WEBVTT - Time to put money into the 'Magnificent 7' tech stocks?

0:00:00.280 --> 0:00:02.579
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to AC N A podcast?

0:00:05.409 --> 0:00:09.550
<v Speaker 2>Hey, it's Andrea. He on the Money Talks podcast. Quick question.

0:00:09.840 --> 0:00:14.800
<v Speaker 2>Which of these apps do you use each week? Facebook,

0:00:14.930 --> 0:00:21.069
<v Speaker 2>Amazon Google. If you're like me, the answer is almost

0:00:21.120 --> 0:00:24.149
<v Speaker 2>every day. Yep. That's right. Don't judge me,

0:00:24.440 --> 0:00:26.469
<v Speaker 2>but that's what we will be getting into this week.

0:00:26.479 --> 0:00:30.819
<v Speaker 2>Why are they the biggest and currently best performing tech stocks?

0:00:31.100 --> 0:00:34.509
<v Speaker 2>And should you be putting your money into them right now?

0:00:34.560 --> 0:00:36.330
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to get into that in a few minutes.

0:00:36.340 --> 0:00:39.930
<v Speaker 2>But first I have a favor to ask of you.

0:00:40.180 --> 0:00:44.470
<v Speaker 2>If you haven't already followed us on Spotify Apple podcasts

0:00:44.479 --> 0:00:48.500
<v Speaker 2>or youtube music, please do because that way you get

0:00:48.509 --> 0:00:51.790
<v Speaker 2>an alert the moment a new episode drops. All right.

0:00:52.180 --> 0:00:54.970
<v Speaker 2>Ok. So let's get started with some financial news that

0:00:54.979 --> 0:00:57.990
<v Speaker 2>caught our attention this week. And of course, I will

0:00:58.000 --> 0:01:03.259
<v Speaker 2>need to bring in the assistance of my editor Tiffany Tiffany. Hi. So,

0:01:03.270 --> 0:01:06.400
<v Speaker 2>what are we discussing first? Ok. So first our favorite

0:01:06.410 --> 0:01:09.569
<v Speaker 2>antihero pop star is in town. I'm not a swift,

0:01:09.580 --> 0:01:12.459
<v Speaker 2>are you? I'm not a swifty, but you know what?

0:01:12.470 --> 0:01:15.260
<v Speaker 2>I have to admire her business sense. Yeah, I must

0:01:15.269 --> 0:01:18.110
<v Speaker 2>say so. Yeah. And already we're starting to see what's

0:01:18.120 --> 0:01:20.899
<v Speaker 2>known as the Taylor Swift effect. Oh, yeah.

0:01:21.120 --> 0:01:23.459
<v Speaker 2>So a bit of background in an interview, the Thai

0:01:23.470 --> 0:01:27.580
<v Speaker 2>Prime Minister said that Singapore paid a handsome grant to

0:01:27.589 --> 0:01:31.639
<v Speaker 2>Taylor Swift's team to woo her here for an exclusive

0:01:31.650 --> 0:01:35.110
<v Speaker 2>Southeast Asia stop. So that got many people asking how

0:01:35.120 --> 0:01:37.730
<v Speaker 2>much did we pay? And is it worth it? Yeah.

0:01:37.739 --> 0:01:39.970
<v Speaker 2>You know, it may seem like a dig at Singapore,

0:01:39.980 --> 0:01:43.220
<v Speaker 2>but it is a valid question, right? So the Singapore

0:01:43.230 --> 0:01:48.069
<v Speaker 2>Tourism Board didn't really disclose how much they gave in grants, right?

0:01:48.080 --> 0:01:49.849
<v Speaker 2>And never did. No, they didn't. But

0:01:50.069 --> 0:01:53.449
<v Speaker 2>tells and airlines told CN that demand for flights and

0:01:53.459 --> 0:01:58.989
<v Speaker 2>accommodation around the concert dates have gone up by 30%. Wow. Ok.

0:01:59.000 --> 0:02:02.720
<v Speaker 2>That makes sense because Singapore is one of only two

0:02:02.730 --> 0:02:05.629
<v Speaker 2>stops in Asia for Taylor Swift. The previous one being

0:02:05.639 --> 0:02:10.449
<v Speaker 2>Japan and we have six shows here in Singapore. Completely

0:02:10.460 --> 0:02:14.570
<v Speaker 2>sold out. Ok. So we're probably expecting lots of fans

0:02:14.580 --> 0:02:18.889
<v Speaker 2>coming in from Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand and

0:02:19.470 --> 0:02:22.350
<v Speaker 2>disappointed fans in Australia. Maybe we didn't get to catch

0:02:22.360 --> 0:02:26.199
<v Speaker 2>her in the Australia tour. We might see them too. Yeah. Yeah.

0:02:26.210 --> 0:02:28.478
<v Speaker 2>So back to the question, is it worth paying a

0:02:28.490 --> 0:02:32.250
<v Speaker 2>grant to Taylor Swift's team? I mean, I suppose if

0:02:32.258 --> 0:02:34.520
<v Speaker 2>you see that the concerts can be a big source

0:02:34.529 --> 0:02:36.038
<v Speaker 2>of revenue for the country, then

0:02:36.360 --> 0:02:40.728
<v Speaker 2>yes. So earlier on you mentioned Japan, right? Researchers estimated

0:02:40.740 --> 0:02:46.570
<v Speaker 2>that her tour in Tokyo generated up to $227 million

0:02:46.580 --> 0:02:49.639
<v Speaker 2>for Japan and they have fewer shows than we do. Exactly.

0:02:49.649 --> 0:02:52.279
<v Speaker 2>And they are also predicting that the concerts here in

0:02:52.288 --> 0:02:59.559
<v Speaker 2>Singapore will exceed the estimated $787 million in economic value

0:02:59.570 --> 0:03:02.399
<v Speaker 2>from Taylor Swift's time in Melbourne. That is insane.

0:03:02.669 --> 0:03:05.270
<v Speaker 2>You know what I'm thinking? I think it's time to

0:03:05.279 --> 0:03:09.309
<v Speaker 2>look at stocks in the hospitality and travel sector perhaps

0:03:09.320 --> 0:03:12.059
<v Speaker 2>because that's likely to go up. So if you happen

0:03:12.070 --> 0:03:14.809
<v Speaker 2>to be able to have that flexibility to move around,

0:03:14.820 --> 0:03:16.350
<v Speaker 2>this might be the time to do it. And don't

0:03:16.360 --> 0:03:19.089
<v Speaker 2>forget we still have a lot of major concerts and

0:03:19.100 --> 0:03:22.989
<v Speaker 2>events coming up in Singapore, not just Taylor Swift and

0:03:23.258 --> 0:03:26.320
<v Speaker 2>speaking of up, you know what went up to Junior

0:03:26.330 --> 0:03:28.288
<v Speaker 2>Bank staff bonuses. What,

0:03:28.386 --> 0:03:30.216
<v Speaker 2>what am I doing in this job? That's what I

0:03:30.225 --> 0:03:33.565
<v Speaker 2>ask myself every time I see headlines like this. But

0:03:33.576 --> 0:03:35.975
<v Speaker 2>you know what? Congratulations to you. If you are working

0:03:35.985 --> 0:03:37.955
<v Speaker 2>in a bank, it's a great bonus for you. Yeah.

0:03:37.966 --> 0:03:42.065
<v Speaker 2>So specifically CD BS and you will be all announced

0:03:42.076 --> 0:03:45.966
<v Speaker 2>a one off bonus for the junior staff, Junior, Junior Junior.

0:03:45.975 --> 0:03:49.005
<v Speaker 2>So this is to help them cope with rising living costs.

0:03:49.255 --> 0:03:52.345
<v Speaker 2>O CBC and D BS are giving their junior employees

0:03:52.356 --> 0:03:53.845
<v Speaker 2>$1000 each

0:03:54.102 --> 0:03:56.962
<v Speaker 2>Singapore dollars while you will be junior staff are getting

0:03:56.972 --> 0:04:00.671
<v Speaker 2>an extra month of bonus. No guess is where all

0:04:00.682 --> 0:04:02.882
<v Speaker 2>of that bonus is coming from. And I think banks

0:04:02.891 --> 0:04:06.171
<v Speaker 2>had a fantastic year with all the interest rate income

0:04:06.182 --> 0:04:08.401
<v Speaker 2>that they've been generating over the past couple of years.

0:04:08.501 --> 0:04:09.942
<v Speaker 2>I think this is a good move. It's a bit

0:04:09.951 --> 0:04:12.811
<v Speaker 2>of a thank you as well for people who stuck

0:04:12.822 --> 0:04:15.841
<v Speaker 2>around and work behind the scenes and lots of work

0:04:15.852 --> 0:04:18.832
<v Speaker 2>for banks that were kept busy for the last two

0:04:18.842 --> 0:04:19.682
<v Speaker 2>years or so.

0:04:20.019 --> 0:04:23.070
<v Speaker 2>Now, if you're listening to this and you would like

0:04:23.079 --> 0:04:26.630
<v Speaker 2>a nice bonus too. Just like me, you can tag

0:04:26.640 --> 0:04:30.200
<v Speaker 2>your boss just like I will not.

0:04:32.040 --> 0:04:34.700
<v Speaker 2>I hope you get that bonus. Anyway. Good luck.

0:04:37.238 --> 0:04:41.019
<v Speaker 2>Did you know that the number seven is considered a

0:04:41.029 --> 0:04:45.329
<v Speaker 2>lucky number in Japan, perhaps that's why the biggest and

0:04:45.339 --> 0:04:49.480
<v Speaker 2>currently best performing tech names in the stock market are

0:04:49.488 --> 0:04:53.118
<v Speaker 2>dubbed the Magnificent Seven. But they won't always called that.

0:04:53.130 --> 0:05:01.459
<v Speaker 2>You see tech stocks had their beginnings actually as Fang stocks, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix,

0:05:01.470 --> 0:05:02.868
<v Speaker 2>Google Fang.

0:05:03.149 --> 0:05:08.209
<v Speaker 2>Fang evolved into fam, not as cool because Apple and

0:05:08.220 --> 0:05:12.058
<v Speaker 2>Microsoft joined the league. Netflix dropped out and then Tesla

0:05:12.070 --> 0:05:16.190
<v Speaker 2>and NVIDIA joined to form what's now called the Magnificent

0:05:16.200 --> 0:05:19.890
<v Speaker 2>Seven or if you're cool like me the Mac seven.

0:05:19.899 --> 0:05:22.219
<v Speaker 2>And for that, we can thank Bank of America Analyst

0:05:22.230 --> 0:05:23.209
<v Speaker 2>Michael Hartnett who

0:05:23.305 --> 0:05:28.026
<v Speaker 2>coined the phrase in 2023. He was describing the seven

0:05:28.036 --> 0:05:31.526
<v Speaker 2>tech companies dominating the stock markets, but you know what

0:05:31.626 --> 0:05:35.126
<v Speaker 2>anything shiny is vulnerable to losing its luster and the

0:05:35.135 --> 0:05:38.075
<v Speaker 2>Mac seven, they aren't immune to this. So while tech

0:05:38.085 --> 0:05:41.295
<v Speaker 2>stocks are having a moment, we should also take our

0:05:41.305 --> 0:05:43.365
<v Speaker 2>moment to consider the risks

0:05:43.462 --> 0:05:46.921
<v Speaker 2>and rewards of investing in Mac Seven stocks. What your

0:05:46.932 --> 0:05:50.381
<v Speaker 2>game plan should be if you're already there to help

0:05:50.391 --> 0:05:53.522
<v Speaker 2>us with. That is Jonathan Wu, senior equity research analyst

0:05:53.532 --> 0:05:56.141
<v Speaker 2>with Philip Capital. Hey, Jonathan, thanks for coming. Thanks for

0:05:56.152 --> 0:05:59.802
<v Speaker 2>having me. So in just a span of about three years,

0:05:59.812 --> 0:06:02.502
<v Speaker 2>so much has happened to big tech, most of them

0:06:02.511 --> 0:06:05.502
<v Speaker 2>making up the Mac seven. What are the factors that

0:06:05.511 --> 0:06:09.440
<v Speaker 2>are driving these Mac Seven stocks to their current strength?

0:06:09.988 --> 0:06:12.570
<v Speaker 2>So first of all the revenue growth, right? I mean,

0:06:12.579 --> 0:06:16.178
<v Speaker 2>obviously you've got a lot of demand from consumers for

0:06:16.190 --> 0:06:18.209
<v Speaker 2>a lot of these big tech companies, you just think

0:06:18.220 --> 0:06:20.238
<v Speaker 2>about a couple of them off the top of your head.

0:06:20.250 --> 0:06:24.049
<v Speaker 2>You know, me and Google, everybody uses Google nowadays every

0:06:24.059 --> 0:06:28.799
<v Speaker 2>day for countless hours, everybody's watching youtube people on Facebook.

0:06:28.809 --> 0:06:32.130
<v Speaker 2>If they're not on Facebook, on Instagram, Netflix, everybody uses Netflix.

0:06:32.140 --> 0:06:34.510
<v Speaker 2>Now they've kind of been taken out of the Mac seven,

0:06:34.519 --> 0:06:34.730
<v Speaker 2>but

0:06:35.010 --> 0:06:37.010
<v Speaker 2>you get the point, right? So a lot of consumer

0:06:37.019 --> 0:06:39.409
<v Speaker 2>demand that's really driving a lot of the growth for

0:06:39.488 --> 0:06:42.238
<v Speaker 2>a lot of these tech companies. So they've had quite

0:06:42.250 --> 0:06:45.428
<v Speaker 2>the journey from the.com renaissance that we saw in the

0:06:45.440 --> 0:06:46.589
<v Speaker 2>early two thousands, right?

0:06:46.899 --> 0:06:50.739
<v Speaker 2>And then they had the COVID-19 pandemic surge, right? So

0:06:50.750 --> 0:06:54.670
<v Speaker 2>they were pandemic darlings because everyone was stuck at home.

0:06:54.730 --> 0:06:57.289
<v Speaker 2>They had to use Netflix, they had to use their phones,

0:06:57.299 --> 0:07:00.089
<v Speaker 2>they had to use their Facebook to stay connected with

0:07:00.100 --> 0:07:03.609
<v Speaker 2>their friends and family. But then we saw a painful

0:07:03.619 --> 0:07:08.839
<v Speaker 2>tumble after those COVID-19 restrictions were eased. Now, there's a

0:07:08.850 --> 0:07:10.679
<v Speaker 2>sustained out performance in

0:07:10.785 --> 0:07:14.355
<v Speaker 2>the market. I'm most curious about this current stage we're

0:07:14.364 --> 0:07:19.605
<v Speaker 2>seeing right now, the early months of 2024. How was

0:07:19.614 --> 0:07:22.325
<v Speaker 2>it that they were able to make that stunning recovery

0:07:22.334 --> 0:07:26.834
<v Speaker 2>from down in the dumps post pandemic, which was only what, 1.5,

0:07:26.845 --> 0:07:29.214
<v Speaker 2>2 years ago to where they are now. So I

0:07:29.225 --> 0:07:32.515
<v Speaker 2>think it's a couple of things. Firstly, when the dip happened,

0:07:32.524 --> 0:07:34.565
<v Speaker 2>you kind of saw growth slowing down a little bit

0:07:34.940 --> 0:07:37.109
<v Speaker 2>and then they were still kind of expanding. So they're

0:07:37.119 --> 0:07:39.309
<v Speaker 2>still spending a lot of money on head count on,

0:07:39.410 --> 0:07:42.390
<v Speaker 2>on a lot of projects that were long shots, but

0:07:42.399 --> 0:07:44.299
<v Speaker 2>at the time because growth was going so well, they

0:07:44.309 --> 0:07:46.709
<v Speaker 2>had enough cash to do it, right. So that kind

0:07:46.720 --> 0:07:48.559
<v Speaker 2>of sent them tumbling down a little bit. And as

0:07:48.570 --> 0:07:52.450
<v Speaker 2>they focus towards efficiency throughout the most of 2023 and

0:07:52.459 --> 0:07:54.829
<v Speaker 2>even now they cut a lot of their fat off

0:07:54.839 --> 0:07:57.619
<v Speaker 2>the bone. They are much leaner. They've got a lot

0:07:57.630 --> 0:08:00.640
<v Speaker 2>of operating leverage and demand has actually returned or remain

0:08:00.649 --> 0:08:03.589
<v Speaker 2>consistent at least. Yeah. And so that's what fueled the

0:08:03.600 --> 0:08:04.589
<v Speaker 2>rally a little bit.

0:08:04.696 --> 0:08:07.217
<v Speaker 2>Plus you have this A I effect, everyone's really hyping

0:08:07.226 --> 0:08:10.636
<v Speaker 2>about it personally. I think it's less of a game changer,

0:08:10.647 --> 0:08:13.717
<v Speaker 2>more of a game improvement kind of tool. I don't

0:08:13.726 --> 0:08:16.557
<v Speaker 2>really think it's that significant at this point in time.

0:08:16.566 --> 0:08:19.497
<v Speaker 2>So it's not as revolutionary as people are making it

0:08:19.506 --> 0:08:22.076
<v Speaker 2>out to be. That's what you're saying. Yeah. It's probably

0:08:22.087 --> 0:08:26.566
<v Speaker 2>similar to, like office 365. It's good. It will make

0:08:26.576 --> 0:08:29.786
<v Speaker 2>your life better. It will increase efficiency. Yeah. Change your

0:08:29.796 --> 0:08:32.236
<v Speaker 2>life all that much. Yeah. Ok. But do you think

0:08:32.247 --> 0:08:34.236
<v Speaker 2>though at the mild

0:08:34.453 --> 0:08:38.353
<v Speaker 2>pace and position that A I is throwing itself into

0:08:38.362 --> 0:08:41.232
<v Speaker 2>the tech names and the tech industry, how do you

0:08:41.242 --> 0:08:45.182
<v Speaker 2>think that is going to shape the path forward for

0:08:45.192 --> 0:08:47.723
<v Speaker 2>the Mac Seven in terms of their stock performance and

0:08:47.732 --> 0:08:50.153
<v Speaker 2>their growth? I think it was in the near term.

0:08:50.163 --> 0:08:52.292
<v Speaker 2>You still be a driver because they're still hype around it.

0:08:52.302 --> 0:08:55.112
<v Speaker 2>Take a look at NVIDIA, for example, they feel the

0:08:55.122 --> 0:08:58.513
<v Speaker 2>immediate benefits and immediate effects of increasing A I demand

0:08:58.523 --> 0:09:00.703
<v Speaker 2>because they supply the chips, right? Yeah. And you can

0:09:00.713 --> 0:09:04.002
<v Speaker 2>see backlog is still increasing quarter on quarter. Yeah,

0:09:04.210 --> 0:09:06.069
<v Speaker 2>still so much demand. And so until this kind of

0:09:06.080 --> 0:09:09.680
<v Speaker 2>dwindles down and enterprises stop spending on A I or

0:09:09.690 --> 0:09:12.651
<v Speaker 2>at least stop increasing spending in A I, which is

0:09:12.660 --> 0:09:14.620
<v Speaker 2>we're still kind of far away because right now you're

0:09:14.630 --> 0:09:16.510
<v Speaker 2>seeing a lot of not just enterprises but a lot

0:09:16.520 --> 0:09:20.510
<v Speaker 2>of sovereign nations. They're starting to build up A I infrastructure.

0:09:20.520 --> 0:09:22.890
<v Speaker 2>Getting out their own A I models, everyone's kind of

0:09:22.901 --> 0:09:25.931
<v Speaker 2>playing catch up now. So that backlog is where the

0:09:25.940 --> 0:09:28.231
<v Speaker 2>money is at. Yeah. So that's really driving the demand

0:09:28.241 --> 0:09:30.791
<v Speaker 2>for A I products. And so that helps NVIDIA, helps Google,

0:09:30.801 --> 0:09:33.290
<v Speaker 2>helps Amazon because of a lot of cloud infrastructure that

0:09:33.301 --> 0:09:33.870
<v Speaker 2>is needed.

0:09:34.190 --> 0:09:37.718
<v Speaker 2>So that is really the main kind of revenue driver

0:09:37.729 --> 0:09:40.359
<v Speaker 2>in the near term. I'm not sure when the demand

0:09:40.369 --> 0:09:42.830
<v Speaker 2>will subside because it's getting a bit out of hand

0:09:42.849 --> 0:09:45.419
<v Speaker 2>right now. I'm inclined to agree. I mean, this A

0:09:45.429 --> 0:09:50.169
<v Speaker 2>I hype is really out there. It's really hard to ignore. Now,

0:09:50.179 --> 0:09:52.890
<v Speaker 2>speaking of NVIDIA, I'm glad you brought it up because

0:09:53.070 --> 0:09:56.929
<v Speaker 2>looking at the charts of the stock performance of the

0:09:56.940 --> 0:10:00.319
<v Speaker 2>MAC seven over a three month period, one year period

0:10:00.330 --> 0:10:01.608
<v Speaker 2>and five year period,

0:10:01.890 --> 0:10:06.319
<v Speaker 2>the first whopping number that sticks out to me is

0:10:06.330 --> 0:10:09.989
<v Speaker 2>Nvidia's stock. I mean, the three month percentage change shows

0:10:10.000 --> 0:10:17.109
<v Speaker 2>12.35 to the five year percentage change is 1094.64. What's

0:10:17.119 --> 0:10:19.590
<v Speaker 2>causing this crazy spike? A big part of it is

0:10:19.599 --> 0:10:23.969
<v Speaker 2>expanding valuations. People expect a lot more growth out of them. Ok.

0:10:23.979 --> 0:10:25.218
<v Speaker 2>So that just drives the price up in

0:10:25.325 --> 0:10:27.684
<v Speaker 2>yearly, right? You compound that with a lot of operating

0:10:27.695 --> 0:10:31.103
<v Speaker 2>leverage that companies like NBA has. They don't have to

0:10:31.114 --> 0:10:33.114
<v Speaker 2>spend a lot to drive revenue growth. They don't have

0:10:33.125 --> 0:10:35.375
<v Speaker 2>to increase their operating expenses that much. They don't really

0:10:35.385 --> 0:10:38.224
<v Speaker 2>have to invest that much in capital expenditure. So their

0:10:38.234 --> 0:10:42.255
<v Speaker 2>cost base is relatively fixed, more or less. I see.

0:10:42.265 --> 0:10:45.744
<v Speaker 2>So revenue just translates to earnings. Any additional revenue just

0:10:45.755 --> 0:10:47.984
<v Speaker 2>translates to the bottom line and you see this big

0:10:47.994 --> 0:10:48.664
<v Speaker 2>spike there.

0:10:48.890 --> 0:10:50.789
<v Speaker 2>And that's what you see with a lot of tech

0:10:50.799 --> 0:10:54.669
<v Speaker 2>companies and compared to maybe traditional businesses like consumer products,

0:10:54.679 --> 0:10:57.489
<v Speaker 2>like maybe Coca Cola or mcdonald's, right, they don't really

0:10:57.500 --> 0:11:00.738
<v Speaker 2>have this kind of leverage where one additional revenue dollar

0:11:00.799 --> 0:11:03.890
<v Speaker 2>translates to 80 cents on the bottom line, right? So

0:11:03.900 --> 0:11:08.070
<v Speaker 2>that's really the main kicker. If demand slows down naturally,

0:11:08.080 --> 0:11:09.590
<v Speaker 2>you start to see it kind of slow down a

0:11:09.599 --> 0:11:14.669
<v Speaker 2>little bit. OK. Is this what will spell volatility for

0:11:14.679 --> 0:11:17.190
<v Speaker 2>the tech sector? Is that why they're so volatile

0:11:17.580 --> 0:11:19.750
<v Speaker 2>initially? Yes, because at the same time, a lot of

0:11:19.760 --> 0:11:22.320
<v Speaker 2>these companies are still in their growth stages, right? So

0:11:22.489 --> 0:11:26.098
<v Speaker 2>exponential growth, exponential expansion, right? So they're kind of like

0:11:26.109 --> 0:11:29.250
<v Speaker 2>adjusting not just to demand but also to what they

0:11:29.260 --> 0:11:31.840
<v Speaker 2>need to do in order to expand. Yeah. OK. Yeah.

0:11:31.849 --> 0:11:34.150
<v Speaker 2>So once this growth kind of slows down and we're

0:11:34.159 --> 0:11:36.419
<v Speaker 2>actually seeing it a little bit with the more mature

0:11:36.429 --> 0:11:40.809
<v Speaker 2>companies like me, Google Apple, especially Apple is very mature actually.

0:11:40.820 --> 0:11:42.599
<v Speaker 2>So growth has kind of slowed down a little bit.

0:11:42.609 --> 0:11:42.890
<v Speaker 2>I mean,

0:11:43.219 --> 0:11:45.630
<v Speaker 2>they're still growing faster than the average company on the

0:11:45.640 --> 0:11:48.750
<v Speaker 2>S and P 500 but it's no longer your 30 40%

0:11:48.760 --> 0:11:50.739
<v Speaker 2>year on year. Ok. So you're starting to see these

0:11:50.750 --> 0:11:53.000
<v Speaker 2>companies slow down a little bit and mature a little bit.

0:11:53.210 --> 0:11:56.919
<v Speaker 2>Whereas on the back end of the magnificent seven Tesla, NVIDIA,

0:11:56.929 --> 0:12:00.809
<v Speaker 2>they are still relatively new compared to Apple. Yeah. Yeah.

0:12:00.849 --> 0:12:03.169
<v Speaker 2>And so they are a little bit earlier in their

0:12:03.179 --> 0:12:05.099
<v Speaker 2>growth stages. So there is a little bit more room

0:12:05.109 --> 0:12:07.869
<v Speaker 2>to run for that. I see. So it's not necessarily

0:12:08.000 --> 0:12:11.669
<v Speaker 2>that NVIDIA and Tesla have better value growth.

0:12:11.960 --> 0:12:14.510
<v Speaker 2>It's just that there are newer players in the game

0:12:14.760 --> 0:12:18.429
<v Speaker 2>and that explains the exponential increases that we're seeing. It's

0:12:18.440 --> 0:12:20.218
<v Speaker 2>just where they are in the business cycle and where

0:12:20.229 --> 0:12:22.530
<v Speaker 2>they are in the consumer demand cycle. Ok. Well, that's

0:12:22.539 --> 0:12:25.750
<v Speaker 2>a really good explanation. Now, I have a clearer idea

0:12:25.890 --> 0:12:29.669
<v Speaker 2>of why certain names are just performing better than others.

0:12:29.679 --> 0:12:32.309
<v Speaker 2>It's not necessarily an out performance per se. It's just

0:12:32.320 --> 0:12:36.289
<v Speaker 2>where they are in their business lifespan, right? So one

0:12:36.299 --> 0:12:38.799
<v Speaker 2>thing that I want to know is how much do

0:12:38.809 --> 0:12:40.270
<v Speaker 2>these guys cost me

0:12:40.549 --> 0:12:42.590
<v Speaker 2>if I want to buy alphabet, if I wanna buy

0:12:42.599 --> 0:12:46.590
<v Speaker 2>apple shares, how much am I looking at? Because if

0:12:46.599 --> 0:12:47.919
<v Speaker 2>they're so high,

0:12:48.409 --> 0:12:53.140
<v Speaker 2>does it become unsustainable and too expensive to buy? Are

0:12:53.150 --> 0:12:56.840
<v Speaker 2>they worth it? So price is just one element of it,

0:12:56.849 --> 0:12:59.339
<v Speaker 2>I mean, it's all relative. So what you're really looking

0:12:59.349 --> 0:13:02.130
<v Speaker 2>for when you talk about value, most of the times

0:13:02.140 --> 0:13:05.659
<v Speaker 2>you look at ratios. So price to earnings ratios, price

0:13:05.669 --> 0:13:08.069
<v Speaker 2>to sales ratios and you look at it as an

0:13:08.080 --> 0:13:11.479
<v Speaker 2>industry whole and what this company is, is priced at

0:13:11.489 --> 0:13:14.390
<v Speaker 2>versus that particular industry, right? What was something like price

0:13:14.400 --> 0:13:16.640
<v Speaker 2>to earnings ratio, tell you as an investor?

0:13:17.039 --> 0:13:19.590
<v Speaker 2>So it gives you basically an idea of whether a

0:13:19.599 --> 0:13:23.059
<v Speaker 2>stock is overpriced compared to its peers or undervalued, right?

0:13:23.070 --> 0:13:26.520
<v Speaker 2>So it's a relative valuation, let's say NBA right now

0:13:26.530 --> 0:13:30.460
<v Speaker 2>is priced at about 40 times earnings forward price earnings.

0:13:30.469 --> 0:13:32.500
<v Speaker 2>You can't compare it to a company

0:13:32.739 --> 0:13:35.189
<v Speaker 2>that has much lower growth and maybe has a price

0:13:35.200 --> 0:13:37.260
<v Speaker 2>earnings ratio of eight times if they are in a

0:13:37.270 --> 0:13:40.609
<v Speaker 2>totally different industry and in a totally different part of

0:13:40.619 --> 0:13:43.228
<v Speaker 2>their business cycle and growth stage, right? So it's all

0:13:43.239 --> 0:13:46.489
<v Speaker 2>relative straightforward. Yeah, when you look at the stock price,

0:13:46.500 --> 0:13:48.069
<v Speaker 2>it really doesn't tell you anything because

0:13:48.500 --> 0:13:52.030
<v Speaker 2>it doesn't mean that because NVIDIA is 700 bucks versus apple,

0:13:52.039 --> 0:13:54.809
<v Speaker 2>that's over 200 bucks, you know, it's more expensive. Yeah. Yeah,

0:13:54.820 --> 0:13:58.590
<v Speaker 2>it's just a relative term. So what are the factors

0:13:58.599 --> 0:14:01.869
<v Speaker 2>should an investor consider then when deciding which of the

0:14:01.880 --> 0:14:04.729
<v Speaker 2>Mac seven stocks to buy? So I think firstly, you

0:14:04.739 --> 0:14:07.400
<v Speaker 2>got to figure out where's the demand flowing to right now.

0:14:07.580 --> 0:14:09.080
<v Speaker 2>So if you look at the seven of them,

0:14:09.500 --> 0:14:12.280
<v Speaker 2>by far, the weakest one would probably be Apple actually

0:14:12.289 --> 0:14:15.590
<v Speaker 2>because everybody kind of has an iphone. Yeah, the only

0:14:15.599 --> 0:14:18.699
<v Speaker 2>way they grow their iphone revenue is when people upgrade

0:14:18.710 --> 0:14:20.599
<v Speaker 2>their iphones, right? So usually you've got this 3 to

0:14:20.609 --> 0:14:21.469
<v Speaker 2>4 year cycle.

0:14:21.890 --> 0:14:24.090
<v Speaker 2>And over the last few years, they haven't actually raised

0:14:24.099 --> 0:14:26.789
<v Speaker 2>their prices on their pro models or any of the

0:14:26.799 --> 0:14:30.890
<v Speaker 2>iphone models. Right. So the average selling prices hasn't really

0:14:30.900 --> 0:14:33.250
<v Speaker 2>been increasing that much. And if your user base is

0:14:33.260 --> 0:14:36.419
<v Speaker 2>growing maybe 3 4% every year and you don't really

0:14:36.429 --> 0:14:39.369
<v Speaker 2>raise prices, then you have to look to other areas

0:14:39.380 --> 0:14:41.229
<v Speaker 2>for growth. And right now they're seeing a little bit

0:14:41.239 --> 0:14:44.700
<v Speaker 2>coming from their services. So if you think about Apple TV,

0:14:44.710 --> 0:14:46.070
<v Speaker 2>subscriptions and so on, but

0:14:46.609 --> 0:14:49.609
<v Speaker 2>because most of the revenue comes from selling iphones and

0:14:49.619 --> 0:14:51.820
<v Speaker 2>that's kind of taken a back seat a little bit.

0:14:51.830 --> 0:14:54.260
<v Speaker 2>They are in terms of revenue growth a little bit

0:14:54.270 --> 0:14:56.210
<v Speaker 2>weaker compared to the rest on the flip side. I

0:14:56.219 --> 0:14:58.200
<v Speaker 2>don't want to keep talking about NVIDIA. But if

0:14:58.640 --> 0:15:00.539
<v Speaker 2>you know, if people keep wanting to invest in A

0:15:00.549 --> 0:15:02.979
<v Speaker 2>I and there's no need for their A I GP

0:15:03.000 --> 0:15:05.030
<v Speaker 2>U si mean one GP U that they're selling is

0:15:05.039 --> 0:15:07.940
<v Speaker 2>like $30,000. So if you just calculate how many units

0:15:07.950 --> 0:15:09.700
<v Speaker 2>are being sold, I don't need to, I think that

0:15:09.710 --> 0:15:12.369
<v Speaker 2>number alone was mind blowing. Yeah, I mean, it's very

0:15:12.380 --> 0:15:14.919
<v Speaker 2>different compared to a consumer and video GP U that

0:15:14.929 --> 0:15:18.109
<v Speaker 2>we have in our computers. It's like 300 bucks bucks. Yeah,

0:15:18.119 --> 0:15:21.530
<v Speaker 2>I mean when governments and private sector companies are buying

0:15:21.539 --> 0:15:21.780
<v Speaker 2>them whole

0:15:22.289 --> 0:15:25.400
<v Speaker 2>in big volumes that changes the whole game. Yeah, I mean,

0:15:25.409 --> 0:15:29.090
<v Speaker 2>you're talking about like billions and billions of dollars. Wow. Yeah,

0:15:29.099 --> 0:15:32.260
<v Speaker 2>I mean when you just look at earnings calls for matter,

0:15:32.630 --> 0:15:34.500
<v Speaker 2>they mentioned that by the end of this year they

0:15:34.510 --> 0:15:39.059
<v Speaker 2>want to have 600,000 GP us like worth of gps. Yeah.

0:15:39.440 --> 0:15:41.039
<v Speaker 2>So I mean you just calculate how much you're spending

0:15:41.049 --> 0:15:43.820
<v Speaker 2>600,000 times 30,000, you know, roughly

0:15:45.119 --> 0:15:46.940
<v Speaker 2>are laughing all the way to the bank for the

0:15:46.950 --> 0:15:49.619
<v Speaker 2>next few years. So it's really the growth story that

0:15:49.630 --> 0:15:51.780
<v Speaker 2>matters here because it's the mileage that it gives you

0:15:51.789 --> 0:15:55.539
<v Speaker 2>as an investor. Yeah, yeah, it's really a growth story. Ok.

0:15:55.549 --> 0:15:58.450
<v Speaker 2>So we talked about how sometimes the tech sector can

0:15:58.460 --> 0:16:01.739
<v Speaker 2>be quite volatile but it's not as volatile as other

0:16:01.750 --> 0:16:05.099
<v Speaker 2>kinds of stocks out there. Still, they've experienced pretty drastic

0:16:05.109 --> 0:16:07.580
<v Speaker 2>movements in a relatively short period and we talked about

0:16:07.590 --> 0:16:13.140
<v Speaker 2>this earlier. Some even believe that there's a performance dispersion

0:16:13.460 --> 0:16:17.159
<v Speaker 2>that has led to a disproportionate increase in stock valuations

0:16:17.260 --> 0:16:19.840
<v Speaker 2>relative to the rest of the markets. And I guess

0:16:19.849 --> 0:16:23.119
<v Speaker 2>when they do that, they are comparing it to equities.

0:16:23.729 --> 0:16:28.479
<v Speaker 2>Do you think that the mag seven are indeed overvalued, overweight?

0:16:28.960 --> 0:16:32.340
<v Speaker 2>I don't think as a group they're overweight because the

0:16:32.349 --> 0:16:35.450
<v Speaker 2>earnings potential is really strong. But if you nick, obviously,

0:16:35.460 --> 0:16:38.520
<v Speaker 2>some of the companies probably a little bit more overvalued

0:16:38.530 --> 0:16:41.140
<v Speaker 2>compared to others. So it's not fair to say as

0:16:41.150 --> 0:16:44.940
<v Speaker 2>a whole, they are overvalued. If you're looking at other

0:16:45.130 --> 0:16:49.859
<v Speaker 2>consumer equities or healthcare, you know, other defensive wise

0:16:50.000 --> 0:16:52.280
<v Speaker 2>talks out there. So if you invest in them, you

0:16:52.289 --> 0:16:54.059
<v Speaker 2>really need to have kind of the stomach to be

0:16:54.070 --> 0:16:56.299
<v Speaker 2>down like 10 15% 1 day and be ok with

0:16:56.309 --> 0:16:58.309
<v Speaker 2>it because you know that they can make it back

0:16:58.320 --> 0:17:01.510
<v Speaker 2>in three days. I think it boils down to why

0:17:01.520 --> 0:17:04.819
<v Speaker 2>you've chosen to invest in that particular company, right? Because

0:17:04.829 --> 0:17:07.780
<v Speaker 2>like you said, the gross story matters, the value matters

0:17:07.969 --> 0:17:10.949
<v Speaker 2>where they're spreading their revenue to where they're gaining the

0:17:11.040 --> 0:17:15.180
<v Speaker 2>revenue and reinvesting the revenue as well, right? So the

0:17:15.189 --> 0:17:19.339
<v Speaker 2>Mac 7 may have had its origins in Fang as

0:17:19.349 --> 0:17:23.250
<v Speaker 2>I prefaced earlier. But there are still key differences that

0:17:23.260 --> 0:17:25.478
<v Speaker 2>the thing that sticks out to me immediately would be

0:17:25.489 --> 0:17:29.579
<v Speaker 2>Netflix because I don't necessarily see Netflix as a tech

0:17:29.589 --> 0:17:31.920
<v Speaker 2>stock per se. It's a very consumer stock,

0:17:32.369 --> 0:17:35.130
<v Speaker 2>but then the lines are blurred, right? Because a lot

0:17:35.140 --> 0:17:38.729
<v Speaker 2>of tech companies are consumer driven. So tell us about

0:17:38.739 --> 0:17:41.530
<v Speaker 2>the key differences here. How do I tell what a

0:17:41.540 --> 0:17:45.209
<v Speaker 2>true mag seven versus a Fang stock? So actually the

0:17:45.219 --> 0:17:47.379
<v Speaker 2>mag seven, I believe at the time it was coin

0:17:47.390 --> 0:17:50.920
<v Speaker 2>is because they were the biggest seven companies, right? Tech company.

0:17:50.930 --> 0:17:53.920
<v Speaker 2>So Netflix had, I think like 60% draw down in

0:17:53.974 --> 0:17:55.864
<v Speaker 2>price. So they kind of fell out of it. I

0:17:56.224 --> 0:17:58.645
<v Speaker 2>think at the time they were maybe only worth only

0:17:58.655 --> 0:18:02.604
<v Speaker 2>worth $200 billion. Whereas the rest, you know, they're like

0:18:02.614 --> 0:18:07.395
<v Speaker 2>closer to one trillion. I mean, it's a, yeah, so

0:18:07.405 --> 0:18:10.364
<v Speaker 2>that's why they got dropped. And also because streaming companies

0:18:10.375 --> 0:18:13.344
<v Speaker 2>in general if you take much as Netflix, but even

0:18:13.364 --> 0:18:16.824
<v Speaker 2>to some extent, Disney or Spotify, the way they earn

0:18:16.834 --> 0:18:19.635
<v Speaker 2>their revenue and the way it translates to earnings is,

0:18:19.645 --> 0:18:21.755
<v Speaker 2>is a little bit more constrained because

0:18:22.349 --> 0:18:24.859
<v Speaker 2>they really bank on just two things. One is user

0:18:24.869 --> 0:18:29.089
<v Speaker 2>growth and two raising prices which just happened by and

0:18:29.099 --> 0:18:32.130
<v Speaker 2>three to a small extent nowadays, it's starting to incorporate

0:18:32.140 --> 0:18:34.650
<v Speaker 2>a little bit more digital advertising in their business model.

0:18:34.819 --> 0:18:37.640
<v Speaker 2>But for the most part, right, it's how much dollars

0:18:37.650 --> 0:18:38.969
<v Speaker 2>can I increase, right?

0:18:39.050 --> 0:18:41.209
<v Speaker 2>Without losing all my customer. Yeah. Yeah. So there is

0:18:41.219 --> 0:18:45.380
<v Speaker 2>that limitation then for companies like the streaming platforms. So

0:18:45.390 --> 0:18:50.489
<v Speaker 2>economy driven volatility aside, tech stocks do face some risks

0:18:50.680 --> 0:18:54.770
<v Speaker 2>including regulatory risk purely because of their size and their

0:18:54.780 --> 0:18:57.839
<v Speaker 2>global reach. And as you rightfully pointed out early in

0:18:57.849 --> 0:19:01.469
<v Speaker 2>the conversation because of how new they are in terms

0:19:01.479 --> 0:19:05.040
<v Speaker 2>of market players, what are some of the

0:19:05.609 --> 0:19:11.510
<v Speaker 2>regulatory risks and what's the impact of those regulatory risks

0:19:11.609 --> 0:19:15.839
<v Speaker 2>on these tech stocks immediately? I'm thinking about me and

0:19:15.849 --> 0:19:19.229
<v Speaker 2>the hearing in the US Senate, for example. So there

0:19:19.239 --> 0:19:22.000
<v Speaker 2>are two main regulatory risks right now and it's been

0:19:22.010 --> 0:19:24.439
<v Speaker 2>going on for the last few years. One would be

0:19:24.449 --> 0:19:27.698
<v Speaker 2>data privacy because all of these companies, they take all

0:19:27.709 --> 0:19:30.890
<v Speaker 2>your data whenever you use them. And so regulators are

0:19:30.900 --> 0:19:32.979
<v Speaker 2>trying to draw clear boundaries between what you can and

0:19:32.989 --> 0:19:34.790
<v Speaker 2>what you can't do. And this has been

0:19:35.119 --> 0:19:39.119
<v Speaker 2>a relatively new phenomenon where they are using a lot

0:19:39.130 --> 0:19:42.689
<v Speaker 2>of data churning, a lot of data to drive more insights. Obviously,

0:19:42.699 --> 0:19:46.688
<v Speaker 2>with the event of higher computer technology, better computers, you've

0:19:46.699 --> 0:19:49.629
<v Speaker 2>been able to do that. The second area which is

0:19:49.640 --> 0:19:52.020
<v Speaker 2>also very important and it has a lot of scrutiny,

0:19:52.030 --> 0:19:56.780
<v Speaker 2>especially in Europe is around monopolistic practices, right? And that

0:19:56.790 --> 0:19:59.140
<v Speaker 2>actually has a bigger impact, I think because

0:19:59.479 --> 0:20:03.449
<v Speaker 2>look at companies like Google that essentially a monopoly in

0:20:03.839 --> 0:20:07.550
<v Speaker 2>multiple business, I mean, Google Maps. Yeah, Android. So they've

0:20:07.560 --> 0:20:10.680
<v Speaker 2>gotten so big and the downside for this regulation is

0:20:10.689 --> 0:20:13.030
<v Speaker 2>that you will have a lot of smaller players, maybe

0:20:13.040 --> 0:20:16.930
<v Speaker 2>smaller news outlets, smaller advertisers claiming that, you know, Google

0:20:16.939 --> 0:20:19.540
<v Speaker 2>is bullying them because they are so big. Yeah, which,

0:20:19.550 --> 0:20:20.579
<v Speaker 2>which is a fair argument

0:20:20.920 --> 0:20:23.500
<v Speaker 2>in Europe. They take it really seriously. They impose serious

0:20:23.510 --> 0:20:26.359
<v Speaker 2>punishments up to I believe 10% of their revenue from

0:20:26.369 --> 0:20:28.349
<v Speaker 2>the last year. And then on top of that, they're

0:20:28.359 --> 0:20:31.369
<v Speaker 2>able to break up the company or at least try

0:20:31.380 --> 0:20:33.719
<v Speaker 2>to break up your company into smaller bits. We've seen

0:20:33.729 --> 0:20:36.709
<v Speaker 2>that actually done in China somewhat with Alibaba.

0:20:37.084 --> 0:20:39.984
<v Speaker 2>What regulators have kind of done? China is a totally

0:20:39.994 --> 0:20:42.435
<v Speaker 2>different animal. Oh yeah. But, but when you look at

0:20:42.444 --> 0:20:46.114
<v Speaker 2>Europe and North America, that's kind of the biggest downside

0:20:46.125 --> 0:20:47.864
<v Speaker 2>risk for a lot of these companies because if you

0:20:47.875 --> 0:20:51.074
<v Speaker 2>break them up, then obviously they don't operate as efficiently

0:20:51.125 --> 0:20:52.954
<v Speaker 2>because have to have separate teams.

0:20:53.339 --> 0:20:54.859
<v Speaker 2>You got to spend a little bit more money. So

0:20:54.869 --> 0:20:56.500
<v Speaker 2>you use a little bit of your operating leverage and

0:20:56.510 --> 0:20:59.890
<v Speaker 2>a little bit of your synergies and investors just don't

0:20:59.900 --> 0:21:01.599
<v Speaker 2>really want it because, you know, if I'm going to

0:21:01.609 --> 0:21:03.959
<v Speaker 2>invest in a company that's so big, I don't want

0:21:03.969 --> 0:21:06.089
<v Speaker 2>them to be broken up. Exactly. Yeah, you lose all

0:21:06.099 --> 0:21:09.089
<v Speaker 2>their competitive advantages. Yeah. exactly. So those two will be

0:21:09.099 --> 0:21:13.209
<v Speaker 2>the main risk in terms of regulatory oversight. Another risk

0:21:13.219 --> 0:21:16.270
<v Speaker 2>that is actually quite important nowadays is your geopolitical risk.

0:21:16.280 --> 0:21:18.500
<v Speaker 2>And what we're seeing with China and the US,

0:21:19.349 --> 0:21:21.479
<v Speaker 2>you know, us banning a lot of technology, a lot

0:21:21.489 --> 0:21:23.899
<v Speaker 2>of the high end chips. So that has really impacted

0:21:23.910 --> 0:21:27.489
<v Speaker 2>NVIDIA a little bit. Fortunately for NVIDIA, a demand is

0:21:27.500 --> 0:21:29.910
<v Speaker 2>so strong that for right now it doesn't really matter,

0:21:30.189 --> 0:21:33.000
<v Speaker 2>but China makes up about 20% of Nvidia's revenue. So

0:21:33.010 --> 0:21:35.389
<v Speaker 2>you kind of have that taken away if you did

0:21:35.400 --> 0:21:37.770
<v Speaker 2>have strong demand and you are just a regular company,

0:21:37.780 --> 0:21:39.670
<v Speaker 2>I mean, 20% of your revenue gone is a lot

0:21:39.680 --> 0:21:43.859
<v Speaker 2>like in three weeks, essentially is huge. It's a big chunk. Yeah.

0:21:43.979 --> 0:21:46.229
<v Speaker 2>Right. So these kind of ongoing tensions, you can't really

0:21:46.239 --> 0:21:48.599
<v Speaker 2>control it. You just got to sit back and watch

0:21:48.609 --> 0:21:51.579
<v Speaker 2>and hope that they can work it out as an investor.

0:21:51.589 --> 0:21:54.389
<v Speaker 2>You have no idea what about key person risk. You're

0:21:54.400 --> 0:21:57.589
<v Speaker 2>looking at the Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg's of the world.

0:21:57.599 --> 0:22:01.270
<v Speaker 2>Is this a potential major risk or pretty minor? You think?

0:22:01.280 --> 0:22:03.319
<v Speaker 2>I think for most of Mac Seven it's pretty minor

0:22:03.329 --> 0:22:05.530
<v Speaker 2>because they have very strong teams around them. So you

0:22:05.540 --> 0:22:07.530
<v Speaker 2>have to know when you're looking at a company like

0:22:07.540 --> 0:22:09.239
<v Speaker 2>this on top of the financial performance.

0:22:09.689 --> 0:22:11.199
<v Speaker 2>Who is the guy at the top? What kind of

0:22:11.209 --> 0:22:14.390
<v Speaker 2>character is he? Is it true that some investors actually

0:22:14.400 --> 0:22:18.540
<v Speaker 2>buy into the company because of that key person? Yeah,

0:22:18.550 --> 0:22:20.660
<v Speaker 2>so I mean, this is huge in maybe not so

0:22:20.670 --> 0:22:23.619
<v Speaker 2>much public equities, but when it comes to private equity

0:22:23.630 --> 0:22:26.250
<v Speaker 2>venture capital, that's something they look at because you want

0:22:26.260 --> 0:22:28.849
<v Speaker 2>to see what kind of leader your CEO is, right?

0:22:28.859 --> 0:22:31.609
<v Speaker 2>So here's the other thing that made the news very

0:22:31.619 --> 0:22:34.609
<v Speaker 2>recently meta announcing that they would

0:22:34.890 --> 0:22:38.540
<v Speaker 2>be paying its first ever dividend to investors. And word

0:22:38.550 --> 0:22:42.629
<v Speaker 2>is that Amazon and alphabet are also going to follow suit.

0:22:43.319 --> 0:22:46.569
<v Speaker 2>Have they indeed reached that level of maturity in the

0:22:46.579 --> 0:22:50.180
<v Speaker 2>market where they can pay back their investors and not

0:22:50.189 --> 0:22:52.900
<v Speaker 2>just for the one year, I mean, once you start

0:22:52.910 --> 0:22:55.810
<v Speaker 2>doing that, I'm sure investors are going to expect you

0:22:55.819 --> 0:22:58.969
<v Speaker 2>to continue paying some form of dividend over the next

0:22:58.979 --> 0:23:02.579
<v Speaker 2>at least five years. Yeah, so definitely it was big

0:23:02.589 --> 0:23:05.949
<v Speaker 2>news for a matter, it really showed their maturity as

0:23:05.959 --> 0:23:08.489
<v Speaker 2>a company especially, you know what happened over the last

0:23:08.500 --> 0:23:10.290
<v Speaker 2>three years when they were just pushing growth and then

0:23:10.300 --> 0:23:11.540
<v Speaker 2>I was like, oh no, we are going to focus

0:23:11.550 --> 0:23:12.329
<v Speaker 2>on efficiency.

0:23:12.979 --> 0:23:15.530
<v Speaker 2>But when it comes to returning value to shareholders, they've

0:23:15.540 --> 0:23:18.800
<v Speaker 2>always done that through share buybacks, their dividends is not

0:23:18.810 --> 0:23:21.329
<v Speaker 2>on top of the share buybacks that they are already doing. So,

0:23:21.339 --> 0:23:25.060
<v Speaker 2>they just are splitting the capital allocation accordingly. For example,

0:23:25.069 --> 0:23:27.530
<v Speaker 2>if they're buying back 100 billion worth of shares, now,

0:23:27.540 --> 0:23:29.188
<v Speaker 2>maybe they're going to buy back 80 billion and then

0:23:29.199 --> 0:23:31.709
<v Speaker 2>do 20 billion in dividends by making these kind of

0:23:31.719 --> 0:23:34.218
<v Speaker 2>strategic moves. It shows what kind of company they are

0:23:34.229 --> 0:23:37.669
<v Speaker 2>maturing into and it probably would appeal a little bit

0:23:37.680 --> 0:23:40.329
<v Speaker 2>more to dividend investors, for example, or for people that

0:23:40.339 --> 0:23:42.550
<v Speaker 2>would have stayed away in the past because

0:23:42.819 --> 0:23:45.239
<v Speaker 2>they were unsure of what kind of trajectory this kind

0:23:45.250 --> 0:23:48.770
<v Speaker 2>of company was heading towards. Right, right now, they've mentioned

0:23:48.780 --> 0:23:51.680
<v Speaker 2>that they're going to be just doing quarterly dividends for

0:23:51.689 --> 0:23:54.560
<v Speaker 2>the foreseeable future. So they've really laid out the lines,

0:23:54.569 --> 0:23:55.849
<v Speaker 2>you know, we're going to do this. It's not a

0:23:55.859 --> 0:23:58.060
<v Speaker 2>one time thing we're going to continue doing it. That's

0:23:58.069 --> 0:24:00.209
<v Speaker 2>a huge commitment. Yeah, and I think that has given

0:24:00.219 --> 0:24:02.679
<v Speaker 2>investors quite a lot of confidence. You can see that

0:24:02.689 --> 0:24:05.550
<v Speaker 2>the stock price this year. Oh yes, it has surged

0:24:05.560 --> 0:24:09.619
<v Speaker 2>tremendously and obviously it begs the question, have they become

0:24:09.630 --> 0:24:10.669
<v Speaker 2>too big to fail?

0:24:11.540 --> 0:24:13.510
<v Speaker 2>I don't think so. I think they still have to

0:24:13.520 --> 0:24:15.640
<v Speaker 2>be quite focused, especially if they are doing a lot

0:24:15.650 --> 0:24:18.760
<v Speaker 2>of investments in R and D and capital expenditure, right?

0:24:19.170 --> 0:24:21.780
<v Speaker 2>When you grow your assets that much, you still have

0:24:21.790 --> 0:24:25.170
<v Speaker 2>to be somewhat prudent in terms of how you're allocating money. Yeah,

0:24:25.339 --> 0:24:27.810
<v Speaker 2>there will come a point where their user base is

0:24:27.819 --> 0:24:29.619
<v Speaker 2>also going to be saturated right now. They are at

0:24:29.630 --> 0:24:34.069
<v Speaker 2>4 billion users. Yeah, I mean, that's like almost 60 70%

0:24:34.079 --> 0:24:36.369
<v Speaker 2>of the world's population, right. So how much more can

0:24:36.380 --> 0:24:38.669
<v Speaker 2>they actually grow in terms of user base? And then

0:24:38.680 --> 0:24:40.000
<v Speaker 2>on the monetization side,

0:24:40.469 --> 0:24:42.660
<v Speaker 2>yes, they're still in the early stages, but they will

0:24:42.670 --> 0:24:44.399
<v Speaker 2>peter out a little bit in the next 5 to

0:24:44.410 --> 0:24:47.030
<v Speaker 2>10 years. It almost feels as if A I came

0:24:47.040 --> 0:24:49.899
<v Speaker 2>at the right time. Like the timing is impeccable that

0:24:49.910 --> 0:24:53.199
<v Speaker 2>they're able to leverage on this for then the next

0:24:53.209 --> 0:24:55.369
<v Speaker 2>chapter of their growth story. I think the A I

0:24:55.390 --> 0:24:57.630
<v Speaker 2>hype came at the right time because these companies have

0:24:57.640 --> 0:24:59.890
<v Speaker 2>been doing it for the last 10 years. Yeah, exactly.

0:24:59.900 --> 0:25:01.379
<v Speaker 2>It's nothing new to them. Yeah.

0:25:01.829 --> 0:25:05.790
<v Speaker 2>So as an investor looking to add a tech stock

0:25:05.800 --> 0:25:07.800
<v Speaker 2>to a portfolio, what do I need to be paying

0:25:07.810 --> 0:25:13.189
<v Speaker 2>attention to particularly deciding on Mac Seven, I'm thinking about

0:25:13.199 --> 0:25:17.810
<v Speaker 2>things like Time Horizon, you talked about tech stock investors

0:25:17.819 --> 0:25:21.880
<v Speaker 2>being the kind that needs to have the stomach for it.

0:25:22.109 --> 0:25:24.109
<v Speaker 2>So I'm not thinking long term here. This has to

0:25:24.119 --> 0:25:27.849
<v Speaker 2>be a quick turnaround or a medium term outlook or

0:25:28.420 --> 0:25:32.180
<v Speaker 2>can they still be long term stocks that we can

0:25:32.189 --> 0:25:36.560
<v Speaker 2>invest in actually for more volatile stocks like tech stocks,

0:25:36.569 --> 0:25:38.939
<v Speaker 2>you really want to have a longer time horizon because

0:25:39.170 --> 0:25:41.609
<v Speaker 2>it kind of mitigates a lot of the volatility risk

0:25:42.040 --> 0:25:44.099
<v Speaker 2>at the same time, if you have companies like the

0:25:44.109 --> 0:25:46.890
<v Speaker 2>max seven, that fundamentally are very sound, if you look

0:25:46.900 --> 0:25:49.439
<v Speaker 2>at their financial statements, you know, the flush of cash,

0:25:49.910 --> 0:25:52.020
<v Speaker 2>you know that if anything

0:25:52.300 --> 0:25:55.430
<v Speaker 2>inadvertently happens, they'll still be able to function, they will

0:25:55.439 --> 0:25:57.520
<v Speaker 2>still be able to pay out their investors. And so

0:25:57.530 --> 0:26:00.218
<v Speaker 2>actually these kind of companies, yes, you can do short

0:26:00.229 --> 0:26:01.880
<v Speaker 2>term trading and stuff like that. But if you really

0:26:01.890 --> 0:26:04.718
<v Speaker 2>want to look long term, that's probably where you're going

0:26:04.729 --> 0:26:06.339
<v Speaker 2>to be able to maximize your returns.

0:26:06.729 --> 0:26:08.910
<v Speaker 2>So then you really have to look at how much

0:26:08.920 --> 0:26:11.218
<v Speaker 2>value can I get at this current price? If you

0:26:11.229 --> 0:26:12.790
<v Speaker 2>think maybe I can get a little bit more, you

0:26:12.800 --> 0:26:15.639
<v Speaker 2>wait for a pullback, right? Because inevitably it will happen. Yeah.

0:26:15.650 --> 0:26:18.510
<v Speaker 2>And then you find that, ok, this is somewhere where

0:26:18.520 --> 0:26:20.170
<v Speaker 2>it's a bit more value to me as a company.

0:26:20.180 --> 0:26:22.899
<v Speaker 2>It doesn't diminish the performance or the capabilities of the company.

0:26:22.910 --> 0:26:25.429
<v Speaker 2>It's just where you want to enter and then you

0:26:25.439 --> 0:26:27.310
<v Speaker 2>just hold it for 10 years because I'm quite sure

0:26:27.540 --> 0:26:29.050
<v Speaker 2>in 10 years all of these companies are still going

0:26:29.060 --> 0:26:31.400
<v Speaker 2>to be. Oh, yeah, it's hard to imagine a world

0:26:31.410 --> 0:26:34.079
<v Speaker 2>without them. Now their game changer, they are

0:26:34.410 --> 0:26:37.699
<v Speaker 2>tech disruptors for the most part they all basically use

0:26:37.709 --> 0:26:39.760
<v Speaker 2>every day. Yeah. It's almost as if we can't live

0:26:39.770 --> 0:26:42.500
<v Speaker 2>without them. Yeah. So my final question to you is,

0:26:42.510 --> 0:26:45.369
<v Speaker 2>do you think max seven will still be mag seven

0:26:45.380 --> 0:26:49.550
<v Speaker 2>in 2025? Yeah, I think in 2025 there will still

0:26:49.560 --> 0:26:52.589
<v Speaker 2>be mag seven. Right. The seven is still there. I'm

0:26:52.599 --> 0:26:55.579
<v Speaker 2>quite confident that this will happen for at least the

0:26:55.589 --> 0:26:57.468
<v Speaker 2>next 2 to 3 years. They'll still be up there.

0:26:57.810 --> 0:26:59.369
<v Speaker 2>Do you think anyone will drop out the way net

0:26:59.380 --> 0:26:59.869
<v Speaker 2>fix it?

0:27:01.260 --> 0:27:04.139
<v Speaker 2>I think the only company that has the potential to

0:27:04.150 --> 0:27:07.099
<v Speaker 2>do that would be Tesla, the rest of them, they

0:27:07.109 --> 0:27:09.579
<v Speaker 2>are very solid. Even though we talked a little bit

0:27:09.589 --> 0:27:13.150
<v Speaker 2>about Apple and slowing growth, there's still a huge company,

0:27:13.250 --> 0:27:16.079
<v Speaker 2>very high value, very high value because they generate a

0:27:16.089 --> 0:27:19.069
<v Speaker 2>lot of revenue earnings are also good and they're very stable.

0:27:19.079 --> 0:27:21.458
<v Speaker 2>It's tough to find a better company than Apple if

0:27:21.469 --> 0:27:23.679
<v Speaker 2>you're looking for something that's stable, right? It may not

0:27:23.689 --> 0:27:26.530
<v Speaker 2>give you the 30 40% performance that you want,

0:27:27.963 --> 0:27:30.373
<v Speaker 2>but right now, not right now, but they will still

0:27:30.383 --> 0:27:32.862
<v Speaker 2>be pretty solid better than most other companies. You know,

0:27:32.873 --> 0:27:36.652
<v Speaker 2>you just gave us a really detailed lay of the land, Jonathan.

0:27:36.662 --> 0:27:38.942
<v Speaker 2>So thank you so much for helping us understand the

0:27:38.953 --> 0:27:42.342
<v Speaker 2>Mac seven, the whole tech stock industry, especially as an

0:27:42.353 --> 0:27:44.243
<v Speaker 2>investor as well. What to look out for. So, thank

0:27:44.253 --> 0:27:46.522
<v Speaker 2>you very much. You're welcome it was fun. It's still

0:27:46.532 --> 0:27:49.003
<v Speaker 2>a very exciting space to watch. However, the journey turns

0:27:49.012 --> 0:27:51.152
<v Speaker 2>out just got to make sure that you know, you

0:27:51.162 --> 0:27:51.863
<v Speaker 2>as an investor

0:27:52.365 --> 0:27:56.645
<v Speaker 2>know what you can stomach as Jonathan painted. If you

0:27:56.656 --> 0:27:59.406
<v Speaker 2>enjoyed this episode, please let us know by leaving us

0:27:59.416 --> 0:28:02.245
<v Speaker 2>a comment or a rating on any of the platforms

0:28:02.255 --> 0:28:04.946
<v Speaker 2>you are listening to us from, we're streaming on Apple

0:28:04.955 --> 0:28:08.936
<v Speaker 2>podcasts and Spotify as well as youtube music. Let's not

0:28:08.946 --> 0:28:13.406
<v Speaker 2>forget the team behind Money Talks, Joanne Chan Tiffany, Jaini, Johari,

0:28:13.416 --> 0:28:17.125
<v Speaker 2>Christina Roberts win and I'm Andrea He catch you next time.