WEBVTT - Impaled on the Obelisk

0:00:05.000 --> 0:00:09.479
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.

0:00:10.880 --> 0:00:11.600
<v Speaker 2>It's Thursday.

0:00:11.680 --> 0:00:15.440
<v Speaker 3>I'm not going to the JP Morgan pub this Thursday week.

0:00:15.520 --> 0:00:16.120
<v Speaker 2>I was fun.

0:00:16.480 --> 0:00:17.239
<v Speaker 1>You were on the roof.

0:00:17.400 --> 0:00:19.200
<v Speaker 2>We went to the roof. It was pretty cool.

0:00:19.520 --> 0:00:24.599
<v Speaker 3>Like the very top part is like this obelisk into

0:00:24.680 --> 0:00:26.880
<v Speaker 3>the sky, so we were gazing up at it and

0:00:26.920 --> 0:00:27.600
<v Speaker 3>it was all that up.

0:00:27.640 --> 0:00:28.680
<v Speaker 2>It was so cool. It was.

0:00:30.480 --> 0:00:30.680
<v Speaker 1>God.

0:00:30.680 --> 0:00:33.760
<v Speaker 2>I wanted to like free solo it, but it was

0:00:33.840 --> 0:00:34.479
<v Speaker 2>so cold.

0:00:35.479 --> 0:00:35.839
<v Speaker 3>It was.

0:00:37.800 --> 0:00:38.159
<v Speaker 1>Rooftop.

0:00:38.240 --> 0:00:40.360
<v Speaker 3>It was so snowy, and I see it was pretty terrified.

0:00:40.400 --> 0:00:41.240
<v Speaker 3>It was totally safe.

0:00:41.680 --> 0:00:46.160
<v Speaker 2>There was a fence. There was a fence. I'm sure

0:00:46.200 --> 0:00:47.040
<v Speaker 2>there is, but.

0:00:47.920 --> 0:00:48.680
<v Speaker 1>You were on the roof.

0:00:49.040 --> 0:00:53.360
<v Speaker 2>I was. It was like a quick a quick lookout.

0:00:52.960 --> 0:00:53.120
<v Speaker 3>You know.

0:00:53.159 --> 0:00:56.680
<v Speaker 2>I waved to New Jersey. Then we got back in. God,

0:00:56.720 --> 0:00:59.560
<v Speaker 2>it was so cool. Though, we have to go. We

0:00:59.640 --> 0:01:00.880
<v Speaker 2>have to You really have to do.

0:01:01.160 --> 0:01:04.280
<v Speaker 1>As you're talking about this, get some email invites being.

0:01:04.080 --> 0:01:07.759
<v Speaker 3>Like come, yeah, well we need to take up one

0:01:07.800 --> 0:01:09.080
<v Speaker 3>of them.

0:01:09.400 --> 0:01:11.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, is there anything you got?

0:01:12.120 --> 0:01:14.479
<v Speaker 1>I'm off the week after next Yeah, oh.

0:01:14.400 --> 0:01:15.959
<v Speaker 2>My god, wait what week are you off?

0:01:16.280 --> 0:01:16.880
<v Speaker 1>The sixteenth?

0:01:17.120 --> 0:01:18.800
<v Speaker 2>Yikes, I'm off the week after that.

0:01:19.600 --> 0:01:22.240
<v Speaker 1>Two weeks off. It's like very satisfying to have the end.

0:01:22.120 --> 0:01:24.120
<v Speaker 2>In sight, you know, Yeah, no, I feel that.

0:01:24.280 --> 0:01:25.800
<v Speaker 1>No, of course, I live for my work.

0:01:25.800 --> 0:01:28.160
<v Speaker 2>And we'll be of course where you go. I mean,

0:01:28.200 --> 0:01:29.559
<v Speaker 2>we can talk about this later.

0:01:29.880 --> 0:01:32.280
<v Speaker 1>I'll tell you off, Mike. I'm going somewhere warm.

0:01:32.640 --> 0:01:33.840
<v Speaker 2>I'm going somewhere cold.

0:01:33.959 --> 0:01:39.160
<v Speaker 1>Nice. Yeah, all right, Hello and welcome to The Money

0:01:39.160 --> 0:01:42.560
<v Speaker 1>Stuff Podcast, your weekly podcast where we talk about stuff

0:01:42.600 --> 0:01:46.360
<v Speaker 1>related to money. I'm Att Levine and I write the

0:01:46.360 --> 0:01:48.000
<v Speaker 1>Money Stuff column for Bloomberg Opinion.

0:01:48.840 --> 0:01:51.480
<v Speaker 3>And I'm Katie Greifeld, a reporter for Bloomberg News and

0:01:51.520 --> 0:01:53.080
<v Speaker 3>an anchor for Bloomberg Television.

0:02:02.120 --> 0:02:04.400
<v Speaker 1>We had an under the wire last week that that

0:02:04.600 --> 0:02:06.160
<v Speaker 1>SpaceX and x I high were emerging.

0:02:06.360 --> 0:02:09.480
<v Speaker 3>We were ahead of the curve, so slightly somewhere nearly

0:02:10.000 --> 0:02:10.480
<v Speaker 3>on the curve.

0:02:10.560 --> 0:02:11.160
<v Speaker 1>We're on the curve.

0:02:11.280 --> 0:02:13.760
<v Speaker 2>I was going to say, we're picking up behind the curve.

0:02:13.919 --> 0:02:14.560
<v Speaker 2>We're a little bit.

0:02:14.880 --> 0:02:17.360
<v Speaker 3>We're picking up where we left off though, Yes, and

0:02:17.400 --> 0:02:21.079
<v Speaker 3>that is on h It happened, SpaceX, It happened.

0:02:21.360 --> 0:02:24.240
<v Speaker 1>This is the thing. I come from the world of

0:02:24.600 --> 0:02:28.320
<v Speaker 1>public company mergers, where like, you negotiate a deal for

0:02:28.320 --> 0:02:30.160
<v Speaker 1>a few weeks, and you sign a deal, and then

0:02:30.160 --> 0:02:32.040
<v Speaker 1>you announce the deal and then like six months later

0:02:32.040 --> 0:02:35.080
<v Speaker 1>it closes and the Elon Musk has done that. He

0:02:35.160 --> 0:02:39.239
<v Speaker 1>did the Twitter merger, which took at least forty years

0:02:39.280 --> 0:02:43.799
<v Speaker 1>off my life. But when he decides to merge Xai

0:02:43.840 --> 0:02:47.640
<v Speaker 1>and SpaceX, like from a glimmer in his eye to

0:02:48.040 --> 0:02:50.720
<v Speaker 1>the deal is closed, is like, I don't know what

0:02:50.880 --> 0:02:53.840
<v Speaker 1>four days like, Yeah, it's really incredible speed.

0:02:54.240 --> 0:02:57.200
<v Speaker 3>Well, as you sort of lay out in the newsletter,

0:02:57.240 --> 0:03:01.720
<v Speaker 3>he's negotiating with himself and then signing it himself.

0:03:02.120 --> 0:03:04.600
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's great. It'll be interesting to learn from the

0:03:04.600 --> 0:03:06.600
<v Speaker 1>eventual IPO filing. I don't know how much of these

0:03:06.600 --> 0:03:09.920
<v Speaker 1>companies Elon Musk owns, right, But he's not the sole

0:03:10.000 --> 0:03:12.000
<v Speaker 1>shareholder of either one. Right, there's a lot of employees,

0:03:12.040 --> 0:03:16.760
<v Speaker 1>there's outside investors. But it seems like he owns or

0:03:16.800 --> 0:03:20.040
<v Speaker 1>at least a majority of both companies, or at least

0:03:20.040 --> 0:03:22.440
<v Speaker 1>the majority of the voting power of both companies, because

0:03:22.480 --> 0:03:24.480
<v Speaker 1>he could just kind of do the merger himself. He's

0:03:24.520 --> 0:03:27.720
<v Speaker 1>the controlling executive of both, he controls the board of both,

0:03:27.760 --> 0:03:29.840
<v Speaker 1>and he's most importantly the controlling sholder of both. So

0:03:29.919 --> 0:03:32.720
<v Speaker 1>like when the deal is submitted to a shareholder vote,

0:03:32.720 --> 0:03:35.280
<v Speaker 1>it's submitted to him, and he says yes, and so

0:03:35.280 --> 0:03:38.640
<v Speaker 1>you can do it really fast. In addition to him

0:03:38.960 --> 0:03:41.880
<v Speaker 1>being legally the controlling shareholder, also like all of the

0:03:41.880 --> 0:03:46.160
<v Speaker 1>shareholders both love him and fear him. My sense is

0:03:46.240 --> 0:03:49.160
<v Speaker 1>this is true. You can imagine some SpaceX shelders saying

0:03:49.560 --> 0:03:54.160
<v Speaker 1>SpaceX is a very valuable company. It is worth more

0:03:54.640 --> 0:03:58.440
<v Speaker 1>than four times as much as x Ai. They say

0:03:58.440 --> 0:04:00.600
<v Speaker 1>it's a one point twenty five trillion dollars valuation for

0:04:00.600 --> 0:04:03.000
<v Speaker 1>the commanded company, one trillion for SpaceX, I'm two hundred

0:04:03.000 --> 0:04:06.000
<v Speaker 1>and fifty billion for Xai. Those numbers are kind of

0:04:06.040 --> 0:04:08.960
<v Speaker 1>fake because no money is changing hands, so there's no

0:04:09.080 --> 0:04:10.120
<v Speaker 1>actual dollar value.

0:04:10.200 --> 0:04:10.360
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:04:10.400 --> 0:04:12.120
<v Speaker 1>Those numbers are like kind of in the ballpark of

0:04:12.160 --> 0:04:14.440
<v Speaker 1>what other transactions have valued the met But this doesn't,

0:04:14.480 --> 0:04:17.360
<v Speaker 1>you know, whatever he wants, but the proportion matters, right,

0:04:17.400 --> 0:04:20.119
<v Speaker 1>Like if you say SpaceX is a trillion dollar company,

0:04:20.120 --> 0:04:22.159
<v Speaker 1>in Xai is a trillion dollar company, then Xai gets

0:04:22.160 --> 0:04:24.680
<v Speaker 1>half the company. If you say you know what they did,

0:04:24.720 --> 0:04:28.039
<v Speaker 1>then Xai gets twenty percent of the company. And you

0:04:28.080 --> 0:04:31.520
<v Speaker 1>can imagine that SpaceX shelter like say an employee or

0:04:31.520 --> 0:04:36.599
<v Speaker 1>former employee saying that's not right like SpaceX is good.

0:04:36.680 --> 0:04:39.039
<v Speaker 1>I like SpaceX, I don't like Xai, which is, you know,

0:04:39.160 --> 0:04:42.599
<v Speaker 1>to some extent the successor of Twitter, and being mad

0:04:42.640 --> 0:04:44.920
<v Speaker 1>about the deal price, but like there's nothing they can do,

0:04:45.040 --> 0:04:49.520
<v Speaker 1>nothing to do at all. I wrote that this is

0:04:49.560 --> 0:04:52.119
<v Speaker 1>made easier by the fact that they are private companies. Yes,

0:04:52.640 --> 0:04:55.400
<v Speaker 1>all of Elon Musks companies either reformed in or have

0:04:55.640 --> 0:04:58.760
<v Speaker 1>kind of moved to Texas, so they're incorporated in Texas,

0:04:59.440 --> 0:05:03.360
<v Speaker 1>and nobody really knows what exactly would happen if these

0:05:03.360 --> 0:05:07.159
<v Speaker 1>were Texas public companies. But Texas does allow you to

0:05:07.240 --> 0:05:10.720
<v Speaker 1>kind of prevent small shareholders from bringing derivative lawsuits. So

0:05:10.760 --> 0:05:12.680
<v Speaker 1>there's some chance that he could do this kind of

0:05:12.720 --> 0:05:16.040
<v Speaker 1>stuff even with two public companies, or there's some chance,

0:05:16.160 --> 0:05:19.520
<v Speaker 1>some chance when he emerges Tesla and SpaceX.

0:05:19.640 --> 0:05:20.840
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, then we'll have there's some.

0:05:20.920 --> 0:05:22.440
<v Speaker 1>Chance that like no one will be able to say

0:05:22.480 --> 0:05:23.720
<v Speaker 1>anything about it. We'll see, we'll see.

0:05:23.880 --> 0:05:25.760
<v Speaker 3>I was going to say, I wish we were about

0:05:25.800 --> 0:05:27.840
<v Speaker 3>to find out in this case, you know, if one

0:05:27.839 --> 0:05:30.640
<v Speaker 3>of them was public. But it's a good point that eventually,

0:05:30.680 --> 0:05:34.719
<v Speaker 3>when we do finally reach the convergence and SpaceX and

0:05:34.720 --> 0:05:35.640
<v Speaker 3>Tesla merged.

0:05:35.360 --> 0:05:38.880
<v Speaker 1>It's going to Ruin to run a vacation of mine.

0:05:39.400 --> 0:05:41.920
<v Speaker 1>I wonder if it's the one in two weeks, but yeah,

0:05:41.960 --> 0:05:42.640
<v Speaker 1>it's gonna be great.

0:05:42.920 --> 0:05:43.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:05:43.680 --> 0:05:47.560
<v Speaker 3>I also like the point made in here that you know,

0:05:47.600 --> 0:05:51.440
<v Speaker 3>the narrative has been that SpaceX is going to fund

0:05:52.360 --> 0:05:55.120
<v Speaker 3>building data centers in space, or it's going to fund

0:05:55.279 --> 0:06:00.000
<v Speaker 3>XAI in some form, but it's pointed out that SpaceX

0:06:00.160 --> 0:06:03.400
<v Speaker 3>generated around fifteen billion dollars in revenue last year. At

0:06:03.400 --> 0:06:05.919
<v Speaker 3>this point made by Martin Piers, it's more about the

0:06:05.960 --> 0:06:08.039
<v Speaker 3>fund raising ability of SpaceX.

0:06:08.120 --> 0:06:12.920
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, SpaceX is a self funding company, right. SpaceX has

0:06:12.960 --> 0:06:16.360
<v Speaker 1>done recent employee tenders where the company itself has used

0:06:16.360 --> 0:06:19.680
<v Speaker 1>its free cash flow to buy stockback from employees. And

0:06:19.720 --> 0:06:21.680
<v Speaker 1>so why does SpaceX need to go public? Well, maybe

0:06:21.680 --> 0:06:23.960
<v Speaker 1>they have like some vast new rocket program that they

0:06:24.000 --> 0:06:27.279
<v Speaker 1>need to fund, but like, really it's to fund data

0:06:27.279 --> 0:06:28.200
<v Speaker 1>centers in space.

0:06:28.279 --> 0:06:28.440
<v Speaker 4>Right.

0:06:28.680 --> 0:06:34.000
<v Speaker 1>They don't necessarily need public money to shoot rockets into space.

0:06:34.080 --> 0:06:36.599
<v Speaker 1>They need it to sweep eaxs.

0:06:36.760 --> 0:06:38.440
<v Speaker 2>This is like a little stuff in space.

0:06:38.560 --> 0:06:41.880
<v Speaker 1>Like it probably makes sense from a corporate finance perspective

0:06:41.920 --> 0:06:44.720
<v Speaker 1>for SpaceX as SpaceX to be public, but like it

0:06:45.000 --> 0:06:48.360
<v Speaker 1>really helps to raise money for XAI or for AI

0:06:48.480 --> 0:06:51.160
<v Speaker 1>type activities or data centers in space, and so this

0:06:51.320 --> 0:06:53.880
<v Speaker 1>is a way for Elon Musk to take these somehow

0:06:53.960 --> 0:06:57.760
<v Speaker 1>even more capital intensive business than shooting rockets into space

0:06:57.960 --> 0:07:00.400
<v Speaker 1>and sweeping it into a fundraising are or not.

0:07:00.560 --> 0:07:04.120
<v Speaker 3>It is amazing to me how many people and ourselves

0:07:04.160 --> 0:07:06.520
<v Speaker 3>included kind of are saying data centers in space with

0:07:06.560 --> 0:07:09.239
<v Speaker 3>a straight face. Orbital data centers is also a phrase

0:07:09.279 --> 0:07:09.760
<v Speaker 3>that I've heard.

0:07:09.960 --> 0:07:15.239
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, a lot of people are very very skeptical about

0:07:15.280 --> 0:07:18.239
<v Speaker 1>the idea of data centers in space.

0:07:18.320 --> 0:07:20.480
<v Speaker 3>Well, I keep just thinking about where else can we

0:07:20.520 --> 0:07:22.920
<v Speaker 3>put data centers? Why do they have to go in space?

0:07:23.160 --> 0:07:27.680
<v Speaker 3>Would the ocean be easier in terms of weird frontiers

0:07:27.680 --> 0:07:29.760
<v Speaker 3>where we could put data centers? Like how did we

0:07:29.880 --> 0:07:32.720
<v Speaker 3>land on space as a realistic option.

0:07:33.320 --> 0:07:34.760
<v Speaker 1>I don't know that anyone's light it on it as

0:07:34.760 --> 0:07:38.320
<v Speaker 1>a realistic option. But Elon Musk I really like science

0:07:38.360 --> 0:07:40.920
<v Speaker 1>fiction for sure. He references is actually in the space

0:07:41.200 --> 0:07:44.440
<v Speaker 1>XA merger announcement. There's a notion that, like there are

0:07:44.440 --> 0:07:50.320
<v Speaker 1>some civilizations that harness energy from their planet. Just look

0:07:50.400 --> 0:07:51.000
<v Speaker 1>so tired.

0:07:51.200 --> 0:07:52.280
<v Speaker 2>No, I'm here, I'm here.

0:07:52.840 --> 0:07:55.920
<v Speaker 1>There's some civilizations they can harness some large proportion of

0:07:55.920 --> 0:07:58.560
<v Speaker 1>the energy on their planet. But then there are the

0:07:58.600 --> 0:08:03.560
<v Speaker 1>better civilizations that can harness most of the energy of

0:08:03.600 --> 0:08:08.200
<v Speaker 1>the star they orbit, and then they're even better the Sun. Yeah,

0:08:08.240 --> 0:08:10.480
<v Speaker 1>and then they're even better civilizations that can harness like

0:08:10.480 --> 0:08:12.760
<v Speaker 1>whole galaxies of energy. And so if you have all

0:08:12.760 --> 0:08:14.480
<v Speaker 1>of the energy of the Sun at your disposal, you

0:08:14.520 --> 0:08:20.040
<v Speaker 1>can like travel between galaxies or whatever. And so that

0:08:20.160 --> 0:08:23.720
<v Speaker 1>sounds so stupid, but Elon Musk, like one of his

0:08:24.200 --> 0:08:27.640
<v Speaker 1>main dreams is to honest all of the energy of

0:08:27.640 --> 0:08:31.160
<v Speaker 1>the Sun. And to do that, you put I'm sorry,

0:08:31.160 --> 0:08:33.040
<v Speaker 1>you put a shellow satellites around the Sun that like

0:08:33.040 --> 0:08:34.600
<v Speaker 1>take all of the energy from the Sun so that

0:08:34.640 --> 0:08:37.640
<v Speaker 1>they run the data centers, so like you know, a

0:08:37.640 --> 0:08:39.560
<v Speaker 1>little beam of light gets through so that we can

0:08:39.600 --> 0:08:41.520
<v Speaker 1>like live on Earth and the rest of the Sun's

0:08:41.600 --> 0:08:43.679
<v Speaker 1>energy goes to the data centers. So Elon Musk can

0:08:43.720 --> 0:08:46.000
<v Speaker 1>be like the data centers are harnessing the power of

0:08:46.040 --> 0:08:46.400
<v Speaker 1>the Sun.

0:08:46.559 --> 0:08:48.320
<v Speaker 2>This is, honest to God, the first time I've ever

0:08:48.360 --> 0:08:49.319
<v Speaker 2>heard of this.

0:08:49.880 --> 0:08:53.320
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I learned of it from the announcement that references

0:08:53.360 --> 0:08:56.720
<v Speaker 1>the Russian scientists who who came up with these tiers

0:08:56.720 --> 0:08:59.760
<v Speaker 1>of civilizations and then I read a portion of his

0:08:59.800 --> 0:09:05.439
<v Speaker 1>Wikipedia page and now I'm telling you and you're weeping.

0:09:05.760 --> 0:09:08.240
<v Speaker 3>Well, the thing is, I'm feeling really sick. I'm like

0:09:08.360 --> 0:09:11.480
<v Speaker 3>brewing something right now. I'm also reading this like really

0:09:11.600 --> 0:09:16.760
<v Speaker 3>trippy garbage like magic slash science fiction book right now,

0:09:16.880 --> 0:09:18.880
<v Speaker 3>and like I'm at the point I'm eighty one percent

0:09:19.040 --> 0:09:20.600
<v Speaker 3>of the way through it, so I'm going to finish it.

0:09:20.640 --> 0:09:23.800
<v Speaker 3>But it's basically just like kind of garbage, Like you

0:09:23.920 --> 0:09:26.040
<v Speaker 3>just threw a breath right now, and it's like I.

0:09:26.040 --> 0:09:28.320
<v Speaker 1>Read this badgeic sci fi garbage and then you come

0:09:28.320 --> 0:09:29.480
<v Speaker 1>into work and it's more of it.

0:09:29.559 --> 0:09:31.840
<v Speaker 2>I feel like I'm dissociating. Am I on the pass?

0:09:33.200 --> 0:09:33.640
<v Speaker 3>Yeah like that?

0:09:33.840 --> 0:09:35.240
<v Speaker 1>But anyway, that's why.

0:09:34.920 --> 0:09:37.800
<v Speaker 3>Anyway, thank you for walking me through that.

0:09:38.160 --> 0:09:40.960
<v Speaker 2>I had just realized we're trying to harness the energy

0:09:40.960 --> 0:09:41.720
<v Speaker 2>of the sun.

0:09:41.760 --> 0:09:43.760
<v Speaker 1>So they get a grand sci fi level. That's the

0:09:43.760 --> 0:09:46.240
<v Speaker 1>intention in terms of like, well the data centers work,

0:09:46.320 --> 0:09:49.000
<v Speaker 1>like yeah, I done knows, Yeah whatever, you know who

0:09:49.040 --> 0:09:52.040
<v Speaker 1>I want to spend a minute talking about who Twitter's

0:09:52.120 --> 0:09:52.880
<v Speaker 1>bondle this?

0:09:53.760 --> 0:09:53.960
<v Speaker 3>Yeah?

0:09:54.280 --> 0:09:57.920
<v Speaker 1>Do you remember when people, when people like me were like, man,

0:09:58.360 --> 0:10:02.760
<v Speaker 1>what a bad deal to agree to fund Elon's Twitter

0:10:02.840 --> 0:10:05.720
<v Speaker 1>buyout with debt that like now trade that yeah, back

0:10:05.760 --> 0:10:08.160
<v Speaker 1>then traded like you know, forty cents on the doll.

0:10:08.160 --> 0:10:09.480
<v Speaker 2>A short sighted thing to say.

0:10:10.000 --> 0:10:12.640
<v Speaker 1>Now if Twitter needs to pay back, like it's like

0:10:12.679 --> 0:10:18.200
<v Speaker 1>thirteen billion dollars of debt. Like like that's like you know,

0:10:18.320 --> 0:10:21.240
<v Speaker 1>one minute of fundraising for Twitter, which is now called

0:10:21.240 --> 0:10:25.560
<v Speaker 1>the SpaceX quaint. Anyway, everyone always.

0:10:25.200 --> 0:10:26.720
<v Speaker 2>Wins, Everyone always wins.

0:10:27.080 --> 0:10:29.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I've read about this a little bit this week too.

0:10:29.960 --> 0:10:34.280
<v Speaker 1>The SpaceX IPO team are working on changing the rules

0:10:34.280 --> 0:10:38.400
<v Speaker 1>for index eligibility so that SpaceX can be put into

0:10:39.720 --> 0:10:43.800
<v Speaker 1>at least some big stock indexes earlier than like normally

0:10:43.880 --> 0:10:45.480
<v Speaker 1>for like that and as like one hundred ear the

0:10:45.559 --> 0:10:49.120
<v Speaker 1>SMP three months. Yeah, it's like some some period of months,

0:10:49.200 --> 0:10:51.200
<v Speaker 1>and they want it to be fast. They're going to

0:10:51.200 --> 0:10:52.600
<v Speaker 1>be in the business in the next year of moving

0:10:52.640 --> 0:10:56.199
<v Speaker 1>an enormous amount of stock from like early SpaceX investors

0:10:56.240 --> 0:10:59.120
<v Speaker 1>to index funds, and they want to move that stock efficiently.

0:10:59.400 --> 0:11:00.920
<v Speaker 2>It makes lot of sense.

0:11:00.920 --> 0:11:02.520
<v Speaker 1>It does. It can't really fault it.

0:11:02.559 --> 0:11:04.800
<v Speaker 3>I will say it's interesting that like SpaceX in terms

0:11:04.840 --> 0:11:06.800
<v Speaker 3>of private companies is kind of in a league of

0:11:06.800 --> 0:11:08.560
<v Speaker 3>its own, like sort of.

0:11:08.520 --> 0:11:10.520
<v Speaker 1>Like it's becoming more of a thing, right. I mean,

0:11:10.640 --> 0:11:12.520
<v Speaker 1>one reason that it seems like they're having traction with

0:11:12.520 --> 0:11:14.840
<v Speaker 1>like the index companies, there's a backlog behind them of

0:11:14.920 --> 0:11:18.160
<v Speaker 1>other multi hundred billion dollar companies that everyone wants to owner.

0:11:18.200 --> 0:11:20.080
<v Speaker 1>It's like, yeah, this should be in the index as

0:11:20.080 --> 0:11:20.520
<v Speaker 1>soon as they can.

0:11:20.640 --> 0:11:22.959
<v Speaker 2>Well, part of the reason I say this it relates

0:11:22.960 --> 0:11:24.880
<v Speaker 2>back to ETFs. Don't worry for sure.

0:11:24.920 --> 0:11:25.120
<v Speaker 1>Sure.

0:11:25.440 --> 0:11:28.640
<v Speaker 3>Barron Capital which is a firm founded by Ron barn

0:11:28.679 --> 0:11:32.080
<v Speaker 3>who is like a long time Elon Musk investor. He

0:11:32.160 --> 0:11:36.160
<v Speaker 3>loves Elon Musk companies. They recently launched an ETF. The

0:11:36.200 --> 0:11:40.880
<v Speaker 3>ticker is Ron b which I love, and they own

0:11:41.280 --> 0:11:45.559
<v Speaker 3>a pretty sizable chunk of SpaceX in the ETF. The

0:11:45.640 --> 0:11:48.440
<v Speaker 3>number of shares that they hold stays static, but as

0:11:48.440 --> 0:11:51.200
<v Speaker 3>the asset levels of the funds go around, some days

0:11:51.200 --> 0:11:53.320
<v Speaker 3>it'll be like twenty two percent of the fund, some

0:11:53.400 --> 0:11:55.480
<v Speaker 3>days it'll be eleven percent of the fund, which is

0:11:55.559 --> 0:11:59.480
<v Speaker 3>interesting because the SEC has a fifteen percent cap on

0:11:59.520 --> 0:12:05.520
<v Speaker 3>a liquid assets for ETFs, but the company confirmed that

0:12:06.240 --> 0:12:10.800
<v Speaker 3>they classify it as less liquid. There's four liquidity tiers,

0:12:11.720 --> 0:12:14.520
<v Speaker 3>highly liquid, moderately less liquid, and then E liquid. But

0:12:15.080 --> 0:12:21.480
<v Speaker 3>SpaceX for their purposes by their definition is less liquid.

0:12:21.600 --> 0:12:23.240
<v Speaker 1>I don't think pretty quick.

0:12:23.360 --> 0:12:25.160
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that's the thing that's kind of what I mean.

0:12:25.200 --> 0:12:26.640
<v Speaker 3>It's in like a league of its own. It's a

0:12:26.640 --> 0:12:29.920
<v Speaker 3>private company, but it's pretty liquid and it makes sense.

0:12:29.720 --> 0:12:32.760
<v Speaker 1>That attention to it, and it's like everyone knows that

0:12:32.880 --> 0:12:33.640
<v Speaker 1>IPI is coming.

0:12:33.960 --> 0:12:51.360
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, should we talk about dats?

0:12:51.760 --> 0:12:52.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah?

0:12:52.320 --> 0:12:54.640
<v Speaker 3>I was wondering when we were going to talk about

0:12:54.640 --> 0:12:56.960
<v Speaker 3>closed end fund activism again, it's been a while.

0:12:57.360 --> 0:13:01.280
<v Speaker 4>Have we talked about think about the dawn of this podcast?

0:13:01.360 --> 0:13:01.480
<v Speaker 1>Oh?

0:13:01.559 --> 0:13:04.600
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I don't know if we just talked about it

0:13:04.640 --> 0:13:07.319
<v Speaker 2>a lot in for ten podcasts, but I'm pretty sure

0:13:07.320 --> 0:13:08.720
<v Speaker 2>we talked about it on real podcasts.

0:13:08.720 --> 0:13:11.920
<v Speaker 1>You and I have talked microphones about clos and close

0:13:11.960 --> 0:13:14.400
<v Speaker 1>in fund activism, close and fund activism as one, I

0:13:14.400 --> 0:13:16.320
<v Speaker 1>guess we've talked about the Blackmen closed un funds.

0:13:17.040 --> 0:13:17.199
<v Speaker 3>One.

0:13:17.240 --> 0:13:20.160
<v Speaker 2>We've definitely talked about boas Weinstein.

0:13:19.720 --> 0:13:23.520
<v Speaker 1>On the front of the pod. The leading closed unfund

0:13:23.559 --> 0:13:25.960
<v Speaker 1>activists or closing fund activism is like, you know, you

0:13:26.040 --> 0:13:29.720
<v Speaker 1>have a closed end fund, which is a company that

0:13:29.840 --> 0:13:32.640
<v Speaker 1>buys investments and also lists its own shares on the

0:13:32.679 --> 0:13:35.319
<v Speaker 1>public slock market, and like sometimes they closed end fund

0:13:36.559 --> 0:13:38.960
<v Speaker 1>the fund's own shares will trade at a discount to

0:13:39.240 --> 0:13:41.839
<v Speaker 1>the net asset value, and then some activists will buy

0:13:41.880 --> 0:13:44.280
<v Speaker 1>up some shares and run a proxy fight and try

0:13:44.320 --> 0:13:46.240
<v Speaker 1>to kick out the management of the fund so that

0:13:46.280 --> 0:13:49.120
<v Speaker 1>they can liquidate the fund, sell all the underlying stuff

0:13:49.120 --> 0:13:51.000
<v Speaker 1>at net asset value and like return money to the

0:13:51.040 --> 0:13:55.240
<v Speaker 1>shareholders and capture that discount. This is the thing, you know,

0:13:55.320 --> 0:13:57.800
<v Speaker 1>it's like controversial, but as it gets you know, yelled

0:13:57.800 --> 0:14:01.679
<v Speaker 1>at by Blackrock or wherever, sometimes activists wins, sometimes they lose.

0:14:02.080 --> 0:14:05.880
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes the underlying fund managers make the case that there's

0:14:06.000 --> 0:14:08.200
<v Speaker 1>actually some long term value and that it is short

0:14:08.240 --> 0:14:12.160
<v Speaker 1>sighted to liquidate the fund and capture the discount. Sometimes

0:14:12.240 --> 0:14:18.920
<v Speaker 1>that case doesn't work anyway. DATS Digital asset treasury companies

0:14:18.960 --> 0:14:21.840
<v Speaker 1>were all the raids last year, led by Strategy formerly

0:14:21.880 --> 0:14:24.040
<v Speaker 1>micro Strategy, which is you know a huge pot of bitcoins,

0:14:24.080 --> 0:14:26.760
<v Speaker 1>which I know we gotta talk about strategy too, but

0:14:26.880 --> 0:14:30.240
<v Speaker 1>let's talky about activism first. All these companies were formed

0:14:30.280 --> 0:14:33.840
<v Speaker 1>that would buy crypto like bitcoin are you know, different

0:14:33.880 --> 0:14:36.800
<v Speaker 1>companies specialized in different things, and they would make it

0:14:36.920 --> 0:14:38.320
<v Speaker 1>have a big pot of crypto and it would trade

0:14:38.320 --> 0:14:40.960
<v Speaker 1>it like a huge premium to the net asset value.

0:14:40.960 --> 0:14:43.280
<v Speaker 1>And so everyone did this trade like in summer of

0:14:43.320 --> 0:14:46.960
<v Speaker 1>last year, and then it collapsed, like the prices came down,

0:14:47.240 --> 0:14:49.320
<v Speaker 1>but also the premiums collapse, and now a lot of

0:14:49.320 --> 0:14:51.760
<v Speaker 1>these doubts are trading it discounts to net asset value.

0:14:51.880 --> 0:14:55.520
<v Speaker 1>And so now you're starting to see glimmers of activism

0:14:55.600 --> 0:14:58.360
<v Speaker 1>against stats where someone will be like, I can buy

0:15:00.040 --> 0:15:02.880
<v Speaker 1>stock in this pot of bitcoin in the stock traits

0:15:02.920 --> 0:15:04.920
<v Speaker 1>at like eighty percent of none asset value. So if

0:15:04.960 --> 0:15:07.000
<v Speaker 1>I pay eighty cents, I can get a dollar worth

0:15:07.000 --> 0:15:09.840
<v Speaker 1>a bitcoin. And the only problem is I got to

0:15:09.920 --> 0:15:11.880
<v Speaker 1>crack open the pot and take out the bitcoin. And

0:15:11.920 --> 0:15:16.600
<v Speaker 1>so you do things like pressure the management to do

0:15:16.680 --> 0:15:19.000
<v Speaker 1>buybacks or maybe lots of proxy facs. We haven't seen

0:15:19.000 --> 0:15:21.680
<v Speaker 1>proxy fights yet, but like we've seen activist filings, and

0:15:22.520 --> 0:15:25.160
<v Speaker 1>the proxy fights will be so good because if you

0:15:25.240 --> 0:15:28.800
<v Speaker 1>run a digital ASSEID treasury company, like yeah, you kind

0:15:28.840 --> 0:15:32.280
<v Speaker 1>of you know, colorful character, and if you're taking a

0:15:32.400 --> 0:15:34.000
<v Speaker 1>run at them as an activist, you're probably kind of

0:15:34.000 --> 0:15:36.040
<v Speaker 1>a colorful character too, and so there'll be some good

0:15:36.040 --> 0:15:36.760
<v Speaker 1>proxy fights.

0:15:36.960 --> 0:15:38.480
<v Speaker 2>I have two things, maybe three.

0:15:38.640 --> 0:15:41.560
<v Speaker 3>I think this is really fun, like the concept of

0:15:41.600 --> 0:15:46.120
<v Speaker 3>bringing the closed end fund activism playbook to crypto, because

0:15:46.480 --> 0:15:50.080
<v Speaker 3>I feel like crypto market structure and equity market structure

0:15:50.200 --> 0:15:53.160
<v Speaker 3>they blend together in some ways, or at least parallel

0:15:53.200 --> 0:15:54.920
<v Speaker 3>each other, and this is just another way.

0:15:55.080 --> 0:15:56.720
<v Speaker 1>Well, but this is to be clear, just equity, like

0:15:56.840 --> 0:16:00.240
<v Speaker 1>these are companies with stocks. And in fact, I think

0:16:00.240 --> 0:16:02.760
<v Speaker 1>the controversy is that a lot of digital aid treasury

0:16:02.800 --> 0:16:05.200
<v Speaker 1>companists will say, no, no, no, we're not a close

0:16:05.280 --> 0:16:08.240
<v Speaker 1>that fund. We're operating business. We're creating a lot of value.

0:16:08.360 --> 0:16:11.080
<v Speaker 1>For you. To just take our crypto and liquidate it

0:16:11.120 --> 0:16:14.760
<v Speaker 1>to capture the discount is totally destructive of long term value.

0:16:14.880 --> 0:16:16.800
<v Speaker 1>And then other people are like, no, you're a product bitcoins.

0:16:16.840 --> 0:16:18.560
<v Speaker 1>Come on, yeah, we'll see, we'll see.

0:16:18.400 --> 0:16:23.720
<v Speaker 3>Who index classification. They have to be operating businesses.

0:16:24.120 --> 0:16:27.240
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, they argue that they're operating businesses, and so far

0:16:27.360 --> 0:16:30.640
<v Speaker 1>they have more or less with the index classifiers.

0:16:30.480 --> 0:16:34.080
<v Speaker 3>The right to you with the might of the pen,

0:16:35.160 --> 0:16:38.120
<v Speaker 3>a swipe of the keyboard. The other thing is this

0:16:39.000 --> 0:16:42.320
<v Speaker 3>brought back just a myriad of memories of the gray

0:16:42.320 --> 0:16:43.320
<v Speaker 3>scale Bitcoin trust.

0:16:43.480 --> 0:16:45.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, sure that did operate as.

0:16:45.440 --> 0:16:48.440
<v Speaker 3>A closing fund, and they are so eager to convert

0:16:48.440 --> 0:16:50.040
<v Speaker 3>it to an ETF so they could get rid of

0:16:50.080 --> 0:16:50.720
<v Speaker 3>their discount.

0:16:50.880 --> 0:16:52.520
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and they had a weirder governance and so you

0:16:52.520 --> 0:16:54.840
<v Speaker 1>couldn't like just do a proxy fight. But like people

0:16:54.880 --> 0:16:57.440
<v Speaker 1>were mad at them for not closing the discount earlier,

0:16:57.440 --> 0:16:59.160
<v Speaker 1>and then they did, in fact want to convert to

0:16:59.160 --> 0:17:01.840
<v Speaker 1>a and then they did. I know that your next

0:17:01.960 --> 0:17:05.600
<v Speaker 1>sentence will be these dats should convert to eds, but

0:17:05.680 --> 0:17:06.840
<v Speaker 1>I disagree and they disagree.

0:17:06.880 --> 0:17:08.080
<v Speaker 2>So yeah, so I'm very.

0:17:08.000 --> 0:17:10.600
<v Speaker 1>Excited for like a wave of this, in part because

0:17:10.640 --> 0:17:12.879
<v Speaker 1>like one thing that is happening is the price of

0:17:12.880 --> 0:17:16.679
<v Speaker 1>bitcoin is collapsing, Like the premiums of these dats are collapsing.

0:17:17.119 --> 0:17:21.760
<v Speaker 1>And today Thursday, February fifth, Strategy was at least at

0:17:21.800 --> 0:17:23.560
<v Speaker 1>some point trading below net asset value.

0:17:23.640 --> 0:17:25.639
<v Speaker 3>I mean I think their break even or whatever you

0:17:25.640 --> 0:17:29.440
<v Speaker 3>want to call it is seventy six thousand dollars per

0:17:29.480 --> 0:17:31.160
<v Speaker 3>bitcoin or about there.

0:17:31.320 --> 0:17:33.600
<v Speaker 1>Well there's two things. There's like their cost pass yeah,

0:17:33.600 --> 0:17:36.320
<v Speaker 1>which like if they trade below their cost basis, then

0:17:36.440 --> 0:17:42.440
<v Speaker 1>arguably their bitcoin buying has been money losing, right yeah, yeah,

0:17:42.480 --> 0:17:44.359
<v Speaker 1>And like they're proxy for bitcoins. That's fine, like if

0:17:44.400 --> 0:17:47.160
<v Speaker 1>bitcoin goes down, like they'll go down. But the other

0:17:47.160 --> 0:17:50.280
<v Speaker 1>thing that's happening is like their stock at least briefly

0:17:50.280 --> 0:17:53.240
<v Speaker 1>traded below net acid value. The whole point of strategy

0:17:53.280 --> 0:17:55.560
<v Speaker 1>is like paying a premium to own strategy because they

0:17:55.600 --> 0:17:58.199
<v Speaker 1>were doing something that made their pot of bitcoins more

0:17:58.280 --> 0:18:01.399
<v Speaker 1>valuable than just the pot of bitcoins, and now the

0:18:01.440 --> 0:18:03.959
<v Speaker 1>market has completely moved away from that, and now they

0:18:04.000 --> 0:18:06.480
<v Speaker 1>trade it roughly or even a little below the value

0:18:06.480 --> 0:18:07.320
<v Speaker 1>of their bitcoins.

0:18:07.440 --> 0:18:09.600
<v Speaker 3>I'm actually scared to check where bitcoin is right now.

0:18:09.640 --> 0:18:11.520
<v Speaker 3>When we stepped into this recording, it was down like

0:18:11.560 --> 0:18:13.640
<v Speaker 3>ten percent on the day I think to it was like.

0:18:13.600 --> 0:18:14.919
<v Speaker 1>At sixty five thousand dollars.

0:18:15.080 --> 0:18:16.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, yeah, which is.

0:18:16.480 --> 0:18:19.320
<v Speaker 1>Down, Like yeah, it's it's been a b lovebath. I'm

0:18:19.320 --> 0:18:22.439
<v Speaker 1>like part of what's happening. There's reporting of like you know,

0:18:22.600 --> 0:18:24.800
<v Speaker 1>for sty leveraging or whatever, but like one thing that's

0:18:24.840 --> 0:18:28.440
<v Speaker 1>happening is like a big chunk of bitcoin is held

0:18:28.440 --> 0:18:33.760
<v Speaker 1>by strategy particularly and deats in general, and you do

0:18:33.840 --> 0:18:35.080
<v Speaker 1>wonder what will happen with.

0:18:35.119 --> 0:18:37.800
<v Speaker 2>Those, right, I mean I do wonder? Can you tell me?

0:18:38.000 --> 0:18:38.280
<v Speaker 3>Well?

0:18:38.320 --> 0:18:40.960
<v Speaker 1>So, like, for instance, the dat that I wrote about

0:18:41.080 --> 0:18:44.000
<v Speaker 1>this week that faced an activist is a bitcoin one

0:18:44.000 --> 0:18:47.040
<v Speaker 1>called empery, and it has announced that it will either

0:18:47.160 --> 0:18:49.080
<v Speaker 1>take you know, borrow money or sell bitcoming, but it

0:18:49.160 --> 0:18:51.919
<v Speaker 1>might sell bitcoin to byvax stock. I think selling bitcoin

0:18:51.960 --> 0:18:54.359
<v Speaker 1>to buy back stock, if you're adat that trades at

0:18:54.400 --> 0:18:57.760
<v Speaker 1>a discount, is just like a straightforwardly good trade. And

0:18:57.800 --> 0:19:00.800
<v Speaker 1>then like you have Strategy, which is enormous, has huge

0:19:00.840 --> 0:19:05.280
<v Speaker 1>cash obligations you know to pay prefer dividends and stuff.

0:19:05.320 --> 0:19:07.960
<v Speaker 1>Because it's taken out all this debt and preferred stock

0:19:08.000 --> 0:19:12.000
<v Speaker 1>to buy bitcoin. How will they fund that? Well, if

0:19:12.040 --> 0:19:14.600
<v Speaker 1>there's stock trades at a premium to that it's underlying

0:19:14.840 --> 0:19:16.600
<v Speaker 1>as a value, then they should sell stock to fund

0:19:16.600 --> 0:19:19.040
<v Speaker 1>that stuff, which is embarrassing, But fine, if the stock

0:19:19.080 --> 0:19:21.359
<v Speaker 1>trades at a discount, I mean they've sometimes said they

0:19:21.440 --> 0:19:24.280
<v Speaker 1>might sell bitcoin, and sometimes so they won't. But like,

0:19:24.280 --> 0:19:26.080
<v Speaker 1>if you're stocks trading at a discount and you need

0:19:26.119 --> 0:19:27.919
<v Speaker 1>cash to pay your debt, like maybe you sell some

0:19:27.960 --> 0:19:31.560
<v Speaker 1>bitcoin and then like is every dbt you know that

0:19:32.240 --> 0:19:34.680
<v Speaker 1>probably provided a lot of buying pressure on the way up.

0:19:34.800 --> 0:19:37.160
<v Speaker 1>Are they providing selling pressure on the way down?

0:19:37.240 --> 0:19:37.800
<v Speaker 2>Well, that's the thing.

0:19:37.800 --> 0:19:41.040
<v Speaker 3>I feel like if a debt such as Strategy came

0:19:41.080 --> 0:19:45.080
<v Speaker 3>out and sold even like a really insignificant amount of bitcoin.

0:19:45.880 --> 0:19:47.240
<v Speaker 2>What that would be for sentiment.

0:19:47.440 --> 0:19:50.280
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's not good. It's potentially a lot of actual volume.

0:19:50.280 --> 0:19:52.320
<v Speaker 1>But yeah, it's a saith don't matter, it's it's great.

0:19:52.400 --> 0:19:57.439
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I would love if boas Weinstein started dabbling in

0:19:57.440 --> 0:19:59.080
<v Speaker 3>a little bit of debt activism.

0:19:59.280 --> 0:20:01.160
<v Speaker 2>Does it make sense for a plastody.

0:20:00.760 --> 0:20:03.439
<v Speaker 1>It's the same trade, yeah, fun actively, it's the same trade.

0:20:04.520 --> 0:20:06.119
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to send him this podcast, all right.

0:20:06.600 --> 0:20:08.440
<v Speaker 1>I think that one thing that Bo's Wanstein has done

0:20:08.640 --> 0:20:11.400
<v Speaker 1>is he's tilted at funds run by companies like black Rock,

0:20:11.440 --> 0:20:13.399
<v Speaker 1>where black Rock for a long time has talked a

0:20:13.440 --> 0:20:15.840
<v Speaker 1>lot about good governance and Bo has has kind of

0:20:15.920 --> 0:20:17.720
<v Speaker 1>used those words against them and said, like, you're not

0:20:17.800 --> 0:20:20.760
<v Speaker 1>doing good governance. You're like stifling shareholders in your clothes

0:20:20.800 --> 0:20:23.560
<v Speaker 1>and funds. I think you're like moral and political playbook

0:20:23.560 --> 0:20:25.360
<v Speaker 1>would be different with the debt because like they don't

0:20:25.400 --> 0:20:26.760
<v Speaker 1>care about cherholder governance.

0:20:27.160 --> 0:20:31.000
<v Speaker 3>Something else, right, some AI generated and some other him

0:20:31.000 --> 0:20:31.920
<v Speaker 3>on an orange bole.

0:20:32.080 --> 0:20:35.399
<v Speaker 1>Your rhetoric is different when you're taking on a debt CEO.

0:20:35.520 --> 0:20:37.680
<v Speaker 1>But like he should, the trade is they can always

0:20:37.800 --> 0:20:55.960
<v Speaker 1>the trade speaking of bad first sentiment should talk me

0:20:56.000 --> 0:20:57.359
<v Speaker 1>about the god?

0:20:57.720 --> 0:21:02.040
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I mean software stad. I didn't know that until

0:21:02.040 --> 0:21:06.800
<v Speaker 3>this week. Apparently this I mean, I guess it was

0:21:06.840 --> 0:21:10.040
<v Speaker 3>theoretically started by anthropic I believe it was coming out

0:21:10.080 --> 0:21:11.360
<v Speaker 3>with some tool for lawyers.

0:21:11.640 --> 0:21:14.440
<v Speaker 1>There's like some catalyst moment, but it's just been like

0:21:14.480 --> 0:21:18.199
<v Speaker 1>a drumbeat of like AI doing stuff that used to

0:21:18.200 --> 0:21:20.800
<v Speaker 1>be sort of hard specialized. It's like the thing people

0:21:20.880 --> 0:21:22.480
<v Speaker 1>used to say about like Google and Apple that like

0:21:22.520 --> 0:21:24.399
<v Speaker 1>you thought you'd built a business, but actually built like

0:21:24.400 --> 0:21:26.840
<v Speaker 1>a button, you know. Like it turns out that a

0:21:26.840 --> 0:21:31.520
<v Speaker 1>lot of like business the business software is a thing

0:21:31.600 --> 0:21:36.040
<v Speaker 1>that AI can either replicate, you know, individually for each

0:21:36.040 --> 0:21:38.080
<v Speaker 1>company or just like you know, do the functions of

0:21:38.640 --> 0:21:40.840
<v Speaker 1>And so there's a lot of worry about a lot

0:21:40.840 --> 0:21:43.679
<v Speaker 1>of software as or service companies that they might not

0:21:43.840 --> 0:21:46.000
<v Speaker 1>be competitive in a world of AI.

0:21:46.359 --> 0:21:50.399
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, which I get, you know, like that's a real fear.

0:21:50.680 --> 0:21:53.200
<v Speaker 3>Can you talk to me about the private equity angle,

0:21:53.280 --> 0:21:56.280
<v Speaker 3>because that's been the other thing BDCs have been absolutely

0:21:56.280 --> 0:21:59.080
<v Speaker 3>in the toilet amidst this SaaS apocalypse.

0:21:59.280 --> 0:22:02.960
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, because like for a while, SaaS seemed like a

0:22:03.000 --> 0:22:07.919
<v Speaker 1>really good business. Where you sell software at a company

0:22:08.040 --> 0:22:13.040
<v Speaker 1>is you charge them recurring license and so you had

0:22:13.040 --> 0:22:16.000
<v Speaker 1>this really good stable cash flow. And when you have

0:22:16.080 --> 0:22:18.399
<v Speaker 1>a business with really good stable cash flow, what happens

0:22:18.480 --> 0:22:20.600
<v Speaker 1>is private equity wants to buy it and they want

0:22:20.640 --> 0:22:23.800
<v Speaker 1>to lever it up because stable cash flows are good

0:22:23.800 --> 0:22:27.080
<v Speaker 1>for servicing debt and becoming good private equity businesses. And

0:22:27.119 --> 0:22:31.280
<v Speaker 1>then you have this problem where private equity and private credit,

0:22:31.359 --> 0:22:36.120
<v Speaker 1>which like provides the leverage, are overweight sort of SaaS

0:22:36.200 --> 0:22:39.360
<v Speaker 1>companies because they're the safe companies, and then it turns

0:22:39.400 --> 0:22:43.719
<v Speaker 1>out they're not safe, like all of this stuff that is,

0:22:43.880 --> 0:22:45.480
<v Speaker 1>you know, it was meant to be like sort of safe,

0:22:45.480 --> 0:22:49.600
<v Speaker 1>stable recurring revenue like conservative investments, and now turns out

0:22:49.640 --> 0:22:50.359
<v Speaker 1>to be kind of risky.

0:22:50.480 --> 0:22:50.640
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:22:50.680 --> 0:22:52.879
<v Speaker 1>The Bloomberg story about this is that software is the

0:22:52.960 --> 0:22:57.560
<v Speaker 1>largest sector exposer for BDCs, so like credit business development companies,

0:22:57.640 --> 0:22:59.200
<v Speaker 1>it's around twenty percent of portfolios.

0:22:59.240 --> 0:22:59.359
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:23:00.400 --> 0:23:03.760
<v Speaker 1>Credit under like you're underwriting weird companies, like you're underwriting biots,

0:23:03.800 --> 0:23:05.480
<v Speaker 1>and you're like, oh, this company, like you know, can

0:23:05.800 --> 0:23:08.159
<v Speaker 1>show me their contracts where they have like all this

0:23:08.280 --> 0:23:10.800
<v Speaker 1>like very stable recurring revenue, and so you're happy to

0:23:10.960 --> 0:23:13.359
<v Speaker 1>underwrite that and have it in your portfolio, and that

0:23:13.560 --> 0:23:14.040
<v Speaker 1>maybe is.

0:23:14.000 --> 0:23:16.160
<v Speaker 3>Not that the table Well, on that twenty percent figure.

0:23:16.200 --> 0:23:18.520
<v Speaker 3>I think that came from Barclays. The story also points

0:23:18.560 --> 0:23:22.960
<v Speaker 3>out that it's possible slash maybe probable, that it's higher

0:23:23.040 --> 0:23:25.200
<v Speaker 3>than that because you think about and this is a

0:23:25.280 --> 0:23:28.000
<v Speaker 3>quote from an analyst at Raymond James. If your software

0:23:28.000 --> 0:23:30.919
<v Speaker 3>business is in healthcare, the fund classifies it as a

0:23:30.960 --> 0:23:34.440
<v Speaker 3>healthcare exposure. The software exposure is meaningfully higher than it looks.

0:23:34.560 --> 0:23:37.920
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so because like every business of a.

0:23:37.880 --> 0:23:41.439
<v Speaker 3>Software Yeah, it's kind of been where we've where the

0:23:41.480 --> 0:23:43.960
<v Speaker 3>tide has been going over the past however many decades.

0:23:44.320 --> 0:23:47.040
<v Speaker 1>Right, it's not software, right, it's like how much of

0:23:47.119 --> 0:23:49.280
<v Speaker 1>like all of business will be eaten by AI? Right,

0:23:49.320 --> 0:23:51.560
<v Speaker 1>how many businesses would become irrelevant? Right? I mean we've

0:23:51.600 --> 0:23:55.840
<v Speaker 1>talked about like consulting and investment banking, right, and certainly journalists, right,

0:23:55.960 --> 0:23:58.520
<v Speaker 1>certainly all these things. Right, And so like a lot

0:23:58.520 --> 0:24:01.440
<v Speaker 1>of businesses these days are more less software businesses, and

0:24:01.960 --> 0:24:03.840
<v Speaker 1>it's the extent they're put out of business by AI,

0:24:03.960 --> 0:24:09.720
<v Speaker 1>then that'll be bad for their shareholders and lenders.

0:24:09.760 --> 0:24:09.920
<v Speaker 4>Right.

0:24:10.160 --> 0:24:13.159
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I don't know. This is kind of like the

0:24:13.200 --> 0:24:15.000
<v Speaker 1>AI thing that people are wonnering about, right.

0:24:14.920 --> 0:24:18.880
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, the existential Oh my god, I have to say

0:24:18.920 --> 0:24:21.720
<v Speaker 3>it's interesting. I mean the story on the terminal, which

0:24:21.760 --> 0:24:24.359
<v Speaker 3>is great private equities giant software bet has been up

0:24:24.480 --> 0:24:27.280
<v Speaker 3>ended by AI. It points out that some firms have

0:24:27.359 --> 0:24:30.360
<v Speaker 3>hired consultants to check their portfolios for businesses that could

0:24:30.400 --> 0:24:31.480
<v Speaker 3>be vulnerable.

0:24:31.600 --> 0:24:33.600
<v Speaker 1>They don't know, man, But also they could just ask,

0:24:34.240 --> 0:24:35.639
<v Speaker 1>like me, it's me, I'm vulnerable.

0:24:36.000 --> 0:24:38.480
<v Speaker 3>They could ask chatchibt to do that analysis for them.

0:24:38.760 --> 0:24:42.760
<v Speaker 3>Also they've been i mean, private credit in particular has

0:24:42.800 --> 0:24:45.960
<v Speaker 3>been you know, funding the AI build out, Like.

0:24:47.800 --> 0:24:49.919
<v Speaker 1>The AI isn't one of these things will work out.

0:24:49.840 --> 0:24:51.639
<v Speaker 3>But it's not a new concept to them. It's just

0:24:51.800 --> 0:24:54.000
<v Speaker 3>weird that it seems like the way that the market

0:24:54.040 --> 0:24:57.320
<v Speaker 3>is now positing that you know, none of these alternative

0:24:57.320 --> 0:25:01.720
<v Speaker 3>asset managers have questions whether I'm not holdings are maybe vulnerable.

0:25:01.880 --> 0:25:05.080
<v Speaker 1>I think that like people have different views on the

0:25:05.160 --> 0:25:08.400
<v Speaker 1>timeframe of like AI disrupting every industry, right.

0:25:08.480 --> 0:25:08.720
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:25:08.800 --> 0:25:12.080
<v Speaker 1>The thing that happened this week is like particular cloud

0:25:12.119 --> 0:25:15.199
<v Speaker 1>products are introduced that look like they're further ahead than

0:25:15.240 --> 0:25:17.479
<v Speaker 1>people thought, and that they could replace the faster than

0:25:17.480 --> 0:25:19.960
<v Speaker 1>people thought. I think people had a mindset of, like

0:25:20.040 --> 0:25:23.239
<v Speaker 1>we are financing this huge data center build out so

0:25:23.280 --> 0:25:27.000
<v Speaker 1>that in X years AI will eat the world, right,

0:25:27.400 --> 0:25:30.880
<v Speaker 1>and like for the next few years, nothing will be eaten, right,

0:25:30.920 --> 0:25:32.520
<v Speaker 1>and it's like, oh, things might get eaten.

0:25:32.359 --> 0:25:33.360
<v Speaker 2>Fast than you think.

0:25:33.840 --> 0:25:36.280
<v Speaker 1>Also, by the way, if your conclusion from this week

0:25:36.359 --> 0:25:40.159
<v Speaker 1>is AI has actually already completely eaten all of the

0:25:40.200 --> 0:25:43.000
<v Speaker 1>software sector, then like maybe you could slow the data

0:25:43.040 --> 0:25:45.159
<v Speaker 1>center build out because you've accomplished a lot with the

0:25:45.240 --> 0:25:46.040
<v Speaker 1>data centers we have.

0:25:46.240 --> 0:25:48.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, maybe we are overbuilding.

0:25:48.280 --> 0:25:49.880
<v Speaker 1>That could be a takeaway. And I don't think that's

0:25:49.920 --> 0:25:50.880
<v Speaker 1>the band takeaway here.

0:25:50.960 --> 0:25:55.120
<v Speaker 3>Everyone's too busy selling software. Yeah, so Areas in Blue

0:25:55.160 --> 0:25:57.560
<v Speaker 3>al and also a whole host of these other bdceizures

0:25:57.560 --> 0:26:00.800
<v Speaker 3>that are just getting crushed did report earnings, and are

0:26:01.040 --> 0:26:03.720
<v Speaker 3>CEO made the point that only about nine percent of

0:26:03.760 --> 0:26:07.640
<v Speaker 3>ares Is loan assets were two software firms. So everyone's

0:26:07.680 --> 0:26:10.000
<v Speaker 3>coming out and trying to say that their actual risk

0:26:10.040 --> 0:26:13.679
<v Speaker 3>here is pretty low. It is interesting that this just

0:26:13.720 --> 0:26:16.920
<v Speaker 3>feels like very much. Let's just throw out the whole bathtub,

0:26:17.040 --> 0:26:19.320
<v Speaker 3>all the babies put them in it, and let's throw

0:26:19.359 --> 0:26:19.960
<v Speaker 3>it out the windows.

0:26:20.080 --> 0:26:21.680
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I mean, you know, one thing we've talked about

0:26:21.720 --> 0:26:23.879
<v Speaker 1>and I've written about a lot is private credit is

0:26:24.000 --> 0:26:28.280
<v Speaker 1>structurally a pretty safe business, right, like structurally pretty safe

0:26:28.320 --> 0:26:31.680
<v Speaker 1>right on. Nothing's perfect, right, but they have equity funding,

0:26:31.680 --> 0:26:35.439
<v Speaker 1>they have long term funding. They don't they don't have

0:26:35.480 --> 0:26:39.080
<v Speaker 1>maybe quite the marked market discipline that some other investment

0:26:39.080 --> 0:26:42.720
<v Speaker 1>firms might have. And so it is true that like

0:26:42.800 --> 0:26:46.399
<v Speaker 1>if there is a three week panic about software and

0:26:46.400 --> 0:26:49.359
<v Speaker 1>then everyone's like, actually we go overreacted, the private credit

0:26:49.400 --> 0:26:52.359
<v Speaker 1>firms can really ride that out like quite easily, right, Yeah,

0:26:52.400 --> 0:26:54.800
<v Speaker 1>Like the BDC's thought prayer goes down, comes back up.

0:26:55.320 --> 0:26:58.239
<v Speaker 1>There's no like run on banks, right, there's no like

0:26:58.560 --> 0:27:02.280
<v Speaker 1>loss of funding. So this is just like try to

0:27:02.359 --> 0:27:05.919
<v Speaker 1>manage perception and tough it out right now, it could change, right,

0:27:05.960 --> 0:27:08.679
<v Speaker 1>but like, for now, it's a fairly safe funding model.

0:27:09.080 --> 0:27:10.440
<v Speaker 1>But at the end of the day the LENDSI to

0:27:10.440 --> 0:27:13.880
<v Speaker 1>pay over, they don't, right, Yeah, Like it's a safe

0:27:13.880 --> 0:27:17.159
<v Speaker 1>funding model, and it seems like SaaS company should be

0:27:17.160 --> 0:27:20.080
<v Speaker 1>a fairly safe credit to invest today. But if that

0:27:20.119 --> 0:27:21.520
<v Speaker 1>turns out to be row, it's bad.

0:27:22.119 --> 0:27:25.280
<v Speaker 3>Well there's a whole bunch of them on sale right now.

0:27:25.440 --> 0:27:27.800
<v Speaker 2>So go Nuts definitely won.

0:27:34.080 --> 0:27:35.640
<v Speaker 1>And that was the Money Stuff podcast.

0:27:35.960 --> 0:27:38.280
<v Speaker 2>I'm Matt Levine and I'm Katie Greifeld.

0:27:38.359 --> 0:27:40.440
<v Speaker 1>You can find my work by subscribing to the money

0:27:40.440 --> 0:27:42.400
<v Speaker 1>Stuff newsletter on Bloomberg dot.

0:27:42.240 --> 0:27:45.760
<v Speaker 3>Com, and you can find me on Bloomberg TV every

0:27:45.840 --> 0:27:48.919
<v Speaker 3>day on the Clothes between three and five pm Eastern.

0:27:49.000 --> 0:27:50.840
<v Speaker 1>We'd love to hear from you if you can send

0:27:50.840 --> 0:27:54.000
<v Speaker 1>an email to money Pod at Bloomberg dot net, ask

0:27:54.080 --> 0:27:56.240
<v Speaker 1>us a question and we might answer it on the air.

0:27:56.680 --> 0:27:59.280
<v Speaker 3>You can also subscribe to our show wherever you're listening

0:27:59.359 --> 0:28:01.200
<v Speaker 3>right now and leave us a review. It helps more

0:28:01.240 --> 0:28:02.080
<v Speaker 3>people find the show.

0:28:02.640 --> 0:28:06.480
<v Speaker 1>The Money Stuff Podcast is produced by Anam Maserakas Moses

0:28:06.520 --> 0:28:08.600
<v Speaker 1>Onam and Alexis.

0:28:08.119 --> 0:28:11.680
<v Speaker 2>HoTT Our theme music was composed by Blake Maples.

0:28:11.960 --> 0:28:15.560
<v Speaker 1>Amy Keen is our executive producer. Thanks for listening to

0:28:15.560 --> 0:28:18.080
<v Speaker 1>The Money Stuff Podcast. We'll be back next week with

0:28:18.240 --> 0:28:18.920
<v Speaker 1>more stuff.