Terry Smith's Perplexing Letter; Samsung's Monster Numbers; Checking In On Tobacco/Nicotine Stocks $PM $BTI

Summary

Chit Chat Stocks – Power Hour

Episode: Terry Smith's Perplexing Letter; Samsung's Monster Numbers; Checking In On Tobacco/Nicotine Stocks ($PM $BTI)

Date: July 10, 2026
Hosts: Ryan Henderson & Brett Schafer

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Ryan and Brett dive into a richly varied investing week just before earnings season kicks off. The focus centers around Terry Smith’s highly-discussed semi-annual Fundsmith letter and the firm’s surprising investment strategy shift. Other timely topics include: key regulatory developments for tobacco & nicotine stocks, explosive earnings results from Samsung revealing the scale of the semiconductor cycle, and an extended “bubble watch” segment exploring industry fads, space tech, and the latest in AI investing metrics. Rounding out the hour are engaging listener questions and quick takes on durable business moats, index inclusion, and branded sponsors.

---

Key Segments and Insights

1. Terry Smith/Fundsmith Letter — Conflicts & Adaptation

[01:57-15:54]

Main Points

• Terry Smith’s latest letter is labeled controversial and “perplexing” for marked contradictions:
  • Heavy criticism of momentum investing and passive fund inflows (the “closet momentum investor” dig), followed shortly by Fundsmith’s own pivot toward incorporating momentum considerations.
• Smith’s fund underperformed (down 3% 1H 2026, MSCI World Index +11%), partly attributed to lack of AI/semiconductor exposure.
• Portfolio changes include exiting high-profile names (Nike, LVMH, Intuit) and adding names like Applovin, GE Vernova, Netflix, TSMC, Uber, MasterCard.

Quotes & Notables

• On passive flows and style changes:

  "We run open ended funds and you have been increasingly taking money out, we suspect to join the exodus from active to passive, or possibly to invest in managers who profess they understand quality better than we do... However, there will be little point being proved right about the dangers of passive or momentum investment after our fund has closed." – (Ryan quoting Terry Smith) [06:10]

• On adapting to momentum:

  “We will take more account of momentum, both fundamental and share price, in our investment decisions... In the current momentum-driven market, buying shares in companies which have hit a glitch is like trying to catch the proverbial falling knife.” – (Ryan quoting Terry Smith) [08:05]

• Brett notes:

  “I actually kind of like the ones that he's switching into a little bit more… TSMC, Uber. I like more of the Nike, Novo Nordisk, Unilever as durable growth engines… Maybe we need to make the shirts now, Ryan: I love catching falling knives…” [10:37]

Host Analysis

• Ryan and Brett agree there’s a tension between Fundsmith’s rhetoric and its actions; likely driven by pressures of managing open-ended funds and needing to show results in the short term.
• Both point out individual investors have a clear advantage: unconstrained time horizons and the ability to buy into short-term underperformers (the "falling knives") for robust long-term returns.

---

2. Tobacco/Nicotine Stocks – Regulatory Tailwinds and Sector Check-In

[16:00-23:54]

Main Points

• Recent FDA guidance permits manufacturers to sell new vapes/nicotine pouches while under regulatory review, potentially favoring established players like Philip Morris International (PM) and British American Tobacco (BAT).
• Certain Zyn (nicotine pouch) products granted “Modified Risk” designation—a notable regulatory win.
• Headline valuations and yields for the “Big Three”:
  • PM: PE 26, yield 3.1%
  • BAT: PE 13, yield 5.3%, 20% non-cigarette revenue
  • Altria: PE 15, yield 5.8%, mostly combustibles, less innovation
• Discussion about HAYPP Group (Nordic online nicotine marketplace) and dividend durability.

Quotes & Notables

• On sector appeal:

  “Tobacco dividends can be more addictive than the products themselves.” – (live chat comment, Brett reads) [22:19]

• Ryan:

  “The most attractive for me right now is BAT… but I’m not in love with any of these just because opportunity cost. You can get a lot of decent businesses right now at a mid teens earnings multiple.” [22:32]

---

3. Microsoft/Xbox Layoffs & The Perils of Acquisition Bloat

[23:54-35:03]

Main Points

• Discussion of massive, candid Xbox layoffs (30% of staff), with executive emails outlining “unhealthy” business metrics and 14 layers of management (!).
• Past aggressive M&A strategy (e.g., Activision Blizzard acquisition for $69B) now seen as a case study in integration failure, bureaucracy, margin erosion, and unclear strategy.
• Brett floats the idea of spinning off Xbox; both hosts agree consolidation of studios caused problems.

Quotes & Notables

• On Xbox management:

  “Our business today is not healthy. We are operating at margins that are three to ten times lower than comparable platforms… In a typical year, we lost 64 cents for every dollar we invested.” – (Asha Sharma, Xbox CEO, read by Ryan) [26:30]

• Ryan:

  “It’s no wonder a lot of these did not blend well together… It seems like the right thing for them to do at the moment [to lean up] but I’d be concerned as a shareholder how it came to this.” [29:19]

• Laughs over Microsoft's 225 acquisitions; hosts debate which, if any, were truly impactful. [31:11]

---

4. Durability Check: Rollins & Pest Control as a Safe Haven

[35:23-39:42]

Main Points

• Rollins (Orkin brand) experiencing its largest drawdown (-30%) in 25 years; otherwise a compounder delivering 13.8% annualized returns since 1990.
• Pest control highlighted as a business resilient to technological (AI) disruption, with stable revenue and pricing power, though current multiples may still be high.

Quotes & Notables

• Ryan:

  “I can’t think of anything further away from AI disruption risk than pest control.” [36:59]

• Brett:

  “If someone goes ‘I got all these cockroaches’, whatever it costs, get them out of here.” [38:02]

• European peer: Rentokil noted as cheaper but also in a rough patch.

---

5. Samsung’s Massive Earnings – Memory/Chip Cycle Exposed

[41:10-45:59]

Main Points

• Samsung reports blowout preliminary quarterly profit ($58.5B USD, +56% QoQ, ~19x YoY).
• Hosts enumerate top global companies: many are now semiconductors/memory and related equipment suppliers.
• Both express “bubble watch” caution: the cycle feels toppy, as semiconductor profits soar and capital expenditure balloons (e.g., SK Hynix raising $28B, others making huge bets).
• TSMC praised for more measured, relationship-centric expansion.

Quotes & Notables

• Brett (with awe):

  “That would be a 56% jump from the previous quarter’s record and… a 19x growth year over year.” [41:50]

• Ryan:

  “These numbers are outrageous… It’s got to be awesome if you’re an employee at that company and about to get a $400,000 bonus… but it’s hard to imagine that competitors don’t come chasing after this profit pool.” [44:28]

---

6. Bubble Watch: SpaceX, Blue Origin and AI Nonsense Metrics

[46:20-54:52]

Main Points

• Blue Origin valued at $130B following first outside fundraising—seen as a “penny stock” compared to SpaceX (now $2T, with $8–10T 2030s price targets published by Wall Street!).
• Discussion on the capital cycle in satellites/space tech; current constraint is launch frequency, not saturation.
• AI bubble symptom: new “EBTIT” metric—Earnings Before Training, Interest, and Taxes—highlighting a tendency to strip out enormous core costs for more flattering metrics.

Quotes & Notables

• “Earnings before AI training… This is the new default metric for lab reinvestment and the best source of truth where cash economics sit for the inference business. That is a horrendous metric for AI labs…” – Ryan [50:58]
• Brett (re: Raymond James $800 SpaceX target):

  “The market cap is a cool $2 trillion, so… that puts us in between 8 and $10 trillion [target]. It’s got to feel crazy actually hitting publish on that…” [53:05]

---

7. Listener Q&A and Quick Hits

[54:52-62:21]

• Topics: Index inclusion front-running (“I hate when index inclusion drives up price…” – Ryan [55:51]), the myth/oscillation of “K-shaped” economies, World Cup sponsors as portfolio picks (Visa, Mercado Libre, AB Inbev, etc.), and why bottlers (e.g., COKE) have dramatically outperformed the main Coca-Cola stock.
• Brett: “Tobacco dividends can be more addictive than the products themselves.” [22:19]
• Stats: Coca-Cola bottling company (COKE) total return of 400% in 5 years vs. 76% for KO [61:03]
• Closing: Eagerness for next week’s earnings (bank/insurance/semiconductor reports), listener feedback requests, and friendly reminder that nothing discussed constitutes investment advice.

---

Memorable Quotes

• “I love catching falling knives”—Brett, on buying into temporarily beaten-down stocks [10:37]
• “Our business today is not healthy… margins that are 3 to 10 times lower than comparable platforms…”—Asha Sharma read by Ryan, on Xbox [26:30]
• “Can’t think of anything further away from AI disruption risk than pest control”—Ryan [36:59]
• “Earnings before AI training… that is a horrendous metric for AI labs.”—Ryan [50:58]
• “Tobacco dividends can be more addictive than the products themselves.”—Chat comment [22:19]
• “The most attractive for me right now is BAT”—Ryan [22:32]

---

Timestamps by Segment

• [01:57] – Terry Smith/Fundsmith Letter Dissection
• [16:00] – Tobacco/Nicotine Sector Analysis
• [23:54] – Xbox, Microsoft, and Acquisition Overreach
• [35:23] – Rollins/Pest Control As Compounder Safe Haven
• [41:10] – Samsung Results & Semiconductor Bubble Watch
• [46:20] – Blue Origin, SpaceX, and Deep Tech Valuations
• [50:23] – AI Bubble & EBTIT: “Earnings Before Training” Metric Discussed
• [54:52] – Listener Questions: Index Inclusion, K-shaped Economy, World Cup Sponsors
• [62:21] – Closing/Next Week Preview

---

Tone

Conversational, analytical, and clearly skeptical—especially of investment fads, frothy multiples, and “creative” performance metrics. The hosts blend humor ("I love catching falling knives"), direct critiques (of Xbox, Fundsmith’s letter, and AI excesses), and practical takeaways geared towards individual investors willing to take the long view.

---

For New Listeners

This episode provides incisive, real-world perspective on high-profile event investing, illustrates the ongoing importance of critical thinking—even as headline narratives shift—and features practical assessments of quality, momentum, and the behavioral challenges of investing at both the fund and individual level. Whether you’re market-weary or eager for next week’s earnings fireworks, Ryan and Brett blend candor, skepticism, and stock-picking wisdom in a way that’s accessible and smart.

Transcript

[A]

For the past three years, IBKR individual clients averaged 24.3% annually, beating the S&P 500's 23.1%. Lower costs and 170 plus global markets matter. Interactive Brokers Member SIPC Visit ibkr.com performance welcome to Chit Chat Stocks, a podcast that helps you find your next great investment. I'm one of your hosts, Ryan Henderson, and I'm joined today as always by the one and only Brett Schaefer. And on this episode, this is our Investing Power Hour. We do these weekly every Thursday at 5pm Eastern Time live on YouTube. If you ever want to check us out live and ask questions, head on over to YouTube. Look up chit chat stocks 5pm eastern time on Thursdays. You'll be able to find us pretty easily and we talk all things financial markets on these episodes this week. It's a little bit of a drier week, news wise. We're heading into earnings season, I believe earnings season officially starts next week, but we got a couple in interesting tidbits. We got Terry Smith's investment firm dropping one of the most controversial investor letters in recent history. We have Microsoft announcing some big layoffs across sales roles and primarily at Xbox, which I think we could talk about that. I called the title here for that segment how not to run a business because it the we'll get into it. But the post looked more like an indictment on poor management. We've got companies trading at low multiples. We've got tobacco news. We've got Samsung earnings which I guess one of the biggest companies in the world now. So certainly going to hit that and then a bunch of bubble watch as well. But I'll leave it there. Brett, welcome to the show. Where do you want to start, Ryan?

[B]

I think we should start with the Terry Smith News. Condolences to you, Ryan. I know it was a tough week for you in your sports fandom. Sad all around for the United States. But maybe we'll talk about that at the end if we have any filler. I don't even think Ryan wants to talk about it at this point. But yeah, let's talk about Terry Smith. What I read the letter. I didn't make any notes. I kind of read it last night. What were your thoughts, Ryan? Because this was out of the blue and there was a lot of people that quipped this is the type of thing you see the capitulation from a quality or value investor perspective at the market top.

[A]

Yeah, the letter struck me as extremely conflicting. There was it there were definitely old man yells at clouds vibes a little bit here. And I'm not trying to discredit Terry Smith in any way, but I feel like so often we see investor letters that just spend endless amounts of time talking about how index funds are advantaged by passive flows and how passive flows are creating this giant bubble that they don't benefit from and that one day it's going to swing the other way and it just feels like kind of Groundhog Day with some of these investor letters. That was a bit the case with this. But you, you'll see at the end he made some changes to his company's investment approach, which were controversial to say the least. Let's get into this dive into the letter. This was the semi annual letter. So half year 2026 update the company. The investment firm is actually called Fundsmith. So if you look up Fundsmith letters, you'll be able to find them. From January 1st to June 30th, 2026, the fund was down basically 3% net of fees. That actually isn't, I mean, compared to the MSCI World Index and compared to The S&P 500, that's really poor. MSCI World Index was up 11% this year. I think the S&P 500 up was up even more because of all the ties to the AI cycle, or super cycle if we want to call it that. And I think a lot of people were kind of knocking him for the performance, but I would. So he's probably not the only person that had performance like this in the first six months this year. Like, if you weren't tied to AI or semiconductors, it's very likely that you could have had returns like this. But all that is to say, it's been a rough last couple years in total since inception. They are still beating the market if, if using the MSCI World Index. And they have annualized 13% net of fees. So, you know, if you've been an investor for a long time, you're still doing all right. But as I'm reading this letter, I was getting kind of frustrated because the first five pages of this investor letter were basically an explanation and evidence of how index funds benefit from passive flows and how it creates basically indiscriminate buying for certain companies. And his focus is basically the opposite of that, finding quality companies that are going to trade at discounts or that trade at discounts to what he thinks they can earn, his company thinks they can earn. So I'm going to give a few quotes. This is kind of the first one that's talking about fund flows, he says. You might say, and we indeed say, that is exactly what we are trying to do by focusing on investing in companies with good fundamental business and financial characteristics and at at least reasonable valuations or better. However, there's another factor at work here, fund flows. We run open ended funds and you can and increasingly have been taking money out. We suspect mostly we suspect mostly to join the exodus from active to passive, or possibly to invest in managers who profess they understand quality better than we do. They may be right, or they may just be closet momentum investors, which will be fine until it isn't. However, there will be little point being proved right about the dangers of passive or momentum investment after our fund has closed. There's one thing I want to take away from that. It's this line. We run open ended funds and you can increasingly and have been increasingly taking money out, we suspect to join the exodus from active to passive, or possibly to invest in managers who think they understand quality better than we do. He also calls them closet momentum investors. Now, whatever. I mean that's, I guess you could say that's fair. It kind of feels like he's taking a dig at the managers that have been doing well recently by calling them kind of secretly momentum traders. But whatever, in a vacuum, that wouldn't be the end of the world. Here's where it kind of caught me off guard. About five paragraphs later, he says the following it is against this background that we are implementing some adaptation or adaption in our fund management process. We will take more account of momentum, both fundamental and share price, in our investment decisions. In particular, we will be much less willing to deploy the time honored technique of buying quality companies when they hit a glitch. This was used to good effect, for example, by Warren Buffett to buy Berkshire Hathaway's stake in American Express during the Salad oil scandal and by us in buying Microsoft at the end of Mr. Ballmer's tenure as CEO. But in the current momentum driven market, buying shares in companies which have hit a glitch is like trying to catch the proverbial falling knife. All we are getting is cut fingers as their downward share price spiral is exacerbated by the index momentum enhancement effect. The so that's kind of where I'm caught up in it. I feel like this is extremely contradicting. He basically knocks people for being closet momentum investors and then says we're adapting, we're implementing more momentum to our strategy, which I thought was a little bizarre. I'm going to Give one more quote here. This is more on the portfolio changes which we can talk about that I think that's more of an interesting discussion but here's what he said. During the six months ended June 30th we executed a series of trades which reflect this attempt to adapt our strategy to suit the current and expected market conditions. We began accumulating stakes in Applovin, ge, Vernova, legrand, mastercard, Netflix, nextpower, Sage, the TJX companies, tsmc, Uber, Viva Systems and Yum Brands. We have exited or have started exiting Atlas, Copco, Coloplast, Esselor, lxotica, Intuit, lvmh, Magnum, Ice Cream, Mettler, Toledo, Nike, Novo, Nordisk, Otis, Unilever, Zoetis and I don't know the other one. I want to get your thoughts on this Brett but for me pointing to underperforming because you didn't have enough momentum exposure or you didn't get the benefit of passive funds and that you're kind of a victim of people pulling money out one that's not a novel concept to them that that's part that's foundational to the way they structure an open ended fund. But there's also there was just misreads here on their part. LVMH was they didn't struggle because of passive flows. They struggled because they saw declining growth like for 12 straight quarters and China was a huge market for them that turned around quickly. Nike's struggled for other reasons. There's like it felt like there was fundamental flaws in some of their investment decisions that seemed to be overlooked from this letter.

[B]

Yeah, I'm showing this right now. I was showing this while you were talking. It is probably and I think listeners ourselves at some point have felt this in the last few years. It shows a chart of MSCI US Momentum versus MSCI us. So I'm just the broad market index and the outperformance is by far with the only one even somewhat close in 1999 just crushing it quarter over quarter it's 25 Alpha for momentum so that's probably what he is feeling here. But I agree with you. The the hatred on catching falling knives, the switching potentially the bottom or sorry the top using this as an excuse. I look at these stocks I actually kind of like the ones that he's switching into a little bit more. I don't know if I would chase a GE Vernova after it's gone on such a massive run app love. And I have questions on the business model but again they've probably Done more research than us. Netflix, MasterCard, TSMC, Uber. I like more of the Nike, Novo, Nordisk, Unilever as durable growth engines. Again, tsmc. A little cyclical there, but maybe we need to make the shirts now. Ryan, I love catching falling knives because if you're an individual, I think this is a clear example that if you don't care about a few quarters of underperformance, there can be advantage of buying at the a stock that you. Everyone expects to go down another 20%, but the expected returns, if you're right over the long haul, five to 10 years can be quite great and you don't have to worry about people pulling out money.

[A]

Yeah, this is actually this whole letter is a perfect example of the advantage that individual investors have over a fund manager like this. You're dealing with fund redemptions. You have to report your performance every six months, probably more regularly actually. But at least you have to give commentary on it. Or you've chosen to give commentary on it every six months. It, of course, is going to condense their time horizons. When they look at investments, there might be something where they say intuit's going to be fine in 10 years. In fact, it'll be over the next 10 years. We think it'll make a great investment, but over the next six months we think it's going to suck and. Or it could potentially have more downside to go and they aren't buying it for that reason. That is a huge advantage for the individual investor. It's like, I mean, if it's. Yeah, if you're able to look out more than four quarters, this is. It's quite. It's just more evidence that you can find some good companies here, I think.

[B]

Yeah. One that stands out to me is Intuit. I know it fairly well. Not an expert on it. We've gone over it on a recent episode. The other one I thought was funny was Magnum ice cream. Maybe that'd be a good one to look at. I know we don't like somewhat of the CPG at the moment, but Pepsi reported today actually and they've been doing all right. Maybe the GLP1 headwind is ending. We'll see. We have a comment here in the live chat that says and it's from Andrew Marshall, past guest. Listen to the podcast. It's my hot take is that he's not even switching his style that much. He always bought stuff that I thought was super overpriced for growth in the name of quality. He's doing the same again. If you go From Intuit to Sage. How does that make much sense? I've used both products extensively. I like QuickBooks. It seems to be a better product. Yeah. Who are we looking at recently? Was it Acrid funds? Feels similar where.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[B]

You buy quality at 45 times earnings. I'm not shocked. This has been the performance. Now the thing is this is when you're supposed to tell investors hey, there's going to be periods of underperformance when there's a huge bull market thing that we're not attached to. But through the market cycle, the down years, we're going to outperform because of the high quality nature of the businesses we own. I feel like this is the time to buy quality that's not AI related. Do you agree?

[A]

Yeah. Yes I do. And there's like, I don't necessarily, I don't disagree with most of the portfolio decisions that were made here. Andrew in the comments mentions selling out of Intuit to buy Sage. Maybe there's some here that you could disagree with but selling Nike at probably more than 20 times earnings, again they're in sort of margins are compressed. When you can buy MasterCard at probably a similar multiple. I think this is, that's not really momentum to me. That's just you're upgrading the quality of your portfolio like in. In fact I think some of these companies weren't that high of quality to begin with. I don't think that highly of Nike. Obviously there's, there's some pricing power there but at this stage I think they face a lot of competition.

[B]

You research your investments, you analyze markets, you manage risk. But did you research your broker? For the past three years, IBKR individual clients averaged an annual return of 24.3% compared to 23.1% on the S P 500. IBKR's lower trading cost compared to competitive rates, efficient execution and access to more than 170 global markets helped investors keep more of what they earn and put more capital to work over time. The broker you choose matters. Interactive Brokers member sipc. If you care about performance, find out why the best informed investors choose interactive [e-mail] performance. Maybe it's a good excuse to have a lot of turnover. It is an interesting letter. I guess I was looking for more since it went semi viral. Maybe that's. As we said, it's been a slow news week. This is something to talk about during earnings season. I don't think many people would be discussing this because right now and maybe it's because it's the summer and it's the World cup this year. There's before earnings season. There's absolutely nothing. Keep listening to the show. We're gonna have some fun listener questions, baby. But anything relative with news, it's going to pick up over the next few weeks. This week I was kind of scrounging around and speaking of, I thought it'd be fun. We haven't talked about the tobacco and nicotine companies in a while. There's been some news out there. Little regulatory tailwinds in the United States, maybe. Here was a quote from the Wall Street Journal. British American Tobacco could be a big winner. From recent changes to how the FDA will police smokeless nicotine products in the future, the regulator issued guidance that effectively allows manufacturers to sell new vapes or oral nicotine pouches while their premarket tobacco product application is being reviewed. That's just kind of the regulatory approval. And this means better competition against illicit vapes as well as getting more pouches and ebay products to market quicker while still under review. On top of that, there was approval for certain not flavors, a type of Zinn. It's all complicated on exactly how this plays out when there's so many different products and approvals and what have you. But they could be marketed as almost like Nicorette as a way, as a healthier way to quit cigarettes, which again, if you can actually market that, all the better. We look at the stocks here. I'm going to list off the big three. Of course there's some smaller ones out there. Philip Morris International, owner of Zyn, you know, the early leader in nicotine pouches, losing a little share, but still a strong player there. Strong leader by far in the European and Japan and Asia market with the iqos heat not burn product. And then they also have some vaping as well. They're at a PE of 26, dividend yield of 3.1%. British American Tobacco, PE of 13, dividend yield of 5.3%. And Altria, well, I should say British American tobacco has about 20% revenue from non cigarette business. They own Camel, some other ones out there. Philip Morris international is above 40%. And ultra group, which is the Philip Morris USA has a P15 dividend yield of 5.8% but is mainly combustibles, hasn't really had a viral product. I'll let you go first on this discussion. Question, Ryan, what one is the most attractive today and do any of them make the watch list as a potential buy in your portfolio?

[A]

I still keep an eye on Philip Morris. I think of the three there, the one I'd be the most interested in is probably British American Tobacco. The news with Zinn, I'm just going to read it off here. It says the FDA has authorized 20 specific Zyn nicotine pouch products to be marketed as Modified Risk. So there are like very specific 6 milligram versus 3 milligram what flavors, that kind of thing. My question here is, is this better for Zyn if other companies get this benefit as well and they can do more marketing? Because for a long time one of the big advant for the leading cigarette companies was that marketing was prohibited and you couldn't really. There wasn't any new entrants, there wasn't any new startups that could really win. I don't know if this has any massive implications for marketing because I've already seen a bunch of marketing for these. Maybe that's illegal, but I think there's

[B]

specific things and you can't. Now you can specifically try to target people that are trying to quit cigarettes like Nicorette, the, the gum. But I, I don't think a lot of people that are using nicotine pouches are necessarily doing it to quit cigarettes. It's kind of an expansion category. Someone said we'll never forget the Swedish match got ripped away from us. Yeah. At one point. But right now they probably would be in a little bit of a drawdown just because of the market share losses that they have. I know they had a more diversified business. Hape Group or Hap Group. I think it might be Haype. The ticker is H A Y P P. I think it's listed on the Nordic Exchange. Is the new play here. Have you guys had a look at it? We have, but not for a little while. Where are we trading at here with this stock? Ryan, have you looked? You might have been typing while I was going. Hate group. We're at 135 last five years we're up 100%. It's a little off a little bit from all time highs says the PE is 200 something. But I think that's probably misleading just because they're reinvesting. For anyone who doesn't know one actually go to our old recurring guest Devin Lasar who covers them on Invariant in much detail. I think actually The HAPE Group 1 might be one of his only complimentary research reports. But they are a basically a bunch of websites and online marketplaces for buying things like nicotine pouches and nicotine products that are legal to buy online. And they kind of are an SEO business and do well with that.

[A]

You know who is the first to pitch that to us? Spencer Sabelli. Actually I think he pitched that to us a few years back and it's

[B]

done well since then.

[A]

Yeah, good for Spencer.

[B]

Chris here says that tobacco dividends can be more addictive than the products themselves. That is true. Well, not as much anymore. Yeah I like bat. I like British American bag a little bit more right here.

[A]

I'm still not in right now. I am not in love with any of these just because opportunity cost. I think there's. I think you can get a lot of decent businesses right now at a mid teens earnings multiple which I guess British Americans a little on the lower end you're getting Earnings multiple of 13 with the guaranteed dividend yield or the guaranteed dividend payments. I yeah, I'm with you. The most attractive for me right now is bat.

[B]

I agree. I agree. Yeah. And over the last five years these stocks have all done I think a total return in the high teens annualized. So not as good of an opportunity most likely as it was five years ago. We have a comment here back on Intuit. I know we've talked about them a lot. We don't have to talk about it for too long a lot to like about Intuit but here in Norway we have auto filed statements that has been checked and adjusted by the user. Is the US moving in the same direction? I'd say likely no or over. It's going to be over a decent time period. Right. But even if that happens they are a diversified business and there will probably still be uses for TurboTax and if that faces a lot of headwinds. They also have QuickBooks and I think other stuff honestly but I don't know the business that well.

[A]

Yeah I think there's a lot of murmur and chatter right now about TurboTax being potentially disrupted. The the higher value use cases are growing so people getting like with with more complex tax returns. They are paying for the TurboTax professional assistance. So you're getting higher ARPU from the TurboTax business. I do think maybe and maybe this is what led to the market share loss this year. There will be pressure on the simpler tax filers But I think TurboTax some of the concerns are maybe overstated at the moment. I think there's a lot to like. I think QuickBooks is a good business. I I'm pretty interested there. Let's shift gears. I want to talk about how not to run a business. Last week on Twitter Asha Sharma The CEO of Xbox announced published an email that she sent to her team internally. This was intended to explain the rationale behind a massive round of layoffs. It however, I'd argue it reads more like a exhibit on how not to run a business, on how an acquisition strategy can go wrong.

[B]

That other guy, that old guy. Not old, the old head.

[A]

Spencer.

[B]

Yeah, it used to be a nice interview. He's compelling interview. I don't. Maybe that's a red flag because if you're so charismatic, well, maybe you're going to underperform those expectations.

[A]

There is.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And maybe there's just something to the fact that like the gaming community in general is very like against companies maximizing profits. Like there's always so much pushback it seems like with with gaming companies in the gaming community and maybe that bleeds into the talent they attract. But let's go through some of this announcement. So I'll just read a couple quotes. She says we are beginning the most significant restructure in Xbox history. After careful consideration, I've made the difficult decision to reduce our team by approximately 3200 throughout fiscal year 2027. That's equivalent to about 30% of the Xbox staff. So it's a huge layoff. More quotes. Our business today is not healthy. We are operating at margins that are three to 10 times lower than comparable platforms and publishing businesses. Since 2018, we have aggressively expanded our studio portfolio. While the number of games created each month across the industry now outpaces the last 10 years combined, it is neither possible nor desirable to own every great independent studio. We have also learned that we are not the best home for every type of studio. In a typical year, we lost 64 cents for every dollar we invested. These are some concerning quotes. A couple more here. Today, in some parts of the company, work passes through as many as 14 layers of management. Our platform teams are 40% larger than they were at the start of this generation. Even as our player base and playtime have declined, that complexity has slowed decisions, blurred accountability and made it harder to deliver for players. We will reduce management layers to no more than 5. And where possible, 3. 5 is still a lot of management layers. Right.

[B]

At a large company, that feels fair.

[A]

Yeah, I guess. I just. I mean how. I mean maybe if it's going from dev to studio head to Xbox head,

[B]

but yeah, that makes sense. That's a good goal. I feel that's a fine goal.

[A]

That is an astounding number though. Work passes through as many as 14 layers of management.

[B]

It's tough. Yeah. There's a lot of bureaucracy out there in the world. It's crazy how profitable these companies are despite this. Maybe they do this because they're so profitable. It's kind of a chicken and egg thing. They're allowed to do this. You know, the cash flow is going down. They need to find new ways to.

[A]

You're talking about Microsoft as a whole.

[B]

Yes, yes.

[A]

Because I get the sense here that Xbox has been losing money probably forever.

[B]

Except maybe that golden age where they kind of were gaining market share in the. What would that be? The Xbox 360 days

[A]

prior to acquiring every gaming studio they heard of. Yeah. What are your thoughts on Ryan, last quote? Last quote. As Xbox grew our headcount, we became more fragmented. Teams, studios and functions often operate independently. And it became harder to work towards a shared goal, make the right trade offs and get things done. This sounds horrifying for trying to be like a productive individual. If you're working in the finance department in Xbox, it sounds horrible. I mean you think about they acquired and maybe you could go through the list. I wasn't even able to get through it all. But they have acquired so many gaming studios. All these companies work on different systems. They have different management teams, they have different priorities, they have different ethos, different cultures, different customer bases. It's no wonder that a lot of these did not blend well together. I mean this was obvious even at Activision, which had their own studios which had like so much political problems, some like terrible HR problems. It's. If you were an Activision shareholder, you know what I'm talking about. It was like shocking that Microsoft went ahead and bought them some of these steps. It seems like the right thing for them to do at the moment, to lean up the business and it'll probably improve productivity. But if I were a shareholder, I would be a bit concerned how it came to this. And maybe you're thinking, well, it doesn't matter, it's Microsoft. They're so big, they generate so much cash, whatever. But Xbox is still, I mean it accounts for 5% or so of the workforce. They spent 60, so there's probably a lot of operating expenses there. They spent $69 billion on Activision Blizzard. You're telling me you wouldn't rather have had that invested in AWS or I mean Azure or given back in the form of repurchases or dividend or something like there is real money waste here that is somewhat substantial to the business and it's not contributing to the profits.

[B]

Guess how many acquisitions Microsoft has made since Inception a quarter of Wikipedia. I'll give that a. Give this a 90% confidence. That's the correct number.

[A]

I'll say 16.

[B]

Oh way off. 225.

[A]

Yeah. I knew I was. I had a feeling I was undershooting. Yeah.

[B]

Now how many of those have been meaningful?

[A]

Do you mean help like good Microsoft

[B]

or meaningful Meaningful to Microsoft's long like what's their market cap today to not 2 trillion, 4 trillion.

[A]

I would say none of those have been meaningful. Activision Blizzard may go down as one of the worst acquisitions of all time for the size.

[B]

Yeah. Wasn't the worst price.

[A]

I mean they bailed out shareholders.

[B]

Yeah. They, they. Let's see. Skype. No.

[A]

What do you think of an Xbox spin off?

[B]

I. I think I said that at some point. Yeah. I'm trying to look at these. Sorry. I'm scrolling through the acquisitions. I guess they made some early ones that could have been impactful for building Microsoft Office. So who knows. I like it for Microsoft. You could maybe raise some money. I actually don't like it for Nintendo. My beloved Nintendo that is still stuck in the mud. Talk about a memory chip loser. Because they've been competing with an inept organization with 15 management layers. Maybe it's not gonna matter because Nintendo and Sony seem so far ahead as well as PC, you know, Steam and what have you. But yeah, I'd rather, I'd rather Vexbox keep spinning in circles here.

[A]

It's. So we've got a comment here. Within gaming. Here's a random shout. G5 Entertainment making mobile games targeted at 40 to 60 year old women. Quite interesting niche but questionable business. Yeah. I mean King Games was that effectively too right with Candy Crush.

[B]

But I like this type of business. Yeah.

[A]

I don't. I just don't want to be involved with gaming. It's so competitive. Nintendo is sort of a one off because there's so much brand value and it's sort of its own ecosystem. But even, even then, I mean Nintendo would be better off if PlayStation and Xbox didn't exist and some of the other streaming platforms. So it just feels so competitive to me and it's. Habits change so often. It's hard to find a truly, truly durable gaming franchise that just grows with every iteration. Maybe Grand Theft Auto, but that's about it.

[B]

Yeah. I'd say Nintendo's brands are pretty durable.

[A]

Durable. Yes. But are more people. You might actually have these numbers. Are more people actively playing Mario Kart today than they were than 10 years ago when the Switch.

[B]

Yeah. But at a previous High on the Wii, probably slightly higher. Ten years ago it was a trough for sure.

[A]

Okay, when the Switch first came out, do you think there's more people playing Mario Kart today?

[B]

On the Switch, active players were like 20 million and now they're up to 120. But it hasn't grown the last few years. So we'll see if the Switch 2 can deliver even more growth. But the last few years it's stagnated at 120ish. I think maybe it's actually 130.

[A]

I've also. I think part of it is I just have scars from investing in gaming companies and Activision performed poorly for me. Electronic Arts was. Yeah, talk about a company that is just running in place. Oh yeah, it has some. It's only play within gaming. Ish on my list is 10 cent but China makes it hard. Yeah.

[B]

Someone says gaming is as fickle as apparel with trends. I wouldn't say it's that bad. And you have some control where for example Nintendo owns in this situation Amazon as well as makes all the shirts for Amazon. It's a little bit better.

[A]

Yeah. I just. It's not an industry that interests me. An industry that might be a little more interesting. Pest control. Rollins is currently in their largest drawdown in 25 years. First of all, I found this astounding that they're over the last 25 years the largest drawdown they've had is 30%. That's pretty talk about stable.

[B]

Do you have the total return since inception? If not, I'll look it up.

[A]

I can pull it up real quick.

[B]

I'll pull it up. You go through your notes.

[A]

I mean there's not a lot of notes here. Honestly my only thinking oh, they're just. They're a pest control roll up. So Orkin brand is probably the most notable. But they do. I mean it's a critical service that is not going away anytime soon. That was more my interest than anything about looking into this was you talk about all the companies I've looked at in the last year. Every one of them has a fairly compelling bear case which I guess is why these drawdowns happen. And a lot of them seem to be tied to AI. So you know Accenture 7 times cash flow but AI disruption risk. Adobe 10 times cash flow but AI disruption risk. Rawlins. I can't think of anything further away from AI disruption risk than pest control.

[B]

But that's fair. Once they deploy Optimus too, those costs are going to come down. True. Yeah, I guess. Yeah. I make too many optimist jokes. All right. The total return since 1990 according to our friends at Fiscal AI use our link. People have been doing that and get 15% off any paid plan that is fiscal AI slash chitchat. All one word link is in the show notes. It has been 13.8% annualized or over a hundred bagger. Even with this drawdown. That's all you need I guess is 14% returns for 36 years and then you got your hunter bagger. Sounds easy, right?

[A]

Yeah, well yeah, obviously in hindsight but the it's just you think about something so critical. I just feel like the revenue growth is pretty straightforward here with pricing power.

[B]

Yeah. If someone goes I got all these cockroaches. Whatever it costs, get them out of here.

[A]

Yeah. And there's probably some advantages to working with commercial partners for or commercial customers. When you have a national brand like Orkin you can kind of do bigger kind of ongoing services deals that are countrywide than a smaller partner might be able to. So yeah, I am interested but EV to EBIT from what I saw I think is still around 30 times. So there's probably some more attractive things at the moment. I shouldn't write it off purely from valuation or headline multiples but biggest drawdown

[B]

in 25 years, 10 year revenue CAGR 9% it's been a durable grower. 5 year 9.73 or 7.8 if that's the slight revenue slowdown that's causing this drop off. Could be a buying opportunity. But I agree 30 times durable growth. Yeah. You can maybe get that 10% return plus capital returns of the revenue growth. Besides that I agree there might be some better stuff out there. Let's see. Tobias in the chat says pest control is investable. Rentokil was a quality darning here in Europe but had a rough period. Is in a turnaround at the moment. Still worth a look. Way lower multiples than Rawling but also quality. Okay, maybe Rentokil give it a European counterpart at a lower valuation. Yeah, I like it.

[A]

You know what I am actually so I'm probably going to look into Rollins more but it's still on the watch list. Something that I did come across that I am actually interested in and this happened I think in the last two weeks. Mobility Global spinoff Carfax, very durable business. And I think there's a whole bunch of investors that ended up with Mobility Global shares in their accounts and wondered what the hell is this? And probably sold it. There's probably a lot of institutions that have market cap mandates that Sold it.

[B]

What do they do down is it's car Fox Carfax. Show me the car.

[A]

It's the. It's the S and P Global spin off.

[B]

Ah.

[A]

And they own carfax.

[B]

Is.

[A]

Is the majority of the business. Yeah.

[B]

All right.

[A]

It's down slightly from its highs two weeks ago. But yeah I. It makes sense why so many spin offs perform poorly initially like in that first week or so because people probably that's not why they invested in S and P Global and there are a lot of funds that just probably can't own it either. So sort of a lot of indiscriminate selling set up there. Let's keep moving. We've got Samsung earnings. We've got.

[B]

Let's talk about that. Do you want to. You want to go through that first? I have Blue Origin as well. Bubble watching question that should probably take us home. The last 20 minutes here I've been looking at some small caps the week but maybe I will say that for next time. There's actually been quite a few at least I think Write up some value Besters club. You can sign up for that for free. They are, you know been a good time. It's kind of hit or miss over there for stuff that you like or that Ryan and I like. Samsung earnings they did preliminary release I think that's nice for the news cycle because there's not much going on as we said right now. Don't worry. Next week earning season starts. Here's a quote. Samsung said in a preliminary earnings report that its operating profit likely reached an all time high of about $58.5 billion in USD for the three months ending in June. That would be a 56% jump from the previous quarter's record and I believe and I don't have it in my notes here that is a 19x growth year over year. I went through on a road trip.

[A]

Those numbers are so insane.

[B]

Yeah, I went through on a road trip. The top 25 now this is quite fun. Market cap companies in the world did a guessing game with people and I was shocked at how many are still semiconductors and memory companies.

[A]

I would guess 7.

[B]

Yeah let's go 1. Nvidia hyperscalers you know as well could be included. TSMC 6 Broadcom 8 Samsung 12 Micron 13 SK Hynix 16AMD 19 ASML 20 Intel 24 Applied Materials 26 Applied Materials is the 26th largest company in the world now. Lamb Richards 29 that is. That's a lot. That is a lot tied up in the Memory trade it feels, or just the computer chip trade in general. Be greedy when others are fearful, I guess. I, I know that's such a cliche. Be fearful when others are greedy. People chasing things like what Sandisk? Other things like that. Yeah. Another example here. These companies are earning just absurdly record profits and that's great for long term shareholders. I mean you were right. But right now it's almost like the opposite of Terry Smith where I feel so afraid of capitulating and chasing all this. There's that famous Druckenmiller quote when he bought the exact top of the NASDAQ bubble of 99 or would have been early 2000 at that point. I don't know when that happens but man, there, there's a lot. Okay. People go, well they're earning, it's going to continue. Apple is already trying to get approval to buy Chinese memory and the unlock here, the capex that all these companies are spending is massive. So the supply is coming online. I think we talk about this every

[A]

week but we've been saying the supply is coming online for two years.

[B]

Well it takes years to come online.

[A]

Yeah. I think we're probably like 2/4 away from Fundsmith announcing that they bought positions in Micron, coreweave, Samsung and Nebius. No.

[B]

Yeah, the neoclad revolution. It.

[A]

These numbers are outrageous. Like the revenue and profit numbers are unbelievable. Just in comparing them to a year ago, like it's got to be awesome if you're an employee at that company and you're about to get a $400,000 bonus or whatever. But it's hard to imagine that competitors don't come chasing after this profit pool.

[B]

Yeah, but it's, it's. I think the TSMC has the better strategy. They don't price too much. People stick around with them because they treat their customers well. Even though they could price gauge gouge. Same with asml, they could price gouge but then that would incentivize everyone to look for other options with memory chip players. They are just incentivizing everyone to throw money at the wall to get rid of them. Feels a bit short sighted. Yeah.

[A]

And TSMC didn't triple capex this year. They didn't just go full blown capacity expansion as much as they can. They've been gradual about it. They've been I think methodical about it. Making sure they're booking orders in advance, making sure these are. I remember listening to one of the conference calls and CC Way was like, yes, we are conducting like thorough investigations of our customers that These orders are legit like where they're coming from, what the. What the demand is. So I think they've gone about it in a much better way. But the music is playing. Brett.

[B]

Yeah, you got to dance SK Hynix. They're raising. We're going to do every 28.

[A]

28 billion.

[B]

28 billion. Again another cliche. When the ducks are quacking, you got to feed them. I think they're going to keep getting fed until valuations normalize. Should we talk about the pride of Kent, Washington Blue Origin?

[A]

True. Yes.

[B]

Apparently they have a market value of $130 billion. They raised their first funds ever raising $10 billion until now is rumored to be 100% controlled by the founder Jeff Bezos. Probably was closer to 99 or something like that just because other people might have one of a piece of the action. It was generally until things have ramped up in recent years been funded by I think about a billion dollars of sales of Amazon stock every year. Here's a quote. At Blue Origin the company has been racing to ramp up production and operations and is aiming to deploy its own communications satellite fleet in addition to developing the AI satellite Constellation. Curious what that product will be. Is that just AI data centers in space? The visualization there.

[A]

I don't know.

[B]

It's not going to look like a giant building. You don't need the protection from the outside world in space or you need less of it. And it says it needs to make sure its rocket can be reused and launched at a good pace while also rebuilding the launch pad that blew up that they poured a billion dollars into to build. What do you think? 130 billion dollar valuation. Would you buy? Would you get in good for Bezos.

[A]

He obviously needed this needed the help. The makes sense timing wise for him. I think he probably would have fetched a much lower valuation a year ago prior to SpaceX going public. But now it feels $130 billion valuation. I mean it feels like pennies when when you compare it to SpaceX evaluation. So yeah I think it makes sense. There's. It's probably good long term that there's competition here in the half chance that Starlink starts to create some sort of Starlink and SpaceX create any sort of monopoly. I think the competition is good. The I'd say I'm rooting for him. I. I am. Bezos is number one on my Mount Rushmore of executives. I like him. Did you notice he was. They did a little Bezos spotlight at the US World cup game.

[B]

We. I'M not sure he was as loud as some of the, the European South American fans.

[A]

Probably not.

[B]

Probably not, no. Yeah, I did see that. Although my mind was not in a great point, in a great spot at that point. Yeah, what was I going to say here? Okay, other question regarding space and satellites. Does satellites follow the classic capital cycle where we're seeing restricted supply right now, so everyone's trying to just get in on this backlog, build as much as possible. We're seeing across the board Rocket lab, Blue Origin, SpaceX, AST, Space Mobile, others and others and others. Does it eventually follow that capital cycle theory where we're going to see a glut at the end? It feels like a type of industry that could be cyclical. I would just be concerned about it and would want to invest on the other side. And some of these higher quality companies I think are out there. Like Rocket Lab.

[A]

Yeah, maybe eventually, but I don't think right now there's enough launch frequency for any, for there to be any sort of satellite glut in the short term.

[B]

It's the opposite at the moment.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, but valuation, how many launches are there a year?

[B]

Do you want me to look?

[A]

There's SpaceX does what, 30? No. Maybe?

[B]

No, they do in between 100, 200 I believe.

[A]

Yeah,

[B]

yeah.

[A]

Long term there's always the possibility, but I, I think they're so launch constrained at the moment that it's, it's unlikely anytime soon.

[B]

Yeah. It says half by SpaceX, 200 to 300 per year. 2025 actually was a record breaking 324. So we probably have to get into the thousands before there's any sort of concern that there's no room for the payloads.

[A]

Yeah. Do we want to talk bubble watch? Sure.

[B]

There is. This was, I don't even know how to say what this was, but there's a new earnings multiple, Ryan. And it's, it's. This is from a serious article. Earnings before training, AI training, interest in taxes. Otherwise I'm not even going to pronounce it this family friendly show E B T I T say that your minds. This is the new default metric for lab reinvestment and the best source of truth where cash economics sit for the inference business. Yeah.

[A]

How is that all the cash economics or taking out all your costs are in training? I don't know but funny acronym. That is a horrendous metric for AI labs. I mean let's just strip out our biggest cost and call it the most indicative of our profitability.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

That is There are so many things that feel toppy lately that you kind of can't help but laugh. But simultaneously I'd be a little worried as an index investor at the moment

[B]

and don't chase momentum maybe. Yeah, this feels like the.

[A]

Yeah, yeah. I mean stream stuff. Yeah. On like some of the outrageous valuations, the neo cloud businesses, stuff like that. Yes. Tons of froth. But I mean there's froth at the index level too. It's. Yeah, some concern.

[B]

Here's another one. Another win for Anthropic. Our guy Ben Bernanke, ex Fed chair is joining the governance board. Is he gonna have some research theses on the Great Depression and the great financial crisis? I'm not sure what he's going to do here. Any thoughts there? Before I move on to the great team at Ray Raymond James, I'm trying

[A]

to think of what the advantage is here for Anthropic to have Bernanke on his on their board.

[B]

Probably dealing with politics. They seem to be terrible with that. That meant.

[A]

Is Bernanke still involved there?

[B]

No, I'm saying that Bernanke had to deal with politicians. I didn't know how the Federal Reserve work. Federal Reserve worked, which can be frustrating to say.

[A]

Yeah, that's fair.

[B]

So painting a proper narrative maybe could be helpful. But what about this? This is the true bubble watch of the week. Raymond James sets a SpaceX price target at $800. We are currently at 150 and the market cap is a cool $2 trillion. So I think that puts us in between 8 and 10 trillion dollars. I believe this is like 2032 or 2035 number.

[A]

Yeah, that's a. It's got to feel crazy actually hitting publish on that price target. I know often price targets are done essentially just to garner business on. On the commercial side or the investment banking side.

[B]

But you got to have a good track record though at some point.

[A]

Where are the ethics here? And every. All the commentary I see around SpaceX is like a lot of it has nothing to do with the business. This is going to be a good investment because it can get NASDAQ 100 inclusion, it can get more investors and it's like when your investment thesis is predicated on the next investor that is usually a really horrendous sign. Now if it's whether or not you believe it earnings related and if you think there's just the extreme earnings power at the business, then whatever. I'm at least fine with you working on a real thesis. But yeah, who knows, maybe it works. Maybe they're right.

[B]

All right, listener questions from the substack chat join for free. The link is in the show notes SpaceX inclusion in the NASDAQ 100 as Ryan just mentioned. Was it front run? Yes, it always is. There are people out there much smarter than us doing such things, probably making a lot of money on this. I generally don't think about this except for the fact in situations where someone gets kicked out of an index and then that can lead to for selling and a potential buying opportunity. So for individuals like ourselves, for any listener, I feel like the best opportunities are not necessarily when something's going to get included in an index because if anything there's going to be front running on that and get it overvalued. The opposite. You want people to sell it, right? You want to buy at the lowest price. You have any thoughts on that, Ryan?

[A]

I hate when index inclusion drives up price just because it feels, I don't know, unfair unless it happens to my stocks. The always nice remitly recently got included in some S&P 600 index I think and I feel like the stock's just been going up casually every day for like a month. Hey, if it happens to me, it's, it's fine. But yeah, I don't know. Index inclusion, it's so. I hate the games that are played around it. I hate the idea that people are making money purely by front running. Index inclusion.

[B]

Okay, other listener question how do you guys see the K shaped market playing out in the medium to long run? Obviously no one has a crystal ball, but we'd be interested on your take. Well, it seems like the data from the last quarter that we've seen from some investment bankers that are doing this research for us and tweeting it out and making blog posts is that we're actually seeing a closing slightly of the K shaped economy. The lower end has apparently been performing much better recently. Maybe we're seeing some solid wage growth. There's opportunities opening up because of the immigration crackdown potentially that could have had an impact on there. I don't necessarily think about this, but I would guess given just how the last 150 years of economic history has gone, we're going to see just some oscillations. Sometimes the rich get richer, sometimes wealth conscience comes back more to the middle class. It seems like it's just oscillation and I don't have any investment theses based on it.

[A]

No, I'm the same way. It always, I feel like I'm always hearing about K shaped economy and how like it's a. It's a bull market for the rich and a bear market for lower income but always seems like that's always the case if you look at the. I mean if you look at the commentary from like Walmart's management team, Dollar General, stuff like that. It's not like we are so screwed. We're not you know these customers are completely nothing left. It's yeah these our consumers are slightly pinched but it's not the end of the world.

[B]

They're still spending credit performance has been fine. You haven't seen any total blow ups there. All right, other question. Perhaps this is a little late now but a fun episode idea might have been to choose your own choose your own portfolios from World cup sponsors only be it sponsors of teams, the competition and stadiums I'm gonna go with Michelob Ultra. That's the one I remember Play for the Ultras Ryan. That's the one I remember. Who owns trying to think through.

[A]

Yeah I think that's AB and Bev. Well no we can't do any. I can't support Anheuser Busch because I don't support any Belgian companies this this month.

[B]

No that's true. Are they actually Belgian?

[A]

I think AB InBev is.

[B]

Yeah they started out it could be German. Yeah it's in that beer belt if

[A]

you want to call it that beer belt. I'm trying to think through all the sponsors here. We've got okay. Rakuten, Mercado, Coca Cola, Visa, Visa, Aramco. No surprise there since the 2034 World cup will be in Saudi Arabia.

[B]

Qatar Airways.

[A]

Qatar Airways. Mercado Libre is a big one. I have been enjoying those Airbnb commercials.

[B]

Yeah I heard it's not true though I heard they they misled not that

[A]

anyone still a good commercial.

[B]

It still works. Yeah I remember it the

[A]

as far as stadiums go generally speaking not a fan of companies that do stadium sponsorships because it used usually seems like a red flag and sort of a vanity project in a way but it doesn't matter because the the they don't get to sponsor the stadiums anyways. It's not Sofi stadium, it's Los Angeles stadium.

[B]

So Lumen A I play no probably

[A]

shoot maybe of this list I would say Mercado Libre or Visa. Did I ever show you the performance of the Coca Cola leading bottling company compared to Coca Cola itself?

[B]

No.

[A]

We have one minute the bottling company has. Bottling company has crushed Coca Cola.

[B]

What's it called? Is that the one that's called Coke.

[A]

Yeah, it's ticker is C O K. Yeah, Yeah. Coca Cola, the bottling company. Total return over the last five years is four, almost 400%. Coca Cola, the beverage company, about 76%.

[B]

Wow. I wonder what the starting PE was. Let's take a quick look. All right. Gotta click the right button here. It's loading. It's loading. P.E. what year? 20. 2018.

[A]

Sure.

[B]

No, no, no, no. 15. That's probably why in Coca Cola what do they always trade at? 30 or consumer staple.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Wonder if there's any accidental investments in the bottling company. The what does. What does a great consumer staple deserve to trade at? What return would you.

[B]

How fast you're going. That's the question. Should.

[A]

Does Coca Cola deserve. Should you expect bond like returns out of Coca Cola?

[B]

Yeah, 4 to 5%.

[A]

Yeah, I think that's what do they own.

[B]

Do they have anything that's growing quickly? The sticking monster Topo Chico.

[A]

Yeah, this is probably one of those just never going to really interest me. Too big. Too well followed. Too slow of a grower.

[B]

Maybe if I was 60. All right, well next week hopefully we'll have a more exciting show. I think we try to keep it somewhat entertaining. Bank earnings Tuesday, J.P. morgan, bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo. We had all the big hitters Wednesday ASML Progressive. I guess if that excites you.

[A]

Hey, and maybe there'll be a two part read through there.

[B]

Good, good. People seem to like that episode and they want us to do costar next. So maybe that should be your next stop research episode. We did cover them briefly I think on the 10 stock kind of whatever is the mixer that we did Thursday. It's going to be Taiwan Semiconductor, UnitedHealth. Always a good look through Netflix, GE Aerospace. A lot of fun stuff next week. Ryan, anything else before we get out of here on this power hour?

[A]

No, I think that's going to do it. Best of luck to all the listeners this earning season. We want to remind everyone that Brett and I are not financial advisors. Anything we say or discuss here on Chitchat Stocks is not formal advice or a recommendation. We may buy, sell or hold any of the securities discussed in this podcast. Thank you all for tuning in. We'll see you next time.

[B]

Sa.