Going Vertical

Añadido: 2026-05-18

[00:00:00]Good morning, Mr. Arnold. How are we?

[00:00:03]Doing well. Great Mother's Day. Blessing all the moms out there. Feeling good. I know Mother's Day is gone. You know, you have your one day, but you know, we're going to throw it out to all the mothers [music] out there who listen. I know there are tens of thousands of you listening >> [music] >> as you as you take care of your families.

[00:00:18]Thank you. Thank you for being a mother.

[00:00:20]Most important job in the world. Second most important job is trying to read the tea leaves of what the hell is going on in the world as we barrel towards a digital economy built on agenda commerce, a multipolar geopolitical world that seems to be fraying at the seams, an increasingly chaotic global financial system that is backed by fiat currency that is being I don't want to say attacked, but it's being there there's a new competitor on the block.

[00:00:47]It's called Bitcoin. And we've been doing this podcast for I think I think we're officially past the the point where it becomes a habit. I think we've done I think 21 days makes a habit. Have we had 21 episodes? I don't I don't think. Probably not. That'd be good for the memes, but I don't think so yet. Not yet, but we're almost there. Point being, we've been making calls on this show, uh which is a recap of John Arnold's 10:31 timestamp newsletter. So, really John's been making calls in the newsletter that we've been recapping.

[00:01:16]They've really been been hitting pretty hard and coming to fruition, and we've seen a continuation of that, uh particularly with the the Apple Intel news that dropped uh last week over the weekend. And but before we get into that, I think just staying on the theme of the meta war that we've been talking about, the US really trying to pull levers to to get asymmetrical leverage in the geopolitical realm, particularly against China, and we have some data in from independent refiners imported oil refining margins out of China. It's not looking good for them, which would signal that the US actions in in the Middle East, if we believe this meta war is going on behind the scenes are are being are very successful for for US leverage.

[00:02:02]Yeah, you know, it's um we we monitor the situation so all the moms out there can do the the most important job in the world.

[00:02:10]And I think the the situation monitoring has certainly uh the patterns emerging from that I think are getting more and more clear. You know, my my usual caveats apply that nothing is ever set in stone and everything's path dependent and probabilistic and things can always go a bunch of different ways, but yeah, I definitely think the last, you know, 6 months have have pointed pretty clearly in one direction on a variety of these data points and we just keep kind of getting more and more. And you know, I titled the the timestamp this week going vertical and we're going to talk about I think three vertical charts that I saw this week. You know, in a a world where we're just getting more and more of them every every day seemingly. This is the first one. A fairly notable chart out of ZeroHedge highlighting the margins for independent oil refiners in China. These are a common name for it was teapot refiners.

[00:02:56]They're like semi under the umbrella of of government and kind of semi do the bidding of government, semi-independent.

[00:03:04]Historically very big buyer of Iranian oil, sanction Iranian oil. And they are currently undergoing um a fairly notable trend shift over the course of the last 10 years of deeply negative margins as spiking input costs are not allowed to be passed on fully to kind of end users in in China. Take all Chinese data with like a bit of a grain of salt as there's a lot of kind of uncertainty and manipulation and frankly like, you know, manipulation both from the Chinese government but also like from people who have an axe to grind you know, in the West presenting the data.

[00:03:35]So it's all, you know, uh big grain of salt in all of this, but you know, this is a a notable enough move that I thought it was definitely very meaningful and and worth talking about because, you know, if if it's directionally true, I think it points exactly to an outcome that I think you'd be naive to believe certain parties in the US were not anticipating or you know trying to trying to create by doing what the the DOD DOW has done in the last couple of months in in the Persian Gulf and throwing a major net oil importer into you know relative disarray. It's definitely the case that from what we can tell China has significant petroleum reserves. I think they were probably more aggressive and more forward-looking in in stocking up over the last 5 or 10 years relative to the US following the the massive SPR drain of 2022. We did not even come back close to the high water mark and so we're not in a fantastic position there, but we do have the the advantage of being a a major net exporter of various crude products. So once again just highlighting this kind of meaningful asymmetry the two poles to the extent that we want to entertain the analysis that you know those two poles are getting more and more opposed. Yeah, and I think now that we have the luxury of the ability to look back retrospectively on this war and again if we're running down this thesis and we if we want to appease it just thinking about the war in Iran starting at the end of February many people saying, "Hey, why is the US getting dragged into this war?

[00:05:08]It seems like we're fighting on behalf of Israel. This is not what I want as an American citizen. I was told no more Middle East wars." But if you look at the sort of scheduling of the the meeting that President President Trump had in order with President Xi of China, it was originally scheduled for late March early April and that got postponed to this week and so they're going to meet later this week and again running with this analysis maybe Trump was looking at the the war with Iran back in late February early March as a way to sort of send a message to President Xi before before these meetings and it looks like they're happening today as John said. Look at this chart, not looking great for the refineries within China and as we can see their crude oil imports have fallen significantly and I would not be shocked if we if we come to find when the history books are written ultimately by the victors, who knows, that this was more calculated than people understand cuz you have the the meetings originally start the war, postpone the meetings, let the ability for data to gather and come in and of course the week of this meeting with between President Xi and President Trump. It seems like Trump's going to have a ton of leverage.

[00:06:26]Yeah, definitely probably more leverage than people expected you know six months ago and I think it's important to highlight once again like not endorsing any of this, not actually happy about a lot of it, but just trying to objectively analyze it as as clearly as possible and I think you know I still see the narrative that the the CIA, Mossad, whatever nexus is kind of driving this, the the deep state as it were and the deep state means different things depending on you know whether your guy is in office or not but in any case the the people who think in you know 20-50 year increments somehow didn't know that the the first response to striking Iran would be that Strait of Hormuz is closed even though the the National Security Strategy document that was released late last year specifically listed keeping the Strait of Hormuz open as a key priority for the for the US despite the fact that it's never been closed. Like so you're telling you know I think there a lot of people out there who still want to believe that like the US is just flabbergasted that this happened and it's like I mean come on guys, [clears throat] come on.

[00:07:25]The the pieces are I think aligning you know pretty well. Again, it may or may not work. There's going to be blowback and downstream issues but I I I think to as a as a you know an investor and analyst of the markets, as someone who's just trying to like protect portfolio, you do yourself a disservice by you know maintaining a narrative that the the people who are really, you know, behind the levers of power are that stupid and and lack foresight, you know, to to that degree. Particularly when they were very explicitly kind of signaling it, you know, 6 months ago.

[00:07:54]But in any case, you know, you're seeing this the impact already on, you know, here on Chinese crude imports. You could say that's because of, you know, they're they're choosing to drain, you know, the SPR instead of importing, you know, much more costly oil. You could also say it's independent refiners, you know, responding to the fact that they can't actually pass on cost fully by, you know, lowering imports. But either way, China's definitely still, you know, maintaining this posture of of strength and certainly they have many many cards to play. You saw it's not on here, but you saw last week for the first time China basically explicitly told refiners and various other companies to to not worry about US Treasury sanctions on Iranian oil. And so I think that's kind of a, you know, posturing that they're in, you know, a great position. Some of the actions that they also took though last week, I think point to maybe a little more hedging on that. Top headline especially, you know, telling banks to deposit loans to sanction refiners, right? So it's kind of talking out both sides of their mouth there. And then to your point on on the the Trump G meeting, you know, ahead of that, apparently, again, you take all these headlines with a grain of salt, but sources say, you know, for whatever that's worth, that China behind the scenes is, you know, pressing Iran to to to wind this down, find a find a compromise and and get Hormuz opened again. Which would not suggest, you know, a desire to see this just or an ability to kind of watch this go on forever, right? So yeah, I think these are all kind of meaningful data points in that whole in that whole story. And again, I think [clears throat] it it would behoove everyone, [snorts] every investor, every kind of anyone looking at the markets to just think carefully about the the constraints and incentives and and goals of all the actors at play in like kind of an honest way.

[00:09:28]Completely agree. And I mean, we're just going to keep going down the list here cuz he's going vertical. And the next chart we have is the Intel stock stock chart, which you were you were sending screenshots of many different charts over the weekend but this was one of them and it's pretty astonishing how vertical this one but again it confirmed something that we've been talking about for for some time on this show particularly which is you have this massive effort to reindustrialize the US manufacturing base and bring the supply chains home obviously the Trump administration took a stake in Intel last year and people are wondering what they were going to do with it or how they were going to try to use that stake to influence what's going on in Intel and their their chip production and lo and behold we had some news again I think a week before this meeting between President Trump and President Xi very intentionally that the government is pressuring and it seems like Apple and Intel are are on board and saying that Apple should be using Intel chips in their products which hasn't been the case for for many decades Apple famously uses TSMC which is obviously a hotbed topic in the geopolitical realm because TSMC obviously is headquartered in Taiwan which is becoming more contested as as stakes continue to increase and so just another I think massive chess move leading up to this negotiation with Xi by the Trump administration and again a confirmation of of the fact that we are really not kidding or not kidding when we say we're going to reindustrialize or at least attempt to reindustrialize the US economy. Yeah, I I think that's right. I remember I don't think we're doing the show yet but I remember writing on the newsletter and I think we talked about it on Bitcoin Alpha RIP the the processor of the show when the initial Intel Intel deal came out in like September of uh administration converting grants to to equity. Uh stock popped then you can barely even see that pop on the chart now. But I think we were talking about how like this is really kind of meaningful move and kind of opening salvo in the what has now become very clearly and apparently US industrial policy, right? Like it's not you know, it was one thing like the MP materials deal in last summer or kind of these little onesy-twosy things with very small companies that you know, have strategic positions but the people I haven't really heard of like Intel is you know, the the the ultimate probably like example or you know, paragon of like American innovation in the last 100 years. You know, one of the most important tech companies and and companies full stop of all time. So for the US government to take a stake that they did I you know, I thought it was incredibly like symbolic and and meaningful and you know, certainly you've seen a a continuation of the momentum kind of wrought from that, you know, since then with that chart. And I think it's it's related to the first vertical chart in so far as it's like to the extent that you think that the US government is hyper-focused on effectively like buying back or wresting back hegemony and you know, uncontested hegemony and control of its own destiny on you know, critical industries and and supply chains. You know, the question you'd have to ask is like what cards do they have to play if China, you know, manufactures all of our you know, has a chokehold over critical minerals, has a chokehold over you know, critical defense industries and supply chains.

[00:12:53]What cards do you have to play? Well, the first one is energy, right? We just talked about that. And the second one I think is capital markets, right? We have the deepest most liquid most desired capital markets in the world, you know, for now.

[00:13:02]And I think you have have seen that we have that the administration has the ability to and here's a great here's a great chart kind of indicating that, right? Despite despite COVID, despite money printing, despite Ukraine and freezing treasuries, despite you know, Trump being elected again, right? Many people really really being suspicious and perhaps rightly so of of Trump and his his capabilities, you know, this another chart that has gone borderline vertical here is is net portfolio inflows into the US and US markets over the last few years, right? And this is a clear like increase in a clear acceleration, right? The the the slope of that line is is increasing meaningfully over the last few years.

[00:13:39]And you know, this this is another big element that I think the administration is clearly you know, trying to weaponize.

[00:13:45]And you know, if you flip back up one slide, I think there's there's this good point that Gavin Baker made, who's who's a really good semi's analyst, probably like the the best one out there, just about relative population growth kind of needed to sustain the demand that TSMC is seeing unless they want to resort to kind of massive, you know, immigration into relatively small and kind of homogeneous country. Meanwhile, you know, the there's clear desire to have reshoring anyway. There's clear desire to have you know, what he calls American wafers regardless. And we've got all this kind of latent capacity with this, you know, this this old man and Intel who needs to, you know, get up off the mat and kind of, you know, do do one more fight to see if he has it in him.

[00:14:25]All of those all of those tailwinds like kind of point a certain direction and to be very clear like none of this has materialized yet. Like all of that chart above on Intel, that's multiple expansion like earnings haven't meaningfully inflected, revenue's not there, free cash flow hasn't really meaningfully changed. It's not even totally clear like, you know, what chips Intel will be producing for Apple. Like is it probably not the leading edge cuz Intel doesn't really have anything like TSMC's capacity for it. So you don't really know what the scope of it is, how meaningful it'll be long-term. And there are a lot of questions that need to be answered there, but I think both of those the the verticality of both of those charts is is telling you that like there are two very critical levers that the US has and it is kind of aggressively, you know, aggressively using them, aggressively playing those two cards that it has. And I think those charts are telling you about we're we're seeing a phase shift is seeing a phase change, right? This is discontinuous non-linear changes that the market's trying to grapple with. And you know, I think there's long-term reason to question whether there's mean reversion there, which we can talk about on both of those. But, I I think that those two charts especially just like tell the story of the week and really even you know the the last few months.

[00:15:34]Yeah, and say what you will about Trump.

[00:15:37]Bull in a china shop, unorthodox, uncouth, maybe a little dealings with CJT and World Liberty 5 with his family like a little Some people go as far as say corrupt, but I don't know. As an American looking at all this, it seems like we're giving it a college try to to actually strengthen the homeland. And I know we've we've had this discussion about whether or not our ideological, philosophical, economic belief systems align with the way in which he's going about it, but how do you like I'm I'm like I'm like I'm well proud to be an American in the fact that we're bringing it all home, you know?

[00:16:15]It's like or trying to at least. Again, to your point, nothing has manifested in terms of financial like the the financial health of Intel. Can Apple and Intel actually do something productive with each other?

[00:16:27]Can Intel produce the chips? That is yet to manifest, but it seems like we're giving it a college try, which which I'm happy to see. I hear I hear Toby Keith getting fired up in the background. You hear the You hear the song starting.

[00:16:39]No, I mean I I I hear you and I I sympathize definitely to a degree. I think even more generally like we've spent, you know, if you've if you've looked at a lot of these dynamics over the last 10 to 20 years and the relative fragility of the United States position on a lot of key key trends and key metrics, I think it was always just going to have to be this way, right? Like if it was either going to just you know, it was going to be the fall of Rome, which it may still be, right? But, it was going to be just complete, you know, downtrend like controlled demolition. Basically, the US becomes [clears throat] like Sorry to say this to our European friends, but basically the US becomes Europe over the course of the next 20 years, right? And fully seeds it's it's industrial capacity and it's you know, relative influence and standing in the world is relative wealth in the world to you know, up and coming players like China.

[00:17:26]Or it was going to have to be something like very aggressive like this, right?

[00:17:29]There was never going to be like a you know, multilateral set of you know, carefully considered agreements and white papers that led to you know, a careful reintegration of industry in the US, you know, distributed evenly between the US and Europe and different different stakeholders, quote unquote, making sure we check all the ESG boxes along the way. Like that was just never going to happen. There are too many interests at play on the on the other side of the world for anything like that to just to to actually make it through, right? It was always going to be if we tried that, I think it was always going to be slow played. It was always going to be, you know, wait until Trump's out of office and another guy comes in. If he's still doing trying to do the same thing, you know, backpedal, delay, do as much as you can to make it difficult. Like if you if you wanted if you wanted anything like this to happen ever, like this is how it was going to happen. TBD whether it will ultimately be net good, I think for the US. TBD whether it'll actually work, but you know, I think for a lot of analysts that have sat around saying, "Well, the US can't, you know, fight a war without China." Well, like okay, we're trying. Like this is this is how it would look if we were going to try, right? Yeah.

[00:18:34]It's uh fascinating and interesting to observe and monitor the situation. It's a It's a fun situation to monitor at the very least.

[00:18:43]Fun's one word for it. It's uh it's interesting, you know. The old Chinese proverb is may you live in interesting times and I we certainly do.

[00:18:51]We certainly do. And we're talking about hey Intel, Apple, what are you going to do?

[00:18:56]Now with the emergence of of AI, maybe they should just make an Andy Grove agent. Maybe they should just take everything Andy Grove did in his life while at Intel.

[00:19:05]>> Make no mistakes. Load it into an LLM, make no mistakes. Bring Andy Andy Grove back from the dead in in robot form. I mean, who knows? The next vertical chart is the the progression of these large language models, particularly how they are performing on these benchmark tests by a meter. And it looks like Claude Methuselah's the preview that these guys got in March, at least, is a is another step function, order magnitude improvement, um in terms of what these LLMs can do.

[00:19:38]Yeah, I mean, scaling laws are holding, right? Like I think that's what it's what this is telling you. Uh and this is a this is like the third chart the third big chart of the week that was, you know, kind of going vertical, and I think it's the most interesting because the other two, like as I wrote about in the newsletter, like are subject to like the ultimate, you know, laws of gravity of the supply response. Like the forces of supply and demand just like hate vertical [snorts] charts. Like they the market wants to like force vertical charts to mean revert. Like when people see, you know, Intel, like new supply comes online both in terms of like actual capacity to respond to the potential for, you know, well above market profits. New supply comes online in terms of equity issuance, right? Like you could imagine like Intel could absolutely be very economically issuing a lot of new equity against prices like this. You know, insiders can very easily make the case for you taking some off the table at prices like that. And you know, the flip side to is China, like there are various market forces that, you know, will will tend to kind of push that that downward vertical line back to back to kind of the mean. And I wrote about some of that in the piece or in the in the newsletter this week. But this is this is a vertical chart that like, you know, it's one of the only vertical charts in the world that doesn't really have like an obvious market constraint to to bring it back down, right? There's this this looks like a a one-way function, a kind of a one-way vertical takeoff. And I I think it's, you know, it's it's telling that the the meter chart on the left, right, is the Methuselah's performance, you know, it's it's early, but it's literally off the charts. Like they don't even show it because it's like so high as to be like maybe unreliable.

[00:21:08]We're not sure about it. On then chart on the right, you can see kind of a less cropped version from an Anthropic researcher. But I think this is like, you know, this is really the chart that is in some way like driving the other two because this is kind of like if this continues, right? This is the next great game like geopolitically. The thing that you have to do if you are in if you're in the seat in, you know, the White House of the DoD, if you're in the seat in Beijing, is you have to try to be the one that owns this line.

[00:21:37]And moreover, like you're thinking that the other guy is also thinking that he needs to own the line, right? And so that starts to make certain calculations a lot more tractable. It starts to make certain decision paths like a lot more inevitable. And you know, the I think it's an open question, but if you listen to a lot of heavily AGI-pilled people who are sitting in the Bay Area right now, like there's a lot of view that this is a winner-take-all game or at the very least a winner-take-most game. And you know, a six-month lead is equivalent to like, you know, a 10-year lead in any other like conventional industry. And you know, I think it'll be interesting to see if like open source and you know, distilled models out of China can can really kind of keep up with this especially as you know, the the weights and the the key data here like get become more and more like, you know, nuclear launch codes and you know, we're seeing more and more kind of encroachment from the government Department of War onto these companies and and these tools. So all that is to say like this is I think this really is is tells the story of the the prior two charts and and why they're happening kind of the way that they are and why they're happening now.

[00:22:41]And the one, you know, constraint that you could argue that is is on kind of the the growth of these charts is just the physical reality of like watts needed to make more and more gains that are kind of parabolic and vertical like this.

[00:22:53]But I think if you flip to the next chart or the next page, like you'll see I think a few data points highlighting like what what the solution to that is going to be or like what the attempted solution to that is is going to be.

[00:23:04]Yeah. Sorry, I was um reading up on Fermi's paradox and the Great Filter cuz as you were explaining that, it's like, are we just speed running towards the Great Filter? Do we make it through? Um but, here's the next chart. It is insane when it comes down to it, like you said.

[00:23:18]These charts are beginning or not only beginning, but are materially affecting the the physical economy and I think will continue to for decades as we race through or towards the Great Filter, but uh this is ISM Manufacturing PMI. Today, AI data center investment is hitting 20 billion every 2 weeks. Capital outlay estimates in the multi-trillion-dollars, I think approaching 10 trillion dollars over the next decade. Uh latest I heard. Yeah. And so, I think this is this is the thing, right? Like, if you're going to say, well, the constraint on that that last vertical chart is physical reality, you know, that how are you going how are you going to possibly, you know, physically scale to sustain gains like that? How are you going to pay for it? And I think it's it's very clear that whether [clears throat] they succeed or not, like, they're going to try, right? Um and, you know, there's a a a clear push on both the private and public side to aggressively reindustrialize and to and to use that as an engine for what you're seeing here, you know, earnings growth to to further support the market.

[00:24:17]And to further support GDP to kind of make this all tractable. And so, I think it's uh that to me, that's why it all like ties together, right? Like, there the the need to decouple from China in the administration's view, the need to support local industry champions like Intel, that's all directly related to kind of winning this race and this be the only shot that the US really has to kind of growing its way out of the debt, right?

[00:24:41]And reestablishing you know, some level of legitimate um industrial dominance that would be necessary to sustain, you know, the next 100 years of, say, the dollar system and the US military. So, it's all kind of like one trade, it's all kind of one chart. Um and, you you thus far, like, again, this is TBD, but um some pretty crazy earnings growth out of out of Q1 thus far.

[00:25:02]>> It's insane. Yeah. 27.7% actual growth rate for the quarter.

[00:25:07]It'll mark the highest earnings growth rate reported by the index since Q4 2021. Obviously, that's a bit of an anomaly because we're coming out of the economic lockdowns, coming from a significantly smaller base baseline. And so, this is, I think, it's hard to judge at a Q4 2021 and think there's any signal there. I think uh But, it makes it more impressive, right?

[00:25:26]Cuz it's like Q4 2021 is kind of this artificially inflated number, and we're like, you know, uh getting right up there despite the fact that the base was was not nearly as low, right, on on the prior year this time around. Yeah.

[00:25:36]Yeah.

[00:25:37]Fascinating stuff. But, then, to your point, like, we're going to have this insane, I mean, to to extend your point, we're going to have this insane growth earnings, GDP, but then you it's it's going to be very discombobulating for people because you're going to see these headline numbers at a PMI, GDP growth, revenue growth, and it's going to be like, "Oh, everything's incredible." But, at the same time, uh we're going to see mass layoffs, it looks like. So, we have a bunch of headlines here um from over the weekend and last week. Kraft Heinz CEO pushes value, consumers are literally running out of money. And so, you have this juxtaposition of everything going on in the world of AI, and the the real economy seems to be to be suffering. I think that's the big question in the way that in which the AI economy is affecting the physical world. Can it produce enough blue-collar jobs, I guess you can say, to save the American consumer? I don't know. Will the deflationary effects, and the productivity gains of the technology, just be a tsunami that that no amount of blue-collar jobs can overcome? We shall see. But, we have Heinz and McDonald's basically saying consumers are hurting, but at the same time, we have Cloudflare, Upwork, Bill cutting anywhere between 20 and 30% of jobs, and you don't have to hear about in the industry last week Coinbase cut I believe 15% of their workforce.

[00:26:56]Yeah, and I think it's you know, it's it's a it's an open question whether some of these are you know, using kind of AI as air cover for just you know, cutting bloated work structures and you know, none of none of the companies on here are like durably profitable and they're all they're all have to celebrate growth anyway. So it's like you know, maybe that explains a decent amount of it. But either way like I think you probably are seeing the early signs of it. Either way there's this clear K-shaped economy that's you know, only going to increase as all AGI pilled people will will tell you over the next you know, 10 years if if they're right. And so just collectively like and this is before by the way we even get to you know, robotics like the the physical AI physical instantiation AI over you know, 10 years from now right? Like what that does to right now the reindustrialization of America is maybe an offset to some of this. What happens when you know, the the robots take our jobs the the physical jobs that are still available like that's an open question. So I I think it's just like all these headlines together make me just think like this is how I concluded the timestamp was just you know, okay, what if they're right? What if what if the the AGI thesis the government's thesis you know, just run it hot into building out American AI dominance what if that's totally right? Well, what is that going to mean for the labor market both white-collar and blue-collar eventually right? What is that going to imply for the need for as Elon Musk calls it universal high income right? Or universal basic income or whatever to to to deal with that reality.

[00:28:13]And you know, the flip side is like okay, what if they're wrong? You mentioned like 10 trillion dollars of expected you know, infrastructure outlays being financed kind of and probably increasingly creative ways. You know, what what does it mean if you know, the demand isn't ultimately there if the products can't be integrated in the way that it you know, would be needed for the ROI to really make sense.

[00:28:32]What does it mean if you have you know, too big to fail AI companies and data data infrastructure companies data center companies not able to pay their bills etc. Like okay, well, that's going to create a massive hole in the national balance sheet as well that needs to be papered over. So kind of in either side either direction like you get into the the the end game conclusion that number will always go up. Number of dollars will always go up, right?

[00:28:55]And there will always be a a supply response of dollars, right, when it's required to to solve one problem or another as things get to socially volatile, to geopolitically volatile.

[00:29:05]And that increasing supply of dollars either way is going to be necessary to get us to you know, any version of the future that the administration wants to see.

[00:29:13]And so I just kind of leaves me with like I it always comes back to Bitcoin and it that's not just like, you know, a contrivance. That's like that's truly what we believe. That's why we believe this is in any environment over time like the most interesting thing to be focusing on. The one asset in the world that has no conceivable supply response.

[00:29:30]And I just highly recommend people go study why that's the case and and build an intuition for why that's the case.

[00:29:35]This is a screenshot from Parker Lewis and Drew Bunsal talk from last year. If you I forget exactly what it's called. I think it's In Search of a Finite Monetary Policy. If you look that up, great 30-minute video to explain the intuition behind that. But ultimately like I I think this it's all just leading all roads will converge on and lead to exactly this kind of regardless of, you know, who in the administration is right or who in Beijing is, you know, is right or wrong. Yeah.

[00:30:00]Never boring. Job. We'll do this again next week. Of course. It's a habit now.

[00:30:05]Enjoy your haircut. Enjoy your haircut, sir. See you guys. We'll be back.

[00:30:08]>> [clears throat]