Davidson. Thank you so

much, Gil. Lots of crazy stuff happening

in tech world. I really appreciate you

taking us through it.

>> Thank you.

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

enjoying the show so far, be sure to

like and subscribe to the Profod YouTube

channel at the link below.

Support for the show comes [music] from

LinkedIn. It's a shame when the best B2B

marketing gets wasted on the wrong

audience. Like imagine running an ad for

cataract surgery on Saturday morning

cartoons [music] or running a promo for

this show on a video about Roblox or

something. No offense to [music] our Gen

Alpha listeners, but that would be a

waste of anyone's ad budget. So [music]

when you want to reach the right

professionals, you can use LinkedIn ads.

LinkedIn has grown to a network of

[music] over 1 billion professionals and

130 million decision makers according to

their data. That's where [music] it

stands apart from other ad buys. You can

target your buyers by job title,

industry, company role, seniority,

skills, [music] company revenue. All so

you can stop wasting budget on the wrong

audience. That's why LinkedIn ads boasts

one of the highest B2B [music] return on

ad spend of all online ad networks.

Seriously, all of them. Spend $250 on

your first campaign [music] on LinkedIn

ads and get a free $250 credit for the

next one. Just go to linkedin.com/scott.

That's linkedin.com/scott.

Terms and conditions [music] apply.

We're back with Profy Markets.

So, [music] lots of AI drama this week

and at the center of it all again, it's

open AI. Through multiple reports,

[music] we now know that those $100

billion that Nvidia was going to commit

to Open AI, whatever that means, that is

now quote on ice. But what might be even

more interesting is the extent to which

Oracle has been implicated in all of

this. And even more interesting than

that is perhaps what Oracle said about

it. This was the public statement from

the official Oracle account on X which I

said to Gil. They said quote the Nvidia

OpenAI deal has zero impact on our

financial relationship with OpenAI. We

remain highly confident in OpenAI's

ability to raise funds and meet its

commitments. There are several things

that are striking about this. Number

one, why is a large corporation

commenting on a third party deal with

which they are not involved? That is

kind of strange. Number two, why do they

feel the need to say anything about it?

And number three, why bring more

attention to this deal than it already

has? These are all the questions that

everyone's asking themselves. is the

question that I'm asking myself. But I'm

only asking them because Oracle posted

about this. If Oracle hadn't said

anything, then perhaps we wouldn't be

asking these questions. But they did.

And so now we are. And the answer to

those questions is quite obvious.

They're saying these things because they

are worried about them. When they say

this has no impact on our relationship

with OpenAI, that's how you know it does

have an impact on their relationship

with OpenAI. When they say they're

highly confident that OpenAI will meet

its commitments, that's how you know

they're not highly confident that OpenAI

will meet its commitments. This is

public relations 101. This is what is

known as the Stryand effect. And that is

whenever you try to suppress or downplay

an issue that you don't want lots of

people talking about. All that happens

when you do that is it makes people talk

about it even more. And this is the

perfect example. That statement, that

press release received 5 million views

on X. To put that into perspective, that

is more than double the prime time

viewership of Fox News. And no, people

were not saying it was a good statement.

It wasn't going viral for that reason.

People said it was a bad statement. They

were trolling Oracle. They were saying

how embarrassing it was. And crucially,

in the hours after that statement was

published, Oracle stock fell 6%. So this

should be a learning moment in public

relations. I think companies need to

remember that business is now more

popular than ever as a form of

entertainment. It is a sport now. It is

a series. You Oracle are now part of the

show. And so what that means is when you

screw up like they did, the stakes are a

lot higher because everyone is watching.

Everyone is interested in how this plays

out. Now, I don't know who made the call

to post that statement. It seems to have

come from someone potentially higher up

in the company, but if you're running a

half a trillion dollar company, which

Oracle is, you need to be better. The

language needs to be way less defensive.

It needs to deal with these concerns a

lot more delicately than it did. And

most importantly, someone should have

asked, "Do we really need to post this?"

And the answer should have been no. You

know, maybe 10 years ago, people

wouldn't have noticed this, but the year

is 2026. We are in a digital era. We

live in an age of virality. The costs of

these mistakes are higher. And in this

case, it cost them roughly $25 billion

in market cap. It is quite simple.

You've got to be smarter. Thanks for

listening to Prophy Markets from Profy

Media. If you liked what you heard,

subscribe to our YouTube channel and

tune in tomorrow for more. [music]