WEBVTT - Perhaps a Ballroom

0:00:02.720 --> 0:00:07.200
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.

0:00:08.039 --> 0:00:10.399
<v Speaker 2>I feel like we should address why we were off

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:12.360
<v Speaker 2>air for three weeks. People asked me about it.

0:00:12.600 --> 0:00:15.319
<v Speaker 1>Really, no one asked me about it. Well, no one

0:00:15.360 --> 0:00:16.079
<v Speaker 1>asked me about it.

0:00:16.880 --> 0:00:19.159
<v Speaker 2>I got questions, Well, you had a vacation, then I

0:00:19.200 --> 0:00:22.920
<v Speaker 2>had a vacation. Then we actually had an episode.

0:00:23.239 --> 0:00:26.040
<v Speaker 1>I think I think everyone in this room would agree

0:00:26.120 --> 0:00:28.840
<v Speaker 1>the greatest episode of the Money Stuff podcast in its history.

0:00:29.600 --> 0:00:32.440
<v Speaker 1>Except when I say we recorded it, I mean we performed.

0:00:32.760 --> 0:00:34.440
<v Speaker 1>We accidentally did not record.

0:00:34.920 --> 0:00:37.919
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so it will never see the light of day.

0:00:38.360 --> 0:00:40.120
<v Speaker 1>We do, I believe have your side of the audio.

0:00:40.120 --> 0:00:42.519
<v Speaker 1>Where's like I was joking, we should do like a

0:00:42.560 --> 0:00:45.160
<v Speaker 1>space coast coast to coast thing, where like we play

0:00:45.200 --> 0:00:48.480
<v Speaker 1>your audio and I just say non secretaris that set

0:00:48.520 --> 0:00:51.000
<v Speaker 1>you up to say something weird in between your audio.

0:00:51.400 --> 0:00:54.160
<v Speaker 2>But I was a sign that I was also thinking

0:00:54.200 --> 0:00:56.760
<v Speaker 2>like Mystery Science Theater, where like I say something and

0:00:56.760 --> 0:00:59.080
<v Speaker 2>then you, like you offer a snippy little comment, and

0:00:59.120 --> 0:01:02.000
<v Speaker 2>then I say something else and you just respond.

0:01:02.040 --> 0:01:03.320
<v Speaker 1>There are a lot of ways we could go with

0:01:03.360 --> 0:01:03.800
<v Speaker 1>that audio.

0:01:03.920 --> 0:01:04.680
<v Speaker 2>Who has the time.

0:01:05.000 --> 0:01:05.679
<v Speaker 1>Who has the time?

0:01:05.840 --> 0:01:09.400
<v Speaker 2>Not us? No, so we apologize to your listeners.

0:01:09.640 --> 0:01:11.480
<v Speaker 1>You're fine, I'm sure it was.

0:01:11.560 --> 0:01:13.559
<v Speaker 2>I'm sure we all had a great couple of weeks.

0:01:14.680 --> 0:01:16.440
<v Speaker 1>We got a vacation from this. They got a vacation

0:01:16.560 --> 0:01:20.119
<v Speaker 1>from us. Fine. I'm going away on a couple of weeks.

0:01:20.160 --> 0:01:21.840
<v Speaker 2>So I'm going to a conference, and you're going to

0:01:21.840 --> 0:01:22.920
<v Speaker 2>do an I want to say this.

0:01:23.240 --> 0:01:25.240
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to the Tulane m and A conference, which

0:01:25.240 --> 0:01:26.960
<v Speaker 1>is like the Big M and A conference for like

0:01:27.640 --> 0:01:30.319
<v Speaker 1>M and A bankers. The Song Exempt put lawyers to

0:01:30.360 --> 0:01:32.680
<v Speaker 1>a very logic extent. So if you're there, say hi

0:01:33.120 --> 0:01:35.040
<v Speaker 1>and uh, I've never been to this conference everyone, So

0:01:35.160 --> 0:01:36.160
<v Speaker 1>that's fun because it's a New.

0:01:36.120 --> 0:01:40.160
<v Speaker 2>Orleans that does sound really and the weather should be

0:01:40.959 --> 0:01:44.399
<v Speaker 2>nice but not horrible. In March in New Orleans. I'm

0:01:44.440 --> 0:01:48.360
<v Speaker 2>going to Vegas for an ETF conference. I hate Vegas,

0:01:48.840 --> 0:01:52.400
<v Speaker 2>but I'll be there. So if you're there, shout out

0:01:52.440 --> 0:01:53.080
<v Speaker 2>the pod.

0:01:53.840 --> 0:01:56.440
<v Speaker 1>Hello, and welcome to the Money Stuff Podcast. You're a

0:01:56.480 --> 0:01:59.760
<v Speaker 1>weekly podcast, your occasional podcast where we talk about stuff.

0:02:00.040 --> 0:02:03.640
<v Speaker 1>It into money. I'm that Levine and I read the

0:02:03.680 --> 0:02:05.360
<v Speaker 1>Money Stuff column from Bloomberg Opinion.

0:02:05.760 --> 0:02:08.320
<v Speaker 2>And I'm Katie Greifeld, a reporter for Bloomberg News and

0:02:08.360 --> 0:02:09.959
<v Speaker 2>an anchor for Bloomberg Television.

0:02:19.520 --> 0:02:20.960
<v Speaker 1>Where should we start, Katie.

0:02:21.000 --> 0:02:25.480
<v Speaker 2>We could start with Warner Brothers. That happens last week.

0:02:26.080 --> 0:02:27.160
<v Speaker 1>I was still happening.

0:02:27.160 --> 0:02:29.240
<v Speaker 2>But yes, it's still happening. But I was on vacation,

0:02:29.919 --> 0:02:33.000
<v Speaker 2>and I left for vacation thinking that, Okay, Netflix has

0:02:33.240 --> 0:02:35.079
<v Speaker 2>kind of got this in the bag, like they've kind

0:02:35.120 --> 0:02:38.160
<v Speaker 2>of had this in the bag, and they did not

0:02:38.760 --> 0:02:40.640
<v Speaker 2>have it in the bag. They ended up walking away.

0:02:40.840 --> 0:02:44.280
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's fascinating, right, Like Paramount had bid thirty dollars

0:02:44.320 --> 0:02:48.119
<v Speaker 1>to buy Warner Brothers. Warner Brothers had said, we'd rather

0:02:48.240 --> 0:02:53.640
<v Speaker 1>take this Netflix bid. It was something more complicated, but whatever,

0:02:53.720 --> 0:02:56.640
<v Speaker 1>it was like worth more than thirty dollars, right to Warner,

0:02:56.840 --> 0:03:00.840
<v Speaker 1>they thought. And then Paramount kept past them. And then

0:03:00.840 --> 0:03:03.239
<v Speaker 1>they eventually raised their bed from thirty to thirty one,

0:03:03.880 --> 0:03:06.520
<v Speaker 1>and Warner was like, well, thirty one is better than

0:03:06.520 --> 0:03:09.400
<v Speaker 1>Netflix's bed, although thirty was not. So they went back

0:03:09.440 --> 0:03:12.680
<v Speaker 1>to Netflix and they said, you have matching rights, would

0:03:12.680 --> 0:03:15.000
<v Speaker 1>you like to raise your bed above thirty one? And

0:03:15.080 --> 0:03:17.440
<v Speaker 1>Netflix said no, thank you, see you later.

0:03:17.800 --> 0:03:19.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, And so Netflix.

0:03:19.040 --> 0:03:22.320
<v Speaker 1>Just dropped out and Paramount is buying Warner for a

0:03:22.360 --> 0:03:22.799
<v Speaker 1>thirty one.

0:03:22.800 --> 0:03:26.880
<v Speaker 2>Dollars I could see world in which Paramount does go

0:03:26.960 --> 0:03:30.559
<v Speaker 2>after Netflix next, because this was pretty audacious.

0:03:30.720 --> 0:03:33.519
<v Speaker 1>So you have this dynamic where Paramount thinks that it

0:03:33.520 --> 0:03:35.720
<v Speaker 1>should be combined with Warner Brothers and Warner Brothers kind

0:03:35.760 --> 0:03:37.880
<v Speaker 1>of things. It should be combined with someone like Warner Brothers.

0:03:39.600 --> 0:03:44.920
<v Speaker 1>And so Paramount, which has a young, ambitious, arguably NEPO

0:03:44.920 --> 0:03:45.560
<v Speaker 1>baby ceo.

0:03:45.720 --> 0:03:47.520
<v Speaker 2>I was going to say, a CEO with a well

0:03:47.640 --> 0:03:48.560
<v Speaker 2>deep pocketed file.

0:03:48.680 --> 0:03:51.840
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, a CEO with let's say, something to prove. He's like,

0:03:51.880 --> 0:03:55.520
<v Speaker 1>I want to buy Warner, and Warner has a CEO

0:03:55.560 --> 0:03:57.640
<v Speaker 1>who has kind of proven itself and you know, wants

0:03:57.720 --> 0:04:01.040
<v Speaker 1>to sell, right, And so it makes sense to combine

0:04:01.080 --> 0:04:02.920
<v Speaker 1>these two companies. I mean, it probably makes sense. They

0:04:02.920 --> 0:04:05.520
<v Speaker 1>think it makes sense. There's there's some synergies, whatever makes

0:04:05.560 --> 0:04:07.920
<v Speaker 1>sense to combine the companies, and it makes sense for

0:04:08.600 --> 0:04:13.680
<v Speaker 1>Paramount's executive team to control the combined company, let's say, right,

0:04:14.480 --> 0:04:17.600
<v Speaker 1>But what doesn't make sense from a corporate finance perspective

0:04:17.680 --> 0:04:21.200
<v Speaker 1>is Paramount, which is teeny, buying Warner, which is big. Yes,

0:04:21.720 --> 0:04:23.880
<v Speaker 1>it sort of straightforward world. You'd be like, well, Warner

0:04:23.880 --> 0:04:26.320
<v Speaker 1>will buy Paramount and then they'll combine them and then yah. Yeah,

0:04:26.480 --> 0:04:28.240
<v Speaker 1>But It just didn't work out that way because of

0:04:28.480 --> 0:04:32.120
<v Speaker 1>the dynamics of how Warner is trying to sell itself

0:04:32.160 --> 0:04:35.960
<v Speaker 1>and bidding against Netflix, and Paramount had offered an all

0:04:35.960 --> 0:04:38.400
<v Speaker 1>stock deal, like, it would not have worked, right, Yeah,

0:04:38.440 --> 0:04:41.440
<v Speaker 1>So they offered it all cash deal, which meant borrowing yeah,

0:04:41.680 --> 0:04:42.120
<v Speaker 1>jillions of.

0:04:42.120 --> 0:04:46.800
<v Speaker 2>Dollars more than twice their market capitalization. Actually, it's pretty fantastic.

0:04:46.880 --> 0:04:49.200
<v Speaker 1>It depends on account, like their market cap right now,

0:04:49.360 --> 0:04:53.120
<v Speaker 1>Paramount's market gap is like thirteen fourteen billion dollars their

0:04:53.120 --> 0:04:56.880
<v Speaker 1>equity market cap and the debt for this deal I think,

0:04:56.920 --> 0:05:01.240
<v Speaker 1>including like everything is like seventy nine billion dollars, so

0:05:01.279 --> 0:05:05.760
<v Speaker 1>it's like six times in their market cap. But that

0:05:05.800 --> 0:05:08.200
<v Speaker 1>math is not quite right because like their market cap

0:05:08.240 --> 0:05:10.240
<v Speaker 1>today is like thirteen billion dollars, but they're getting like

0:05:10.279 --> 0:05:14.440
<v Speaker 1>a forty something billion dollar equity check from Larry Allison Fair.

0:05:14.680 --> 0:05:17.360
<v Speaker 1>They're also doing a rights offering, which I love.

0:05:17.680 --> 0:05:19.800
<v Speaker 2>Explain that and why do you love it? Well?

0:05:19.839 --> 0:05:21.760
<v Speaker 1>I love it because just doesn't make sense for like

0:05:21.800 --> 0:05:23.840
<v Speaker 1>this teeny company to borrow so much money to buy

0:05:23.839 --> 0:05:27.400
<v Speaker 1>this bigger company. You do the reverse, right, and the

0:05:27.520 --> 0:05:29.960
<v Speaker 1>rights offering is a way to like very slightly move

0:05:29.960 --> 0:05:32.560
<v Speaker 1>in the correct direction, which is like, we should have

0:05:32.600 --> 0:05:36.000
<v Speaker 1>more stock outstanding if we're going to swallow this giant company.

0:05:36.360 --> 0:05:38.719
<v Speaker 1>And so they're offering to sell about three billion dollars

0:05:38.720 --> 0:05:41.719
<v Speaker 1>of stock to whoever wants at public investors on the

0:05:41.760 --> 0:05:44.760
<v Speaker 1>same terms that Larry Allison is buying. So Paramount is

0:05:44.839 --> 0:05:48.400
<v Speaker 1>essentially a controlled company like in the personal ownership of

0:05:48.440 --> 0:05:50.560
<v Speaker 1>like the Ellison family, but it has public shareolders and

0:05:50.680 --> 0:05:52.160
<v Speaker 1>they can put in some more money. Basically, if you're

0:05:52.160 --> 0:05:54.200
<v Speaker 1>a public sherelder, you have the right to buy some

0:05:54.240 --> 0:05:57.200
<v Speaker 1>stock at the sixteen bucks that Larry Ellison is playing,

0:05:58.080 --> 0:06:00.240
<v Speaker 1>which like you know, it's three billion of stock, which

0:06:01.200 --> 0:06:03.920
<v Speaker 1>it's three billion less of debt load than you'd otherwise need.

0:06:03.960 --> 0:06:05.080
<v Speaker 1>And like they have a lot of debt.

0:06:05.279 --> 0:06:06.919
<v Speaker 2>They do have a lot of debt, to the point

0:06:06.960 --> 0:06:10.560
<v Speaker 2>where they were downgraded to junk by Fitch in the

0:06:10.600 --> 0:06:14.240
<v Speaker 2>aftermath of this, which I guess isn't that surprising when

0:06:14.279 --> 0:06:15.040
<v Speaker 2>we're talking about some.

0:06:15.000 --> 0:06:18.000
<v Speaker 1>Of these levels I was thinking about, like when they

0:06:18.000 --> 0:06:19.400
<v Speaker 1>were trying to get this deal. So there's a long

0:06:19.440 --> 0:06:21.960
<v Speaker 1>time where Paramount was pestering Warner to take their deal

0:06:22.000 --> 0:06:25.280
<v Speaker 1>instead of Netflix and Warner we're saying no, and it

0:06:25.320 --> 0:06:26.560
<v Speaker 1>was hard for them to say no because a lot

0:06:26.560 --> 0:06:30.039
<v Speaker 1>of sharelders wanted the certainty and cash of the Paramount deal,

0:06:30.440 --> 0:06:32.000
<v Speaker 1>and so the board had to defend their deal. And

0:06:32.040 --> 0:06:34.719
<v Speaker 1>one thing the board said was the paramat deal would

0:06:34.760 --> 0:06:37.760
<v Speaker 1>be the largest leveraged buyotever, and we have doubts that

0:06:37.760 --> 0:06:40.159
<v Speaker 1>they can get it done. And like, in some sense,

0:06:40.200 --> 0:06:42.760
<v Speaker 1>that's like a weird thing to say. Because the Warner

0:06:42.839 --> 0:06:46.680
<v Speaker 1>board represents the Warner shareholders. They have a fiduciary duty

0:06:46.680 --> 0:06:48.080
<v Speaker 1>at this point to get the best price for the

0:06:48.080 --> 0:06:51.960
<v Speaker 1>Warner shaholders. And if you say, well, the paramount deal

0:06:52.000 --> 0:06:54.240
<v Speaker 1>involves borrowing a lot of money, it would be hard

0:06:54.279 --> 0:06:56.360
<v Speaker 1>to pay down all that debt, Like that doesn't matter,

0:06:56.400 --> 0:06:58.359
<v Speaker 1>Like that's not your problem, right, the shoulders are cashed

0:06:58.360 --> 0:07:00.240
<v Speaker 1>out at that point. If it runs into trouble after

0:07:00.279 --> 0:07:02.240
<v Speaker 1>the LBO, that's not the sholder's problem. So it's not

0:07:02.240 --> 0:07:04.720
<v Speaker 1>the boards problem. And the board is defending this as saying, well,

0:07:04.880 --> 0:07:06.839
<v Speaker 1>we don't think they could even raise the financing to

0:07:06.880 --> 0:07:08.920
<v Speaker 1>do this albo, which is kind of a weird thing

0:07:08.920 --> 0:07:11.880
<v Speaker 1>to think because it's like Larry Ellison, It's like it's

0:07:11.880 --> 0:07:14.720
<v Speaker 1>people who can raise the financing yeah, but now that

0:07:14.800 --> 0:07:17.800
<v Speaker 1>they've signed the Paramount deal, I'm like, oh, yeah, this

0:07:17.920 --> 0:07:20.760
<v Speaker 1>is the largest LBO ever And like I can see

0:07:20.800 --> 0:07:24.160
<v Speaker 1>why someone with ties to Warner Brothers would be nervous

0:07:24.160 --> 0:07:26.400
<v Speaker 1>about that. There's going to be a lot of job cuts.

0:07:26.400 --> 0:07:29.240
<v Speaker 1>There's going to be probably a lot of cuts in production,

0:07:29.320 --> 0:07:32.080
<v Speaker 1>although there's debate about that. But like, to service all

0:07:32.120 --> 0:07:34.400
<v Speaker 1>of this debt, it's going to be difficult and it's

0:07:34.400 --> 0:07:36.640
<v Speaker 1>going to lead to like hard business treses at Paramount

0:07:36.720 --> 0:07:40.520
<v Speaker 1>Warner And if you sold to Netflix, which has plenty

0:07:40.560 --> 0:07:42.600
<v Speaker 1>of money, you wouldn't have those pressures made a lot

0:07:42.640 --> 0:07:46.280
<v Speaker 1>of pressures, right, Like Netflix is not not necessarily a

0:07:46.360 --> 0:07:50.280
<v Speaker 1>lavish benign over alert for movie companies, but like having

0:07:50.280 --> 0:07:52.600
<v Speaker 1>that much debt like makes it harder to run the business.

0:07:52.760 --> 0:07:56.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean there were questions about theatrical releases, et cetera.

0:07:56.080 --> 0:07:57.400
<v Speaker 2>When it came to the Netflix bid.

0:07:57.560 --> 0:07:59.560
<v Speaker 1>Netflix is like, you can have your theory of mind

0:07:59.560 --> 0:08:00.920
<v Speaker 1>of Netflix, but they have plenty of money.

0:08:01.000 --> 0:08:03.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Yeah, it's funny. I mean, taking a look at

0:08:03.640 --> 0:08:08.280
<v Speaker 2>our reporting, both Ted Sarandos and David Ellison had spent

0:08:08.320 --> 0:08:11.560
<v Speaker 2>a lot of time in DC sort of pitching for

0:08:11.600 --> 0:08:14.920
<v Speaker 2>this deal. And it seems like one of the factors though,

0:08:15.120 --> 0:08:17.720
<v Speaker 2>was the idea that when it came to the regulatory

0:08:17.800 --> 0:08:20.360
<v Speaker 2>side of things, that it would be a quicker experience

0:08:20.440 --> 0:08:23.960
<v Speaker 2>going with the Paramount bid than with Netflix that probably

0:08:23.960 --> 0:08:25.920
<v Speaker 2>would have lasted well into twenty twenty seven.

0:08:26.160 --> 0:08:29.000
<v Speaker 1>A lot of people think that, Yeah, Paramount definitely pushed

0:08:29.000 --> 0:08:31.920
<v Speaker 1>that narrative. Ted Sarandas is going around saying no, no, it's fine,

0:08:31.960 --> 0:08:34.200
<v Speaker 1>we have no problem. We would have got improved quickly.

0:08:34.360 --> 0:08:36.640
<v Speaker 1>So I don't know the answer, but like, yes, certainly

0:08:36.960 --> 0:08:39.839
<v Speaker 1>people were nervous about the Netflix regulatory approval process, and

0:08:40.559 --> 0:08:43.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, this is on the backdrop of everything is

0:08:43.960 --> 0:08:49.160
<v Speaker 1>about Donald Trump's personal whim but anyway, so there's a

0:08:49.200 --> 0:08:51.760
<v Speaker 1>sense that like Netflix is politically on the outs and

0:08:51.960 --> 0:08:55.320
<v Speaker 1>Paramount is politically on the end. But like the Netflix

0:08:55.559 --> 0:08:57.760
<v Speaker 1>very consistently said no, no, it's no problem, more fine,

0:08:57.760 --> 0:08:58.720
<v Speaker 1>We're doing great.

0:08:58.880 --> 0:09:01.439
<v Speaker 2>So I don't know, Yeah, I mean, Netflix, in walking

0:09:01.440 --> 0:09:03.640
<v Speaker 2>away said that this was solely about price, that they

0:09:03.640 --> 0:09:04.800
<v Speaker 2>were confident they would get it.

0:09:04.880 --> 0:09:08.880
<v Speaker 1>Fascinating, Yeah, you've come this far, You've had this much

0:09:08.920 --> 0:09:12.800
<v Speaker 1>time and money on this deal, and they're like, could

0:09:12.800 --> 0:09:15.880
<v Speaker 1>you pay one more dollar and you're like, no, it's amazing.

0:09:16.120 --> 0:09:17.920
<v Speaker 1>It's an amazing display of disciplined No, by the way,

0:09:17.960 --> 0:09:19.160
<v Speaker 1>it's one more dollar. But it's also they get a

0:09:19.200 --> 0:09:20.920
<v Speaker 1>big breakup fee for walking away.

0:09:21.240 --> 0:09:22.560
<v Speaker 2>Yay, Paramount is paying.

0:09:22.840 --> 0:09:25.160
<v Speaker 1>There's been a lot of talk about paramount of grain

0:09:25.240 --> 0:09:28.040
<v Speaker 1>to pay that breakup fee, and like, I've always found

0:09:28.080 --> 0:09:32.040
<v Speaker 1>that talk very perplexing because obviously, if you've been thirty

0:09:32.080 --> 0:09:34.800
<v Speaker 1>one dollars per share in cash to buy a company,

0:09:35.040 --> 0:09:38.000
<v Speaker 1>the incidence of the breakup fee is on you, Like

0:09:38.320 --> 0:09:40.679
<v Speaker 1>nobody could possibly pay it other than paramount, and it's

0:09:40.720 --> 0:09:43.079
<v Speaker 1>just like sort of smoking mirrors that. Wheer was like, oh,

0:09:43.080 --> 0:09:44.679
<v Speaker 1>they have to pay the breakup fee anyway, Yeah, they're

0:09:44.679 --> 0:09:45.040
<v Speaker 1>paying it far.

0:09:45.200 --> 0:09:48.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Well. Also, just to the point on the DC relationship,

0:09:48.960 --> 0:09:53.560
<v Speaker 2>apparently President Trump told Sorrando's at some visit not to

0:09:53.640 --> 0:09:57.480
<v Speaker 2>overpay for the company. So apparently he took his advice.

0:09:57.720 --> 0:10:00.400
<v Speaker 1>I don't know, No, he was he was going to overpay.

0:10:00.240 --> 0:10:02.160
<v Speaker 1>The Trump gave him some business advices.

0:10:02.200 --> 0:10:05.640
<v Speaker 2>I've never mind if the President tells you that, I

0:10:05.679 --> 0:10:08.680
<v Speaker 2>mean kind of feels like the writing's on the wall,

0:10:08.880 --> 0:10:09.800
<v Speaker 2>like this is all okay.

0:10:09.960 --> 0:10:11.920
<v Speaker 1>I don't think that's Like if you overpay, we'll want

0:10:11.920 --> 0:10:14.240
<v Speaker 1>to approved. I think that's just used to be in business.

0:10:14.320 --> 0:10:17.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, yeah, I mean I wasn't actually in the room,

0:10:17.600 --> 0:10:19.400
<v Speaker 2>So yeah.

0:10:19.520 --> 0:10:22.960
<v Speaker 1>We're speculating a little bit about what that conversation.

0:10:23.200 --> 0:10:25.800
<v Speaker 2>I don't know what room it was. Wasn't the Oval office,

0:10:25.840 --> 0:10:29.680
<v Speaker 2>It could be any room, yeah, perhaps a ballroom. Just

0:10:29.720 --> 0:10:33.400
<v Speaker 2>from a human level, I mean, just reading this, I

0:10:33.440 --> 0:10:35.240
<v Speaker 2>feel like I was getting my feelings hurt, like the

0:10:35.280 --> 0:10:38.960
<v Speaker 2>fact that it took so many months, Paramount was rebuffed

0:10:38.960 --> 0:10:42.280
<v Speaker 2>at so many turns. It feels like Warner Brothers the

0:10:42.360 --> 0:10:45.000
<v Speaker 2>board really didn't want to do this and then found

0:10:45.040 --> 0:10:47.559
<v Speaker 2>themselves in a position where they sort of couldn't say no.

0:10:47.720 --> 0:10:50.120
<v Speaker 2>I feel like if I was in Paramount shoes, I

0:10:50.120 --> 0:10:52.920
<v Speaker 2>would just feel really bad all the time.

0:10:53.200 --> 0:10:55.000
<v Speaker 1>But interesting, I don't know.

0:10:55.080 --> 0:10:57.679
<v Speaker 2>I mean, maybe I just don't have the bullheaded confidence.

0:10:57.760 --> 0:10:59.600
<v Speaker 1>You know, Warner would never say we really don't want

0:10:59.600 --> 0:11:03.079
<v Speaker 1>to sell the I mean, they're a boardive competent directers

0:11:03.080 --> 0:11:05.480
<v Speaker 1>that have a fiducial duty to get the best price

0:11:05.520 --> 0:11:10.319
<v Speaker 1>for their shareholders. I think that they liked the Netflix deal.

0:11:10.440 --> 0:11:12.400
<v Speaker 1>For whatever reason, they liked the Netflix deal. You know,

0:11:12.440 --> 0:11:15.760
<v Speaker 1>they'll tell you deal certainty and the value of the

0:11:15.800 --> 0:11:20.920
<v Speaker 1>cable stub and whatever. But there was always some price.

0:11:22.200 --> 0:11:24.160
<v Speaker 1>I mean, there had to have always been some price

0:11:24.679 --> 0:11:26.600
<v Speaker 1>that paramount could pay that would be enough for them,

0:11:27.000 --> 0:11:30.280
<v Speaker 1>And it turned that price was one dollar more, which

0:11:30.320 --> 0:11:32.360
<v Speaker 1>is funny. The other thing that happened that it's so

0:11:32.440 --> 0:11:35.200
<v Speaker 1>strange is that Netflix, you know, was like, we'll pay

0:11:35.840 --> 0:11:37.600
<v Speaker 1>the complicated package they would pay, and this is our

0:11:37.640 --> 0:11:40.839
<v Speaker 1>best and final offer. And Paamans said, we offer thirty

0:11:40.880 --> 0:11:43.160
<v Speaker 1>dollars and it is not our best and final offer.

0:11:43.400 --> 0:11:46.760
<v Speaker 1>And so it would like Warner could not accept that deal.

0:11:46.840 --> 0:11:49.200
<v Speaker 1>It would be just absolute malpractice to be like, we'll

0:11:49.200 --> 0:11:51.760
<v Speaker 1>take your not best offer. So they had to hold

0:11:51.760 --> 0:11:53.840
<v Speaker 1>out for something more, And everything else is in the

0:11:53.840 --> 0:11:55.720
<v Speaker 1>background of like, oh, we had to hold out for more,

0:11:56.080 --> 0:11:59.640
<v Speaker 1>and like I don't know if they explicitly said thirty

0:11:59.679 --> 0:12:02.480
<v Speaker 1>one best and final effort, but like thirty one was enough.

0:12:02.679 --> 0:12:06.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, Well, it'll be interesting to see how long this

0:12:06.440 --> 0:12:08.240
<v Speaker 2>actually does take to get through.

0:12:08.520 --> 0:12:10.640
<v Speaker 1>The Other thing is but I don't think I think

0:12:10.640 --> 0:12:12.920
<v Speaker 1>they've already gotten some of their clarents. There's like European

0:12:13.160 --> 0:12:15.640
<v Speaker 1>there's a locking still happen. But the other interesting thing

0:12:15.679 --> 0:12:18.240
<v Speaker 1>is like if your model of this is they have

0:12:18.320 --> 0:12:20.439
<v Speaker 1>taken on crippling dat and won't be able to service it,

0:12:20.600 --> 0:12:24.760
<v Speaker 1>like you read some people being like Netflix's plan here

0:12:25.280 --> 0:12:27.280
<v Speaker 1>is to buy the whole thing in three years when

0:12:27.280 --> 0:12:30.520
<v Speaker 1>it falls apart, which is one one way to put

0:12:45.880 --> 0:12:47.120
<v Speaker 1>Private credit has been a thing.

0:12:47.240 --> 0:12:52.439
<v Speaker 2>Oh my gosh, GOSHBDC.

0:12:50.760 --> 0:12:51.440
<v Speaker 1>All these things.

0:12:51.520 --> 0:12:59.240
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, b CRED Blackstone stepping up to meet these redemptions personally, right.

0:12:59.240 --> 0:13:05.040
<v Speaker 1>Be cred the Blackstone non traded private credit business development

0:13:05.040 --> 0:13:06.800
<v Speaker 1>company that's not as name, that's just what it is.

0:13:07.320 --> 0:13:09.920
<v Speaker 1>Its name is b Credit. All these non traded BBCs,

0:13:10.840 --> 0:13:14.360
<v Speaker 1>they call them like semi liquid vehicles. Every quarter they

0:13:14.400 --> 0:13:16.880
<v Speaker 1>offered a redeem up to five percent of the stock

0:13:17.240 --> 0:13:19.800
<v Speaker 1>a tender offer. So if you are invested in this fund,

0:13:19.800 --> 0:13:21.440
<v Speaker 1>you can't sell it on the stock exchange. There's no

0:13:21.520 --> 0:13:24.160
<v Speaker 1>way to get liquidity except every quarter they will buy

0:13:24.240 --> 0:13:25.920
<v Speaker 1>back your shares if you want, if you want out,

0:13:26.080 --> 0:13:28.400
<v Speaker 1>but only up to five percent. So last quarter they

0:13:28.480 --> 0:13:32.240
<v Speaker 1>got seven point nine percent of the fund in redemption requests,

0:13:32.400 --> 0:13:35.679
<v Speaker 1>which is a record, as we reported. And so they

0:13:35.720 --> 0:13:40.960
<v Speaker 1>had to scrape to do those redemptions, not because they

0:13:40.960 --> 0:13:43.400
<v Speaker 1>didn't have the money. They have like bank credit facilities.

0:13:43.440 --> 0:13:45.640
<v Speaker 1>They can do the money, but because like the way

0:13:45.679 --> 0:13:47.880
<v Speaker 1>the tender offer works, they can't. It's boring, but like

0:13:48.000 --> 0:13:51.680
<v Speaker 1>they couldn't actually meet all those redemptions. And rather than

0:13:52.200 --> 0:13:55.480
<v Speaker 1>say no, which is not quite the same thing as gating,

0:13:55.520 --> 0:13:58.400
<v Speaker 1>the fund quotes but like yeah, like look like gating,

0:13:58.400 --> 0:14:00.920
<v Speaker 1>and people get mad and upset. So rather than say

0:14:00.920 --> 0:14:02.840
<v Speaker 1>know it anyone right out, they let everyone get out.

0:14:03.120 --> 0:14:06.600
<v Speaker 1>And to do that, they paid about seven percent of

0:14:06.600 --> 0:14:10.079
<v Speaker 1>them out with Pea Creds money and they paid their

0:14:10.080 --> 0:14:14.880
<v Speaker 1>remaining zero point nine percent out with money from Blackstone

0:14:15.040 --> 0:14:20.360
<v Speaker 1>the firm and from the personal accounts of some Blackstone employees. Yeah, here,

0:14:20.400 --> 0:14:22.920
<v Speaker 1>you know, get into the fund. It's like meant to

0:14:22.960 --> 0:14:25.240
<v Speaker 1>be a show of confidence. It's like we will cash

0:14:25.280 --> 0:14:27.600
<v Speaker 1>you out at par and we will pay par with

0:14:27.640 --> 0:14:30.560
<v Speaker 1>our own money because we really believe in these credits.

0:14:30.680 --> 0:14:33.320
<v Speaker 2>Specifically, it was more than twenty five senior leaders from

0:14:33.560 --> 0:14:37.080
<v Speaker 2>sure across Blackstone. We reported. Yeah, I've heard that too.

0:14:37.200 --> 0:14:39.240
<v Speaker 2>I was talking to someone about this on bloomber TV

0:14:39.400 --> 0:14:41.720
<v Speaker 2>yesterday and they were like, I take this as a

0:14:41.800 --> 0:14:44.360
<v Speaker 2>very bullish sign. It's a kin to share buybacks or

0:14:44.400 --> 0:14:46.160
<v Speaker 2>insider buying or something like that.

0:14:46.640 --> 0:14:48.200
<v Speaker 1>So that is the honestly what it's meant to be.

0:14:48.240 --> 0:14:53.040
<v Speaker 2>That's the optimistic angle. But the headlines keep coming, and I.

0:14:52.960 --> 0:14:55.840
<v Speaker 1>Mean like the angle is like some retail investors in

0:14:55.840 --> 0:14:58.280
<v Speaker 1>this private fund, having read bad headlines, wanted to take

0:14:58.280 --> 0:15:04.480
<v Speaker 1>their money out, and there are offsetting inflows from experienced

0:15:05.120 --> 0:15:08.280
<v Speaker 1>private credit professionals who work at Blackstone and know the portfolio. Right,

0:15:08.440 --> 0:15:11.160
<v Speaker 1>that's a good story. Yeah, you have to like, you know,

0:15:11.200 --> 0:15:13.520
<v Speaker 1>you have to like twist the arms of the employees

0:15:13.560 --> 0:15:14.600
<v Speaker 1>to yeah, how do you say no?

0:15:14.920 --> 0:15:16.760
<v Speaker 2>That's what I would love to know, Like, Okay, more

0:15:16.800 --> 0:15:20.160
<v Speaker 2>than twenty five or about twenty five said yes. Did

0:15:20.160 --> 0:15:23.080
<v Speaker 2>anyone say no? Did anyone feel like they could? I

0:15:23.120 --> 0:15:24.200
<v Speaker 2>want to talk to that person.

0:15:25.040 --> 0:15:26.880
<v Speaker 1>The other thing that bothered me about this is like

0:15:28.240 --> 0:15:30.040
<v Speaker 1>if you came to me and I was like a

0:15:30.080 --> 0:15:31.320
<v Speaker 1>sharp Elbo private.

0:15:31.040 --> 0:15:33.160
<v Speaker 2>Credit professional and you really I can see it.

0:15:33.280 --> 0:15:36.680
<v Speaker 1>You're like all of our retail not all seven of

0:15:36.720 --> 0:15:39.480
<v Speaker 1>our retail investers are panicking in one out of our

0:15:39.520 --> 0:15:41.920
<v Speaker 1>lovely fund, which has great credits, and I live in

0:15:41.920 --> 0:15:45.320
<v Speaker 1>the portfolio. Would you like in? I'd be like, sure,

0:15:45.680 --> 0:15:48.200
<v Speaker 1>that sounds like a firesal. I'd be happy to get

0:15:48.240 --> 0:15:50.880
<v Speaker 1>in when these people are panicking, and then my bosses

0:15:50.880 --> 0:15:52.480
<v Speaker 1>would be like, great, you're buying it one hundred cents

0:15:52.480 --> 0:15:55.880
<v Speaker 1>on the like, no, that's nothing. I don't want to. Like,

0:15:56.200 --> 0:15:57.880
<v Speaker 1>if I think they're worth one hundred cents on the

0:15:57.920 --> 0:15:59.960
<v Speaker 1>dollar and everyone's panicking, I want to buy a ninety.

0:16:00.480 --> 0:16:02.440
<v Speaker 1>They should get a discount. You know, when you think

0:16:02.480 --> 0:16:04.680
<v Speaker 1>about like the professionals at the firm using their own

0:16:04.680 --> 0:16:09.040
<v Speaker 1>money to buy the controversial assets. The classic story is

0:16:09.080 --> 0:16:10.960
<v Speaker 1>in like I don't know, I like twenty eleven or something.

0:16:11.600 --> 0:16:14.720
<v Speaker 1>Sometime shortly after the financial crisis, Credit Sueez had this

0:16:14.800 --> 0:16:18.000
<v Speaker 1>like giant pile of what people call the toxic assets,

0:16:18.000 --> 0:16:20.680
<v Speaker 1>like yeah, the mortgage derivatives and just do your weird

0:16:20.680 --> 0:16:23.720
<v Speaker 1>stuff from the crisis, and they were like, we can't

0:16:23.960 --> 0:16:26.280
<v Speaker 1>sell this. It has a huge capital hit. So we're

0:16:26.320 --> 0:16:29.280
<v Speaker 1>going to package it into a box and give shares

0:16:29.320 --> 0:16:31.760
<v Speaker 1>of the box to our like managing directors. And so

0:16:31.800 --> 0:16:35.720
<v Speaker 1>they've just paid bonuses one year in toxic assets. Love it,

0:16:36.200 --> 0:16:38.600
<v Speaker 1>and like those people all got rich, like they'd like

0:16:38.680 --> 0:16:41.000
<v Speaker 1>immediately recovered, and they did so well because like they

0:16:41.080 --> 0:16:43.520
<v Speaker 1>got these toxic assets at the marks they were at,

0:16:43.560 --> 0:16:48.160
<v Speaker 1>which was a distress mark. But here everything's in par

0:16:48.440 --> 0:16:51.600
<v Speaker 1>you know their distress marks. You're getting a price that

0:16:51.680 --> 0:16:58.680
<v Speaker 1>does not reflect necessarily the level of nervousness that your

0:16:58.840 --> 0:17:01.200
<v Speaker 1>retail investors are showing they try to redeem.

0:17:01.360 --> 0:17:03.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and that's the thing. I mean, we heard from

0:17:03.960 --> 0:17:07.240
<v Speaker 2>Blackstones Global head of private credit Strategies at Bloomberg and

0:17:07.280 --> 0:17:09.959
<v Speaker 2>Bust this week saying that the noise that you're seeing

0:17:10.119 --> 0:17:13.560
<v Speaker 2>doesn't match the solid credit fundamentals of the fund's assets.

0:17:13.760 --> 0:17:16.359
<v Speaker 2>It almost feels like the conversation has sort of moved

0:17:16.880 --> 0:17:19.800
<v Speaker 2>beyond that when it comes to the redemption request that

0:17:19.800 --> 0:17:24.520
<v Speaker 2>you're seeing. And even if it's not headlines about Blackstone specifically,

0:17:25.080 --> 0:17:27.160
<v Speaker 2>there's a lot of stories. I mean, there was one

0:17:27.280 --> 0:17:30.880
<v Speaker 2>on Thursday about Blackrock what marking a private loan they

0:17:30.960 --> 0:17:32.520
<v Speaker 2>hadn't made to zero.

0:17:32.840 --> 0:17:34.160
<v Speaker 1>Me some markdan on some lens.

0:17:34.320 --> 0:17:34.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:17:34.600 --> 0:17:38.040
<v Speaker 1>I don't know that it'll be universal across all these

0:17:38.080 --> 0:17:40.520
<v Speaker 1>these funds, but like all these all these people, all

0:17:40.560 --> 0:17:42.680
<v Speaker 1>the all these like senior private credit people are going

0:17:42.680 --> 0:17:46.359
<v Speaker 1>around expressing conference in their portfolios, which one might be

0:17:46.400 --> 0:17:49.679
<v Speaker 1>true and two they have to say. But then, like

0:17:50.119 --> 0:17:52.840
<v Speaker 1>there's the separate question of if everyone is panicking and

0:17:52.880 --> 0:17:55.240
<v Speaker 1>you are confident in the portfolio, Like, yeah, you should

0:17:55.240 --> 0:17:56.760
<v Speaker 1>step in and buy, but it's weird to have to

0:17:56.760 --> 0:17:59.159
<v Speaker 1>buy out one hundred cents on the dollars. Yeah, and

0:17:59.200 --> 0:18:02.040
<v Speaker 1>this is why I of the trade that Boas Weinstein

0:18:02.119 --> 0:18:05.840
<v Speaker 1>is doing. So we're recording this. On Thursday, he announced

0:18:05.920 --> 0:18:08.800
<v Speaker 1>one I think today or yesterday for the star woud

0:18:08.800 --> 0:18:11.600
<v Speaker 1>A private read Yeah, and two weeks ago he announced

0:18:11.600 --> 0:18:14.680
<v Speaker 1>one for these blue Owl private BDCs, where basically he's

0:18:14.680 --> 0:18:19.439
<v Speaker 1>going around tendering to buy shares of these non traded,

0:18:19.520 --> 0:18:22.360
<v Speaker 1>semi liquid vehicles that people are nervous about, and he's

0:18:22.400 --> 0:18:24.360
<v Speaker 1>offering to buy them, like, you know, he's seventy five

0:18:24.359 --> 0:18:27.879
<v Speaker 1>sons on the dollar. Presumably he's more skeptical than like

0:18:28.040 --> 0:18:31.159
<v Speaker 1>Blackstone is, but like less skeptical than these retail investors. Right,

0:18:31.240 --> 0:18:33.840
<v Speaker 1>he thinks these credits are fine or he's heading the

0:18:33.840 --> 0:18:36.479
<v Speaker 1>credit I don't know, but like he's getting these credits

0:18:36.480 --> 0:18:38.919
<v Speaker 1>at a discount because retail investors are I don't want

0:18:38.920 --> 0:18:40.400
<v Speaker 1>to say panicking, but they're nervous.

0:18:40.520 --> 0:18:43.000
<v Speaker 2>Well, that's what I wanted to ask you, was what

0:18:43.200 --> 0:18:44.679
<v Speaker 2>is the trade here for Boas?

0:18:44.880 --> 0:18:48.200
<v Speaker 1>The trade is like the value of liquidity in these

0:18:48.359 --> 0:18:51.439
<v Speaker 1>vehicles has gone up enormously in the last month. People

0:18:51.520 --> 0:18:54.160
<v Speaker 1>now want this liquidity, and if people really want liquidity,

0:18:54.160 --> 0:18:56.240
<v Speaker 1>they should pay for liquidity, and bo As will be

0:18:56.240 --> 0:18:57.080
<v Speaker 1>the one to get paid.

0:18:57.280 --> 0:18:59.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, in theory, I'm wondering.

0:18:59.520 --> 0:19:02.359
<v Speaker 1>Tender like this might just be trolling. Yeah, nothing forces

0:19:02.359 --> 0:19:05.600
<v Speaker 1>anyone to tender, because these vehicles all have mechanisms to

0:19:05.640 --> 0:19:07.600
<v Speaker 1>cash you at a one hundred cents on the dollar. Like, yeah,

0:19:07.600 --> 0:19:10.880
<v Speaker 1>not perfect, there's gates whatever. But because like you sort

0:19:10.880 --> 0:19:12.560
<v Speaker 1>of expect to get cashed out one hundred cents on

0:19:12.600 --> 0:19:14.320
<v Speaker 1>a dollar, you might not want a tender to Boaz

0:19:14.359 --> 0:19:16.240
<v Speaker 1>at seventy five, but you might.

0:19:16.520 --> 0:19:18.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, to the point, he could be trolling. I was

0:19:18.960 --> 0:19:21.000
<v Speaker 2>looking at some of his tweets, including the one he

0:19:21.040 --> 0:19:25.800
<v Speaker 2>announced this, and someone commented something like, you're a hilarious man.

0:19:26.280 --> 0:19:27.080
<v Speaker 2>It is pretty funny.

0:19:27.119 --> 0:19:29.760
<v Speaker 1>Funny trade. Yeah, it's a funny trade because like there's

0:19:29.800 --> 0:19:32.480
<v Speaker 1>all these headlines that, oh, private credit liquidity, and then

0:19:32.520 --> 0:19:34.760
<v Speaker 1>like there's all these private credit people going around on

0:19:34.800 --> 0:19:36.800
<v Speaker 1>TV being like it's fine, our portfolios are good. And

0:19:36.800 --> 0:19:38.920
<v Speaker 1>then because like I'll pay seventy five, like it's great,

0:19:38.960 --> 0:19:41.320
<v Speaker 1>it's a good trade. Well, it was like a little

0:19:41.320 --> 0:19:42.840
<v Speaker 1>bit pouring fuel on the fire, Like.

0:19:42.840 --> 0:19:44.960
<v Speaker 2>How it works out for him? Like is he he

0:19:45.040 --> 0:19:45.960
<v Speaker 2>might get zero shares?

0:19:46.000 --> 0:19:46.840
<v Speaker 1>I don't know, but.

0:19:46.760 --> 0:19:48.719
<v Speaker 2>I mean it would be nice to ask the man himself.

0:19:48.720 --> 0:19:52.679
<v Speaker 2>But like, is this him calling the bottom and hoping,

0:19:52.720 --> 0:19:55.080
<v Speaker 2>like how it's being traded in the market, that it

0:19:55.080 --> 0:19:56.679
<v Speaker 2>will go back to one hundred cents or is he

0:19:57.040 --> 0:19:59.560
<v Speaker 2>just hoping that he will get cash out at one

0:19:59.600 --> 0:19:59.959
<v Speaker 2>hundred cent?

0:20:00.440 --> 0:20:02.360
<v Speaker 1>There could be all sorts of trades. Yeah, he could

0:20:02.400 --> 0:20:05.320
<v Speaker 1>be short what the credits a right? But like, yeah,

0:20:05.359 --> 0:20:07.679
<v Speaker 1>to me, like the obvious trade is like the il

0:20:07.680 --> 0:20:10.360
<v Speaker 1>liquidity premium of these funds has gone way up and

0:20:10.440 --> 0:20:11.359
<v Speaker 1>he can capture that.

0:20:11.760 --> 0:20:16.160
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, well, Boas come on the podcast. Just the point

0:20:16.160 --> 0:20:17.920
<v Speaker 2>I wanted to I wanted to make when it comes

0:20:17.920 --> 0:20:21.000
<v Speaker 2>to like the fundamentals almost not mattering. I do just

0:20:21.040 --> 0:20:23.640
<v Speaker 2>wonder about the psychological aspect of it all. The fact

0:20:23.680 --> 0:20:27.520
<v Speaker 2>that over the past several years, all these private asset,

0:20:27.560 --> 0:20:30.679
<v Speaker 2>private credit folks have been pushing so hard into the

0:20:30.720 --> 0:20:34.600
<v Speaker 2>retail market. Whether this experience overall, even if the fundamentals

0:20:34.600 --> 0:20:38.520
<v Speaker 2>are fine, will just dent demand going forward from retail.

0:20:38.720 --> 0:20:40.879
<v Speaker 1>My bet is always on people having short memories. But

0:20:41.119 --> 0:20:43.080
<v Speaker 1>right now, yeah, it's like no, one's like, oh, we

0:20:43.119 --> 0:20:45.199
<v Speaker 1>really need to do our retail private credit pressure right,

0:20:45.240 --> 0:20:47.080
<v Speaker 1>like not this week.

0:20:47.440 --> 0:20:49.320
<v Speaker 2>Not this week. I don't know. There's a lot of

0:20:49.320 --> 0:20:51.480
<v Speaker 2>planned there's like a lot of like interval fund type

0:20:51.480 --> 0:20:53.360
<v Speaker 2>things that are supposed to push out in the next

0:20:53.400 --> 0:20:56.480
<v Speaker 2>couple of months. So yeah, we'll see, we'll see, we'll see.

0:21:11.560 --> 0:21:16.600
<v Speaker 2>Speaking of private assets, you about thanks over, Let's talk

0:21:16.640 --> 0:21:18.919
<v Speaker 2>about what's going on in the ETF space. Why not

0:21:19.359 --> 0:21:24.680
<v Speaker 2>you know, all the while we're here, So we're talking

0:21:24.680 --> 0:21:29.840
<v Speaker 2>specifically about private companies because there's this fascinating ETF. The

0:21:29.880 --> 0:21:34.040
<v Speaker 2>government name is the er Shares Private Public Crossover ETF.

0:21:34.480 --> 0:21:41.439
<v Speaker 2>It's xover Crossover XOVR. It owns SpaceX, not outright, but

0:21:41.560 --> 0:21:46.919
<v Speaker 2>through a special purpose vehicle. And the SEC has a

0:21:46.960 --> 0:21:49.480
<v Speaker 2>cap on how much of an ETF, any open ended

0:21:49.520 --> 0:21:52.920
<v Speaker 2>fund can have in a liquid asset. It's fifteen percent.

0:21:53.440 --> 0:21:56.040
<v Speaker 2>The problem is that the CTF keeps running into is

0:21:56.080 --> 0:22:02.320
<v Speaker 2>that it keeps getting out flows, so it stake as

0:22:02.320 --> 0:22:05.080
<v Speaker 2>a percentage of the portfolio keeps going up. It hit

0:22:05.160 --> 0:22:07.879
<v Speaker 2>like forty four percent or somewhere close to it in

0:22:07.920 --> 0:22:08.960
<v Speaker 2>the past couple of weeks.

0:22:09.520 --> 0:22:14.240
<v Speaker 1>SpaceX's evaluation is like a quintuple the last years.

0:22:14.560 --> 0:22:17.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, morning Star has been very vocal on this, specifically

0:22:17.600 --> 0:22:20.480
<v Speaker 2>this man named Jeffrey Prattack. I hope that's I'm saying

0:22:20.520 --> 0:22:22.680
<v Speaker 2>his last name, right, that if you take a look

0:22:22.680 --> 0:22:25.920
<v Speaker 2>at the performance of the ETF, it doesn't necessarily reflect

0:22:26.160 --> 0:22:30.080
<v Speaker 2>the fact that SpaceX's valuation has quintupled, which is also

0:22:30.200 --> 0:22:31.120
<v Speaker 2>a big question mark.

0:22:31.520 --> 0:22:33.800
<v Speaker 1>Right, this is like the opposite of private credit. Like

0:22:34.240 --> 0:22:36.639
<v Speaker 1>private credit, everyone's like, oh, the marks are fine, everyone

0:22:36.640 --> 0:22:39.639
<v Speaker 1>like about these marks, and then this one. Yeah, like

0:22:39.640 --> 0:22:42.320
<v Speaker 1>those marks should be much higher. Yeah, which is weird

0:22:42.320 --> 0:22:46.000
<v Speaker 1>to me that people wouldn't usually people of marketings up.

0:22:46.720 --> 0:22:49.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, Well that's the big question there, like why, like

0:22:49.119 --> 0:22:51.760
<v Speaker 2>you would think that this fund is absolutely crushing it.

0:22:52.160 --> 0:22:53.800
<v Speaker 2>But morning Star has made the case that if you

0:22:53.840 --> 0:22:56.080
<v Speaker 2>take a look at the performance of this ETF, its

0:22:56.119 --> 0:23:01.640
<v Speaker 2>performance can be almost entirely explained by its public holdings

0:23:01.880 --> 0:23:05.200
<v Speaker 2>rather than it's SpaceX holdings, which again it's a it's

0:23:05.200 --> 0:23:10.520
<v Speaker 2>a question mark, why is that happening? Sure, that's that's

0:23:10.600 --> 0:23:11.160
<v Speaker 2>the big one.

0:23:11.800 --> 0:23:13.560
<v Speaker 1>I mean the answer, I mean, I don't know the answer.

0:23:14.520 --> 0:23:15.600
<v Speaker 2>I don't know the answer either.

0:23:15.640 --> 0:23:17.879
<v Speaker 1>We've looked at the SPV and the shares aren't there

0:23:17.880 --> 0:23:20.120
<v Speaker 1>and like oops, and they close up and forget about.

0:23:20.359 --> 0:23:23.520
<v Speaker 2>Well, that's one of the theories, right, is that the SPV, well,

0:23:23.640 --> 0:23:30.400
<v Speaker 2>the SPV that's like a very well, it could partly

0:23:30.400 --> 0:23:34.639
<v Speaker 2>be explained by SPV costs. There was a filing this

0:23:34.720 --> 0:23:38.040
<v Speaker 2>week where the firm said that in the prior period,

0:23:38.760 --> 0:23:42.399
<v Speaker 2>the funds like total expense ratio was one point one

0:23:42.480 --> 0:23:45.000
<v Speaker 2>eight percent, even though the management fee is only seventy

0:23:45.000 --> 0:23:48.159
<v Speaker 2>five bases points. And they said that they've since switched

0:23:48.160 --> 0:23:50.639
<v Speaker 2>to an SPV that has no management fee and no

0:23:50.760 --> 0:23:53.360
<v Speaker 2>carried interest, so this isn't going to be a problem anymore.

0:23:53.760 --> 0:23:55.320
<v Speaker 2>So it's going to be interesting to see how that

0:23:55.440 --> 0:23:58.280
<v Speaker 2>shakes out. But what we do know is that you

0:23:58.320 --> 0:24:01.840
<v Speaker 2>take a look at the this share of SpaceX, that

0:24:01.960 --> 0:24:06.080
<v Speaker 2>is this portfolio, and it is wildly above the SEC's

0:24:06.119 --> 0:24:10.720
<v Speaker 2>limit on how much you can actually hold liquid securities.

0:24:11.240 --> 0:24:15.080
<v Speaker 2>So the point being, this is a story that's developing

0:24:15.119 --> 0:24:16.480
<v Speaker 2>right now and it's going to be interesting to see

0:24:16.480 --> 0:24:19.560
<v Speaker 2>how it shakes out. And it sort of puts the

0:24:19.600 --> 0:24:23.200
<v Speaker 2>whole push on putting private assets, or at least private

0:24:23.240 --> 0:24:27.080
<v Speaker 2>companies in an open ended vehicle. Kind of takes the

0:24:27.119 --> 0:24:30.880
<v Speaker 2>shine off because with an ETF, you can take your

0:24:30.880 --> 0:24:34.320
<v Speaker 2>money out at any time. These funds ETFs aren't gated,

0:24:34.720 --> 0:24:37.840
<v Speaker 2>and that can cause your portfolio to do really funky

0:24:37.920 --> 0:24:40.359
<v Speaker 2>things if you have to sell your liquid assets and

0:24:40.680 --> 0:24:42.240
<v Speaker 2>it's not as easy to sell.

0:24:42.320 --> 0:24:46.359
<v Speaker 1>An SPV, I mean counterplant it's SpaceX. Yeah, right, this

0:24:46.440 --> 0:24:48.240
<v Speaker 1>is not a very good counterplint, right because like three

0:24:48.240 --> 0:24:49.720
<v Speaker 1>months ago, I won't want to be in croit credit

0:24:49.800 --> 0:24:52.360
<v Speaker 1>and now they don't. But like it is a counterplint,

0:24:52.359 --> 0:24:54.639
<v Speaker 1>which is that Yeah, people are like ooh, they're surprised

0:24:54.640 --> 0:24:56.920
<v Speaker 1>of having outfuds because people like you want to own

0:24:57.160 --> 0:25:01.720
<v Speaker 1>SpaceX and if their performance reflected that SpaceX shares, people.

0:25:01.480 --> 0:25:05.879
<v Speaker 2>Would want that flows follow performance. This is probably more

0:25:06.000 --> 0:25:09.439
<v Speaker 2>conversation around like SPVs, because there is an ETF that

0:25:09.520 --> 0:25:13.200
<v Speaker 2>does hold SpaceX outright. The ticker is ron B. It's

0:25:13.400 --> 0:25:19.960
<v Speaker 2>the Barren First Principles ETF. But they've also classified their

0:25:20.000 --> 0:25:23.240
<v Speaker 2>SpaceX holdings not as ill liquid but as less liquid,

0:25:23.280 --> 0:25:25.680
<v Speaker 2>which is something that I didn't actually really appreciate until

0:25:25.680 --> 0:25:28.680
<v Speaker 2>I started looking into the ron B ETF, that you,

0:25:29.400 --> 0:25:32.639
<v Speaker 2>as the portfolio manager, classified the liquidity of your holdings

0:25:32.640 --> 0:25:35.160
<v Speaker 2>to the SEC rather than the other way around.

0:25:34.920 --> 0:25:37.760
<v Speaker 1>Right, And by the way, like obviously they are incentives

0:25:37.800 --> 0:25:41.400
<v Speaker 1>the game that but like I kind of see why

0:25:41.480 --> 0:25:44.760
<v Speaker 1>someone would say SpaceX is kind of liquid, right, like, yeah,

0:25:45.080 --> 0:25:47.800
<v Speaker 1>it's a two trillion dollar company or whatever.

0:25:47.520 --> 0:25:51.400
<v Speaker 2>Really theoretically going public in the next couple of months.

0:25:51.480 --> 0:25:55.240
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but like also there's secondary trading. That's there's jillions

0:25:55.280 --> 0:25:57.760
<v Speaker 1>of best pieces. Like if you were like gone to

0:25:57.800 --> 0:25:59.680
<v Speaker 1>your head, you have to liquid out your SpaceX shares,

0:25:59.680 --> 0:26:02.240
<v Speaker 1>and we like you could do it at like today's prices,

0:26:02.280 --> 0:26:06.760
<v Speaker 1>you could, yeah, for hundreds of millions of dollars of size, right,

0:26:06.800 --> 0:26:09.560
<v Speaker 1>not for tens of billions of dollars. So I don't know,

0:26:09.560 --> 0:26:12.280
<v Speaker 1>I don't I don't have that. Like I keep saying

0:26:12.359 --> 0:26:14.679
<v Speaker 1>private markets and then in public markets, right, like the

0:26:14.680 --> 0:26:17.199
<v Speaker 1>there's a continuum of liquidity, and like SpaceX is more

0:26:17.240 --> 0:26:18.560
<v Speaker 1>liquid than a lot of publics.

0:26:18.560 --> 0:26:21.440
<v Speaker 2>Then yeah, well it's interesting. I mean, as far as

0:26:21.600 --> 0:26:25.280
<v Speaker 2>I can tell, this ETF hasn't liquidated any of its

0:26:25.280 --> 0:26:27.520
<v Speaker 2>SpaceX SPV holdings, right.

0:26:27.400 --> 0:26:31.080
<v Speaker 1>Also, why would it. Yeah, it's a marketing matter.

0:26:31.880 --> 0:26:35.560
<v Speaker 2>Well, probably to get below the fifteen per sure, fair fair.

0:26:35.440 --> 0:26:37.680
<v Speaker 1>But once you once you solve that problem by saying

0:26:37.680 --> 0:26:41.400
<v Speaker 1>it's liquid, then as a marketing matter, it's really better

0:26:41.480 --> 0:26:43.199
<v Speaker 1>to be like, hey, I'm an ATF that's full of

0:26:43.240 --> 0:26:44.960
<v Speaker 1>SpaceX than to be like, hey, I'm an ETF with

0:26:45.000 --> 0:26:46.560
<v Speaker 1>a little bit of SpaceX and all other stuff.

0:26:46.640 --> 0:26:50.800
<v Speaker 2>Barn for example, is somewhat of a special case. People

0:26:50.840 --> 0:26:53.600
<v Speaker 2>familiar with the matter have run this plan by the SEC.

0:26:53.720 --> 0:26:57.600
<v Speaker 2>Part of their reported logic in why they classified it

0:26:57.640 --> 0:27:00.320
<v Speaker 2>this way is that they've been investing in SpaceX since

0:27:00.359 --> 0:27:04.159
<v Speaker 2>twenty seventeen, and they have like an established and good

0:27:04.320 --> 0:27:07.480
<v Speaker 2>relationship with the company that it seems like they would

0:27:07.520 --> 0:27:10.600
<v Speaker 2>have an easier time getting their hands on more SpaceX

0:27:10.640 --> 0:27:14.560
<v Speaker 2>than maybe other firms and funds out there. I don't know,

0:27:14.600 --> 0:27:17.280
<v Speaker 2>like if any issuer could go to the SEC and

0:27:17.320 --> 0:27:20.520
<v Speaker 2>be like, actually, this private company, we think it's lost liquid.

0:27:20.560 --> 0:27:21.400
<v Speaker 2>It's not you liquid.

0:27:21.560 --> 0:27:24.720
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. I could sell SpaceX shares. This doesn't

0:27:24.720 --> 0:27:26.719
<v Speaker 1>seem like a big problem. The only thing I think

0:27:26.840 --> 0:27:28.879
<v Speaker 1>is interesting to these funds is I just said, like,

0:27:29.040 --> 0:27:30.720
<v Speaker 1>you'd rather be like, hey, this is an ATF with

0:27:30.760 --> 0:27:35.199
<v Speaker 1>SpaceX than like than cats and dogs in SpaceX. Yeah, Like,

0:27:35.960 --> 0:27:39.840
<v Speaker 1>there's obviously a demand very publicly traded a SpaceX proxy.

0:27:40.160 --> 0:27:44.600
<v Speaker 1>Despite how liquid SpaceX is, right And one thing I've

0:27:44.680 --> 0:27:48.080
<v Speaker 1>heard is that people talk about the ETFs as like

0:27:48.119 --> 0:27:51.560
<v Speaker 1>a trade where the trade is you buy the EHF

0:27:52.040 --> 0:27:55.040
<v Speaker 1>and like with with with exover, there's like a they

0:27:55.040 --> 0:27:59.040
<v Speaker 1>have like a sort of indexy mechanistic list of their

0:27:59.080 --> 0:28:02.840
<v Speaker 1>other public stocks. You buy the ETF, you short the

0:28:03.680 --> 0:28:06.119
<v Speaker 1>other public stocks, and what you're left with is a

0:28:06.200 --> 0:28:08.680
<v Speaker 1>trade that's just long ETF, short public stocks and the ETF,

0:28:08.720 --> 0:28:11.760
<v Speaker 1>so you're left with just long SpaceX. And I think

0:28:11.800 --> 0:28:13.639
<v Speaker 1>that that's like kind of a marketed trade of like

0:28:13.680 --> 0:28:15.680
<v Speaker 1>this is how you get your SpaceX exposure. You buy

0:28:15.720 --> 0:28:18.160
<v Speaker 1>this ETF and you hedge out in the public stocks.

0:28:18.400 --> 0:28:20.159
<v Speaker 1>Which reminds me a little bit of the trades you

0:28:20.160 --> 0:28:23.240
<v Speaker 1>talked about with with Arc of Hollywood's rc ETFs, where

0:28:23.280 --> 0:28:27.040
<v Speaker 1>those ETFs looked like they might get allocations and hot

0:28:27.040 --> 0:28:29.840
<v Speaker 1>IPOs and so people would heartbeat into the ETFs to.

0:28:29.760 --> 0:28:30.399
<v Speaker 2>Get some.

0:28:32.080 --> 0:28:34.199
<v Speaker 1>But this is like this is like a sort of

0:28:34.520 --> 0:28:38.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, way to isolate SpaceX exposure, if that's the

0:28:38.080 --> 0:28:40.560
<v Speaker 1>sort of thing you're looking for, which I feel like

0:28:40.600 --> 0:28:42.120
<v Speaker 1>a lot of public market investors are.

0:28:42.480 --> 0:28:46.360
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, perhaps this fund did run up quite a bit.

0:28:46.400 --> 0:28:48.760
<v Speaker 2>I mean it grew to like one point eight billion

0:28:48.800 --> 0:28:50.480
<v Speaker 2>dollars in assets at one point, and I have to

0:28:50.560 --> 0:28:54.080
<v Speaker 2>imagine that was entirely because it was marketed as having

0:28:54.120 --> 0:28:58.880
<v Speaker 2>SpaceX exposure. But it's since seen pretty significant outfloads.

0:28:59.040 --> 0:29:01.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so it doesn't go up allow SpaceX shows that

0:29:01.600 --> 0:29:10.760
<v Speaker 1>it's not a very good SpaceX proxy. And that was

0:29:10.760 --> 0:29:11.920
<v Speaker 1>The Money Stuff Podcast.

0:29:12.200 --> 0:29:14.360
<v Speaker 2>I'm Matt Levine and I'm Katie Greifeld.

0:29:14.560 --> 0:29:16.680
<v Speaker 1>You can find my work by subscribing to The Money

0:29:16.680 --> 0:29:18.680
<v Speaker 1>Stuff quletter on Bloomberg dot.

0:29:18.480 --> 0:29:22.000
<v Speaker 2>Com, and you can find me on Bloomberg TV every

0:29:22.080 --> 0:29:25.240
<v Speaker 2>day on the Clothes between three and five pm Eastern.

0:29:25.520 --> 0:29:27.320
<v Speaker 1>We'd love to hear from you if you can send

0:29:27.320 --> 0:29:30.720
<v Speaker 1>an email to Moneypod at Bloomberg dot net, ask us

0:29:30.720 --> 0:29:32.720
<v Speaker 1>a question and we might answer it on the air.

0:29:32.960 --> 0:29:35.560
<v Speaker 2>You can also subscribe to our show wherever you're listening

0:29:35.600 --> 0:29:37.480
<v Speaker 2>right now and leave us a review. It helps more

0:29:37.480 --> 0:29:38.320
<v Speaker 2>people find the show.

0:29:38.920 --> 0:29:43.280
<v Speaker 1>The Money Stuff Podcast has produced Moses On and Alexis HoTT.

0:29:43.720 --> 0:29:46.320
<v Speaker 2>Our theme music was composed by Blake Maples.

0:29:46.720 --> 0:29:50.200
<v Speaker 1>Amy Keen is our executive producer. Thanks for listening to

0:29:50.200 --> 0:29:52.720
<v Speaker 1>The Money Stuff Podcast. We'll be back next week with

0:29:52.840 --> 0:29:53.520
<v Speaker 1>more stuff