SpaceX Files for Historic IPO & Dating Apps Pivot to IRL Events

Summary

Morning Brew Daily – Episode Summary

Date: May 21, 2026
Hosts: Neal Freyman & Toby Howell
Main Theme:
This episode of Morning Brew Daily dives into the highly anticipated SpaceX IPO filing, the ongoing saga of real estate listings disappearing from Zillow, Target’s surprising turnaround, and the evolving landscape of dating apps moving from endless swipes to real-life experiences. The hosts blend sharp business analysis with laid-back banter, offering key stats, industry context, memorable moments, and their own candid takes.

---

1. SpaceX IPO: A Peek Into the Black Box

[02:30 – 10:09]

Key Discussion Points:

• Historic IPO Filing: After years as a "financial black box," SpaceX's S-1 filing became public, offering unprecedented insight into the company’s operations and finances.

• Financial Highlights:

  • 2025 Revenue: $18.7 billion (up 33% year-over-year)
  • Capital Expenditures: over $20 billion (doubled)
  • Net Loss: $4.9 billion
  • Target Valuation: Nearly $2 trillion

• Three Business Segments:

  • Space: Rocket launches for satellites/payloads.
  • Connectivity (Starlink): Over $4 billion in revenue.
  • AI: $818 million revenue—with much smaller numbers compared to Twitter’s $1.2 billion in 2022, as pointed out by Dan Primack (Axios).

• Elon Musk’s Unorthodox Grip:

  • Elon owns ~50% of shares but more than 85% of voting control due to super-voting share structure.
  • “85% of a company this size is just absolutely unheard of.” – Toby [05:57]
  • Wild incentives: Elon can earn a billion in restricted stock not just if the valuation hits $7.5 trillion, but if SpaceX establishes a permanent Mars colony with 1 million inhabitants.

• Growth Vision Driving the Valuation:

  • Discussed sky-high multiples (80x sales, while most mega-caps are at 7-10x).
  • Core to this bullishness is Musk’s vision of orbital AI data centers and interplanetary expansion.
  • “When you're betting on SpaceX in their IPO ... you think that Elon is a single handed visionary ... [to] drive the next AI/space age.” – Neal [07:24]

• Starship Hinges on Everything:

  • The Starship vehicle is crucial to SpaceX’s future—enabling massive payloads for satellites and orbital data centers, as well as potential ultra-fast “point-to-point” terrestrial travel.
  • “They need this giant rocket to work, which it hasn't really worked so far.” – Toby [08:33]

• IPO Fever:

  • SpaceX’s move is set to spark “a historically insane IPO year,” with OpenAI and Anthropic said to be close behind.

Notable Quotes:

• “This was probably the most highly anticipated S1 filing of all time ... it's been a financial black box.” – Neal [04:21]
• “Elon just commands an insane revenue multiple that no other CEO can.” – Neal [05:48]
• “Most people are looking to drive EBITDA, Elon is trying to colonize Mars.” – Toby [06:52]
• “If you're investing in SpaceX, you're investing in Elon's vision of a space-bound human population.” – Neal [07:24]

---

2. Zillow vs. Compass: Chicago Listings Vanish

[10:09 – 13:27]

Key Discussion Points:

• Sudden Disappearance: Thousands of Chicago area home listings vanished from Zillow due to a legal/industry battle involving Zillow, Compass, and Midwest Real Estate Data.
• Issue: Compass encourages “private listings” (homes are discreetly shopped among agents pre-publication), while Zillow has a 1-day rule requiring all listings to be public quickly.
• Feud Fallout: MRED blocked Zillow’s access to data on 43,000 properties, leaving buyers and sellers caught in the crossfire—only 2,000 Chicago for-sale listings on Zillow vs 8,600 on Realtor.com.
• Debate:
  • Compass: Public listing histories (e.g., price cuts, time on market) can hurt sellers.
  • Zillow & critics: Private listings can foster backroom deals, limit exposure, and disadvantage consumers.

Notable Quotes:

• “As if the home selling or buying process wasn’t stressful enough, the companies in control ... are in an all-out brawl.” – Neal [11:35]
• “It all comes down to: do you want transparency?” – Toby [12:16]

---

3. Target’s Pleasant Surprise: A Retailer on the Rebound

[13:27 – 15:38]

Key Discussion Points:

• Q1 Results: Target reports its biggest same-store sales increase in four years, raises revenue forecasts.
• Credit to Leadership: CEO Michael Fiddle Key (former intern) credited for focus on store experience, tech, and merchandise.
• In-Stock Inventory Woes: Inconsistent inventory remains a top customer complaint, but the company is addressing supply chain issues.

Notable Quotes:

• “Guests are responding in areas where we are leaning in and driving change.” – Michael Fiddle Key, via Neal [14:09]
• “Their problem was always they were stuck in the messy middle ... now it’s about making the store delightful and stocked.” – Toby [14:22]

---

4. Dating Apps Pivot: Swipes Out, IRL Connections In

[15:38 – 18:51]

Key Discussion Points:

• IRL Experiences & AI Overhaul:
  • Tinder now hosts in-person events (pickleball, silent discos).
  • Bumble dropping traditional swipe in favor of AI-powered matching.
  • New features: speed dating, group dates, enhanced ID verification.
• Stock Troubles: Both Bumble (down 90% since IPO) and Match (down 75% over five years) drive change.
• Swiping Fatigue: 80% of users report emotional/mental exhaustion, indicating the experience is broken.
• Leadership: Spencer Rascoff (ex-Zillow) now heads Match Group and Tinder, major strategic pivots underway.

Notable Quotes:

• “The people controlling the apps are admitting that, yeah, swiping sort of broke everything. Now we’re trying to fix it.” – Toby [16:59]
• “The real question for me: Is it better that now algorithms are going to be matching people, versus your own desire swiping?” – Toby [18:13]
• “Maybe less AI and more pickleball as the solution to all their issues.” – Toby [18:46]

---

5. Neil’s Numbers: Quirky Stats for Your BBQ

[20:35 – 26:51]

1. Tipping Trends ([20:35]):

   • Americans tip one percentage point less on weekends.
   • In heavily religious counties, Sunday lunch tips drop nearly 0.9 points; possibly tied to church donations and competing spending.
   • “It made me look inward at my own tipping.” – Toby [22:27]

2. Geologists’ Grim Fates in Movies ([23:03]):

   • One-third of movie geologists die, mostly by murder, then accidents, then aliens.
   • 85% painted as good guys; only 11% are women.
   • “I think every profession should examine how they’re portrayed in movies.” – Neal [25:27]

3. Indy 500’s Mind-Blowing Scale ([25:31]):

   • Largest single-day sporting event: 350,000 attendees
   • Infield fits landmarks like Yankee Stadium, Taj Mahal, Vatican City
   • “They put down 8 miles of hot dogs and bratwurst ... the biggest party.” – Toby [26:51]

---

6. Quick Headlines & Quirky Ephemera

[27:42 – 31:42]

• Bezos’ Pro-Billionaire Defense:
  • Critiques NYC's mayor for “vilifying” billionaires and touts tax reform—no income tax for bottom 50%;
  • “Jeff Bezos doesn’t grant many interviews like this, which is why these quotes were going viral.” – Toby [28:51]
• Schlitz Beer’s Quiet Goodbye:
  • Once storied Milwaukee staple, now brewing final batch after 177 years.
  • “Drink Schlitz or I’ll kill you” ad campaign infamously tanked the brand. – Neal [30:50]

---

Memorable Moments & Banter

• “Most people are looking to drive EBITDA, Elon is trying to colonize Mars.” [06:52]
• Pickleball emerges as the unsung hero of modern daters’ social lives [18:46]
• In movie logic, it’s apparently dangerous to be a geologist and heroic to be a podcaster (unless you’re the villain) [25:31]
• Schlitz lore: Brands can survive centuries—but not bad ’70s ads [30:50]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• SpaceX IPO: 02:30 – 10:09
• Zillow Listings Battle: 10:09 – 13:27
• Target's Turnaround: 13:27 – 15:38
• Dating Apps Pivot: 15:38 – 18:51
• Neil’s Numbers (Stats): 20:35 – 26:51
• Bezos & Schlitz Headlines: 27:42 – 31:42

---

Tone

The episode features breezy, quick-witted business journalism, packed with fun stats, memorable analogies (“derpy dragon” business segments), references to pop culture (“Survivor” mishaps, pickleball dating), and a blend of skepticism and admiration for tech visionaries.

---

In summary:
From the “Mars or bust” ambitions inside SpaceX’s IPO to why Chicago home shoppers can't find listings—and why your date might be waiting at a silent disco rather than in your DMs—this Morning Brew Daily episode covers the most compelling business news with humor, insight, and just the right amount of side-eye.

Transcript

[Narrator/Advertiser]

Consider this comparison. PwC data found the percentage of CEOs who report revenue gains or cost reductions from AI is almost equal to the percentage who say they're still stuck. What separates these two groups? PwC points to a clarity issue. Even for CEOs, it's hard to tell what's AI hype, what's reality, and where this tech can make a tangible difference. Learn where AI can actually make an impact and what successful adoption looks like at pwc.com us brewai that's pwc.com/us/brew AI

[Neal Freyman]

good morning, brew Daily Show. I'm Neal Freyman.

[Toby Howell]

And I'm Toby Howell.

[Neal Freyman]

Today, why are thousands of homes disappearing from Zillow?

[Toby Howell]

Then the big One is here. SpaceX officially filed for its IPO. It's Thursday, May 21st. Let's ride.

[Neal Freyman]

Not even TV vets like Jeff Probst are immune from messing up. Last night on the live finale of Survivor 50, the host mistakenly revealed who lost the fire making challenge before that tape segment aired to viewers, spoiling to everyone which contestants would make it to the top three. After a lot of confusion on the set where a bewildered probes asked what just happened? The show went to commercial and when it returned, he handled it like a pro. So I love doing live television, he said and called it the last twist of the season. It's called a peek into the future.

[Toby Howell]

It made me so grateful, Neil, that we have nothing to spoil on this show because I don't know if we could handle it with as much grace and aplomb as Jeff Probstad. Although I will say, the day after my sister got engaged, I congratulated her on the show. And apparently I wasn't supposed to do that. So that's the biggest thing that I have spoiled. It's not exactly something that millions of people are hanging on every word. But Jeff, if you want to come on this podcast to discuss. We all make mistakes. Have your people talk to our people. And now a word from our sponsor, LinkedIn Ads. Neal, have you ever had a not so fun talk with a CFO before?

[Neal Freyman]

No, because I've never made a bad investment in the pursuit of reach, reactions and impressions. Not once ever. Certainly not one that cost a lot of money.

[Toby Howell]

Well, CFOs love LinkedIn ads. They generate the highest ROAS. 121% of all major ad networks reach the right buyers with LinkedIn ads. You can target by company, industry, job title and more.

[Neal Freyman]

So advertise on LinkedIn, the network that works for you.

[Toby Howell]

Spend $250 on your first campaign on LinkedIn ads and get a $250 credit for the next one. Just go to LinkedIn.com/mbd. That's LinkedIn.com/mbd. Terms and conditions apply. A rocket ship of a company filed to go public yesterday and it's a company that makes rocket ships. Space X's IPO filing finally gave everyone a look under the hood of Elon Musk's Frankenstein monster of a business. First takeaway it makes a lot of money. Revenue grew 33% last year to reach $18.7 billion, powered by its Starlink satellite business. The second takeaway? It spends a lot of money. Capital expenditures doubled to over $20 billion as the company plowed cash into designing rockets and training AI systems. In total, the company lost $4.9 billion, which will test investors appetite considering it's targeting a nearly 2tr dollar valuation. That valuation is propped up by a three headed monster that looks more like the meme where two heads of the dragon are fierce and one is a little derpy. SpaceX has three business units. Space, which includes rocket launches that bring payloads like satellites to space. There's connectivity, which includes its Starlink Internet business, which brought in over $4 billion in revenue. And there is AI, which let me give you this stat courtesy of Dan Primack from Axios Twitter, had a $1.2 billion of revenue in Q1 2022. Space X, the entire unit, including X, grok and all AI compute, brought in only $818 million in Q1 2026. That is less than Twitter. So that's the Derpy Dragon. But eventually Elon hopes they can all work together in perfect harmony, using rockets to launch satellites that bring GPUs to space to build data centers which will train its AI models. That's the vision at least. Neal, this was the big one. What did you take away from getting a peek at Space X's financials?

[Neal Freyman]

Just big picture. This was probably the Most highly anticipated S1 filing of all time because for as much as we talk about Space X and it permeates our culture and the business world, it's been a financial black box. We don't know how much money. We didn't know until 12 hours ago how much money it made or lost, it's been private forever. So SpaceX was founded in 2002, which was before Metta, which has been public forever. It was founded before Tesla was Tesla was founded in 2003 and went public in 2010. It was founded before Uber, which has been public for a long time. So Space X has been this mystery box that we just haven't been able to see inside and we finally are able to see inside. So it's been just a nice, it's like it's been a nice reward for all of us who have been covering this company for a long time. My takeaway is that there are very few companies that command this type of valuation with this kind of financials. So SpaceX wants to go public at a valuation of at least $1.5 trillion. It made $19 billion last year, lost about $5 billion. Now it's targeting the same valuation as Metta, another company I mentioned. Metta had sales that were 11 times SpaceX last year and profits of $60 billion compared to SpaceX which lost $5 billion. Tesla, which has, which would have a lower market cap than Space X, did five times the amount of Space X revenue last year. So my big takeaway is that Elon just compare and commands an insane revenue multiple that no other CEO can. And it's because of this growth potential that he sees with SpaceX.

[Toby Howell]

Yeah, I'm going to quote Dan Primack again who said his immediate reaction to the SpaceX S1 filing was it's not, it's a big company, but it's not as big as many of us thought. Because yeah, when you put it in context of that Tesla revenue like wait, Tesla is a much larger company in terms of the money it actually makes. Let's talk about Elon though, in his compensation plan, because it's a very Elon compensation plan. First of all, he owns around 50% of the company's entire shares outstanding. And then based off of the class of shares he owns, he has more than 85% of the shareholder votes because of some super class voting share structure. That is crazy. He has. We talk about ironclad grips on companies like go back to Meta again. Zuckerberg has control over the voting shares. 85% of a company this size is just absolutely unheard of. But it's goes back to why Elon wanted to keep Space X private for so long. He didn't want to have to answer to shareholders. Now that he is entering the public markets, he wants that control. Also, there's just some funny things in the his incentive package. If Space x reaches a 7 and a half trillion dollar valuation and establishes a permanent Mars colony with 1 million inhabitants here, what are your KPIs network? You would get 1 billion in restricted shares as well. Yeah, most people are looking to, you know, drive ebitda, Elon is trying to colonize Mars and that is apparently a very important part of the company's growth path going forward.

[Neal Freyman]

Let's talk about the growth path because we talked about how insane the valuation is. It's like 80 times sales compared to mega cap companies which are more around like seven or ten times sales. So if you're investing in Space X, you're investing in Elon's vision of, you know, a space bound human population. And a big part of that is putting orbital AI data centers in space. And what they say is the total addressable market for AI data centers in space is $26.5 trillion. So if you're saying this is the total addressable market and a lot of times companies will say this is our total addressable market in their prospectus for ipo. And it's pretty big, it's pretty lofty, it's usually not that realistic. But no one has a figure that's like, you know, the GDP more than the GDP of virtually every single country outside of the United States. And so when you're betting on Space X in their ipo, if you want to invest in them, it's, you think that Elon is just a single handed visionary. Same thing, Tesla as well, and will drive the next AI slash space age. And thinks that the future is going to be a bunch of orbital data centers powering everything here on Earth and on the moon and potentially on Mars.

[Toby Howell]

The final thing we need to mention about Space X is a lot of their ambitions is underpinned by one thing, and that is Starship. Remember the giant rocket that we've seen launch and fail and blow up and whatnot. It's, it's launching again today, later this afternoon. But basically every part of their vision needs to be be powered by Starship because they need to bring larger payloads up to space that its current roster of Falcon rockets can't pull off. Starship needs to bring these big satellites that can deploy these AI data centers. So that's one part. They also talked about maybe point to point travel within Earth using Starship get anywhere around the world in 30 minutes or less. So it's got a lot of lofty vision. I mean we've said that word a lot already. But they need this giant rocket to work, which it hasn't really worked so far. Tune in today to see if their latest version of Starship can actually make it and do what they want it to do.

[Neal Freyman]

And SpaceX is firing the starting gun on what's going to be A historically insane IPO year. We also got reports that Open Air might file to go public, do the same thing as soon as tomorrow or at least in the next few weeks. And then Anthropic is also gearing up to ipo. These are just the, you know, some of the biggest companies in the world. They're all private. Soon, they're all going to be public. So soon, if you open up Robinhood, you open up your brokerage, you're going to be faced with a choice, choice of whether to invest in Space X OpenAI or Anthropic. Maybe you want to invest in one or zero or all three, but it's going to be bedlam on the private on the public market.

[Toby Howell]

I'm just imagining San Francisco's real estate market. Once all of these shares start to vest, it's going to be gnarly.

[Neal Freyman]

Well, SpaceX, also based in remote southern Texas, it's going to create all sorts of warped real estate down there with a bunch of new millionaires in the remote corner of the South. Moving on. Zillow surfers in Chicago might have noticed something really odd yesterday. The house you were pretending you could afford the day before wasn't on the website anymore. Thousands of home listings in the Chicago area disappeared from Zillow yesterday. And it's all because of a very convoluted legal battle between some of the heaviest of heavyweights in the real estate industry. Zillow, the most visited US real estate website, Compass, the world's largest real estate brokerage, and Midwest Real Estate Data, a data company that's more of a welterweight in this metaphor, but has aligned itself with compassion. Now, the main thing to know is that Zillow and Compass do not like each other. And at the center of the spat is what's known as private listings, the process of shopping around your house on the deal before blasting it everywhere. On a platform like Zillow, Compass is pro private listings, encouraging sellers to share their homes initially among a small group that includes Compass agents to get a better value. Zillow is very anti public listings and last year instituted a new rule. It would block any home from its site if it wasn't publicly available within a day of it being listed for sale. Fast forward, forward through a bunch of lawsuits and we get to yesterday when Midwest Real Estate Data, remember on the side of Compass, blocked Zillow from accessing data on 43,000 properties in the Chicago area. The reason Zillow's website didn't feature just a few homes that had been previously privately listed Toby as if the home selling or buying process wasn't stressful enough, the companies in control of everything are in an all out brawl and that's turned thousands of home listings invisible.

[Toby Howell]

Let's dive into the arguments for and against private listings. So as you mentioned, Compass is on the side of private listing. CEO Robert Refkin argues that public listing history can actually hurt sellers because then buyers can see things like price cuts, how many days it's been on the market, if the listing is stale or not. And he says that access to that information is actually a killer of value, therefore getting you a worse deal for your house. Now the critics argument Zillow side is that it obviously favors a brokerage like Compass that has, you know, both sides of the market. If you never bring it to the public markets, I mean it's not an ipo, but if you never show it to a lot of people, people publicly, then one Compass broker can talk to his buddy and say, hey, let's just skip everything, I'll sell it to you, we both reap the fees. Compass says that we don't do that sort of back dealing. But Zillow is like the only way to get a better deal is to just know all the information upfront and give everyone a level playing field.

[Neal Freyman]

What's funny to me is that this dispute that's led to all these listings being listed or being invisible in Chicago area involves nine listings out of 43,000. Those are the ones that Zillow refuses to put on its website because they had been listed privately before. But at least as of midday yesterday, there were considerable drop in the amount of homes listed for sale in the Chicago area. Zillow displayed about 2,000 for sale listings in the city while Redfin, a competitor showed 5,000. Realtor realtor.com 8,600 and homes about homes.com more showed more than 4,700. So this is leaving home sellers and home buyers in the Chicago area in the lurch because Compass and Zillow are fighting. Moving on. What's red and white? And now in the black. Target, the retailer that's been struggling, mightily showed early signs of a turnaround yesterday, posting its biggest sales increase in four years. Then after crushing Q1, it went ahead and raised its revenue guidance for the rest of the year, revealing its confidence. This momentum has legs for its revival. Target has a former intern to thank. Michael Fiddle Key, who began his Target career as an intern, worked his way up the corporate ladder to become CEO earlier this here and his three part focus on making stores more pleasant shop at. Infusing more technology and adding better, more stylish merchandise is paying off. In his understated Midwestern way, Fiddle Key said, Even with this early progress, we know our work is just beginning and we have confidence we're on the right path because guests are responding in areas where we are leaning in and driving change. Not only are Target's results good for Target, but they're a positive sign for the US Economy, which depends on consumer spending for a large chunk of growth. No problem signs here.

[Toby Howell]

Target's problem has always been they've been stuck in the messy middle. Walmart owns, you know, the cheap factor, Amazon owns cheap and convenience, and Target is not the cheapest, not the fastest. So what is it they've tried to start leaning into? Making stores feel delightful to shop at again. Make it feel like a treasure hunt where you're picking up knickknacks that maybe you didn't go in shopping for but maybe you leave with. So that's been part of the strategy, along with just doing basic things like cleaning up the stores. They've been leaning more into the baby aisle a little bit, just sprucing up their food and beverage industry. But what I thought was very interesting is that the number one customer complaint still is in stock inventory they want. If you go in looking for toothpaste, you better have toothpaste on the shelves. It sounds like a very basic retail one on one thing, but that is basically what Target's been struggling with. And what they're leaning into is just make sure we have the stuff that people want to buy when they want to buy it. All the other stuff kind of falls into line after that. But fascinating to see Fidelity kind of turn it around a lot quicker than we expected. We'll see if, you know, maybe the comparisons were a little bit softer, which is why it's doing so well.

[Neal Freyman]

But good job Target, and they just hired a new supply chain head earlier this week to maybe fix some of those empty toothpaste.

[Toby Howell]

As you can tell, I'm running low on toothpaste right now. It's top of mind for me. Moving on Dating apps realize that they have fried a generation's brains with endless swipes and curated profiles and are recalibrating rating to a serve up more IRL experiences and b do away with swiping. Tinder is trying its hand at hosting events in L A that include pickleball nights, silent discos and happy hours to try and counteract dating app fatigue. Bumble recently announced that it's Ditching the swiping mechanism popularized by Tinder, entirely matching users using AI instead. Part of this is business driven. Bumble stock is down more than 90% since its 2021 IPO, while Match Group, which owns Hinge and Tinder, is down 75% over the past five years. But clearly the people using apps are looking for a break too, as shown by a Forbes survey which found nearly 80% of daters felt emotionally, physically or mentally exhausted by the apps. It all points to a rethinking of the dating industry at a time where the value prop doesn't seem to be resonating for anyone involved. Other changes from Tinder include an upcoming speed dating tool where you can chat with people virtually after you've verified your id, and group dates, which lets friend groups meet friend groups for larger hangs. Neil there's always plenty of discourse around the state of dating, but now the people controlling the apps are admitting that, yeah, swiping sort of broke everything. Now we're trying to fix it.

[Neal Freyman]

Talk about new blood. Match Group and Tinder have a new head. His name is Spencer Rascoff, who was actually the co founder of Zillow, which we just talked about. He seems to be good at matching buyers and sellers in a particular market. So he became the CEO of Match last year and then became CEO of Tinder as well. And he's really focusing on Tinder. Tinder still has that brand. It is the biggest dating app in the world. It's available in over 185 countries, accounted for more than half of Match's revenue last year. And Match has a bunch of different dating apps like Hinge under its banner. And they still have a lot of people, they still have a lot of young people. 50% of people on this app are under 30. So he is still, he still believes in the promise of dating apps, but I think there is widespread acknowledgment among him and Whitney Wolfe Heard, who was returned to Bumble, which she started as well, that they're just not working right now. And Tinder specifically blames its overzealous monetization efforts, but trying to squeeze as much money as possible because they were struggling financially. Now they're pivoting to all these different types of tricks and different, different ways to improve the experience, whether that's in real life stuff or using AI to make things better.

[Toby Howell]

That, that's the real question for me. Is it better that now algorithms are going to be matching people versus your own, you know, desire swiping? Is that actually better? And a lot of companies are saying, yeah, we might as well give it a shot. But I wonder if there's going to be a similar sort of backlash to saying how are we letting algorithms control who we are matching up with, who we're going on dates with? Which is why the in real life component is so big. Playing pickleball and you know, flirting in a low stakes way is probably still the best way to meet people. So maybe less AI and more pickleball as the solution to all of their issues. All right, we're going to take a quick break and come back with Neil's numbers right after this.

[Neal Freyman]

Toby, what if I told you you had to pay me $1,000 right now?

[Toby Howell]

I'd be in deep trouble.

[Neal Freyman]

Well, you would be in the same boat as a lot of employees in the US and that can lead to decreased productivity and distractions. Thankfully, Aflac can help.

[Toby Howell]

Aflac pays claims fast, accurately and fairly at no direct cost to businesses. Plus, Aflac plans can save businesses and employees tax dollars when payroll deductions are withheld pre tax.

[Neal Freyman]

To learn more, just head to aflac.com Morning Brew Daily that's a f l a c.com Morning Brew Daily Toby, what are you doing to build your wealth?

[Toby Howell]

I joined this pyramid thing or whatever and now if I convince all my friends to join, I'll make bank.

[Neal Freyman]

Okay, well for those of you who are actually serious about investing and building wealth, there's public.com with their modern investing

[Toby Howell]

platform, you can build a multiasset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and more while accessing industry leading yields.

[Neal Freyman]

Earn an uncapped 1% match when you transfer your old investment portfolio over to public at public.com/morning brew. That's public.com/morning brew paid for by Public Investing. Full Disclosure in Podcast Description did you happen to catch what Emily told us to absolutely not do on next week's episode?

[Toby Howell]

No, I miss that. I usually meditate during our team meetings.

[Neal Freyman]

That's where Plaid no Pro could come in handy. It's an AI powered note taking device that magnetically attaches to your phone and helps capture and organize real world conversations from meetings to deep work.

[Toby Howell]

Instead of scrambling to take notes or relying on memory, PLOD automatically transcribes and summarizes the discussions, turning long conversations into clear, structured notes and actionable takeaways. It meets enterprise grade standards, including software. Talk to HIPAA in GDPR compliance.

[Neal Freyman]

Start at PLA Slash Brew Use code brew for 10% off welcome to Neil's Numbers, the segment where I share three Stats from the week's news that will make you the most informed person at your Memorial Day barbecue. For my first number, here's a bizarre fact. People tip less on the weekends. A recent study written up by the Wall Street Journal looked at 68 million credit card transactions across 47 restaurant chains and found that customers tip their servers up to 1 percentage point less on Saturdays and Sundays than on weekdays. Well, that 1 percentage point may not sound like a lot. It could add up to thousands of dollars of income over a year for waitstaff. So the big question is why? Why are people stingier on weekends? The study floats a couple of different theories. One is that restaurants are busier on weekends, which means less attentive service from waiters rushing from one table to the next text leading to lower tips. But perhaps a more compelling hypothesis is that on weekends there's much more competition for people's money, specifically God. The researchers found that church played a big factor in tipping because people might leave a smaller tip after having made a donation at church. The data bear this out. In the most religious counties, tips for Sunday lunch were 0.88 percentage points lower than at lunch on Monday. In some, the researchers wrote, tips were lower on the weekend when the bulk of consumer spending happens.

[Toby Howell]

There's also a movie theater connection. When box office sales went up, restaurant tips also went down. So that was fascinating to me because rather than treating tipping as this fixed moral obligation that you do no matter what, they treat it like it's part of their finite entertainment budgets. It's part of their discretionary spending budgets. And it got me thinking. Like I now we're getting a tipping discourse, but I'm 20% no matter what, like the services, good or bad. So it is like a fixed moral obligation for me. But I am wondering, even if you're

[Neal Freyman]

coming from church and you donation, you're like, I'll still leave 20.

[Toby Howell]

I mean a lot of it is a very small percentage. Like it is 1%. So probably it is like more under subconscious than an actual conscious thing that you're doing. But yeah, it does add up over time. But it really did get me thinking like I am 20% no matter what. It is just like a fixed cost for me. Maybe there are more factors involved in it and I should be slightly adjusting or I shouldn't be slightly adjusting. I don't know. It made me turn the glass looking glass inward at myself in my tipping.

[Neal Freyman]

The easiest to do math on.

[Toby Howell]

Yeah, so it's a decimal double.

[Neal Freyman]

I don't want to think about that. Okay, for my next number. If you encounter a geologist in a movie, there's a good chance that they're not going to make it through the entire runtime. A group of Swedish geologists examining their profession in film found that about one third of geologists die or are found dead, often very early in the movie. Their study spans 202 geologists in 141 movies spanning 1919 to 2023. So how do geologists die in movies? Geologists deaths fall into eight categories, including the leading cause, murder, such as when James Bond kills the evil petrologist Professor Dent in Dr. No. The second most common cause of death is work related, for example, drowning in quicksand, incineration in an oil pit, or falling into a crater. Third is encounters with extraterrestrials like the doomed geologist in Prometheus. We should be sad about these untimely ends because more often than not, geologists aren't the villain. According to the researchers, 85% of GE are good guys, or at least are not directly evil. And I do say guys deliberately. Of the 202 geologists in film, just 11% are female. Overall. The Swedish geologist wrote, our profession is typically seen as an action packed, adventurous endeavor, often perturbed by dramatic events with minimal indulgence in singing or dancing. Toby, I think these geologists deserve better.

[Toby Howell]

They know they never get normal geology jobs either. It's never just, just review some mineral samples. For me it's always like the worms are eating people and you know, the aliens are coming right now. I think it is a good brand exercise for geologists though, because one, they're clearly being portrayed as larger than life action heroes that are constantly around villains. So that is why they are overwhelmingly the good guys too. So I think that's good for their brand. But then it is very funny that the number one cause of death is murder. Like it's not even like falling rocks or aliens or anything like that. It's just, just good old fashioned conflict with another human being. So just a very funny story overall. And I do love that this was a timeline of humanity's movies too, because in early films most of their deaths or most of the content was about oil exploration in the frontier and they were dying that way. Then in the Cold War era got a little bit more apocalyptic. And now in the modern era it's climate disasters, it's space threats, it's other things. So this data set contained a lot of humanity in it when it relates to how geologists were perishing.

[Neal Freyman]

I think every profession should examine how they're portrayed in movies.

[Toby Howell]

Yes.

[Neal Freyman]

Yeah, podcasters go through. Let's do podcasters. I don't know if there's enough of a work body already with enough podcasters in movies, but, you know, I wonder how many of them died too early. At least in the heroes right now. We're not the heroes right now. Yeah, I would say 85% are probably the villain and people wouldn't be too upset if we died. My final number is the mind boggling scale of the Indianapolis 500, which takes place this Sunday for its 110th year. Everything about the Indy 500 is bigger than you can possibly imagine. The first thing to know is that a metric ton of people will go to the race. In fact, it's the largest single day sporting event in the world with 350,000 people expected to attend. That means one out of every 977Americans will be at the racetrack come Sunday, packing in the grandstand. The infield. Speaking of the infield, the area inside the 2.5 mile oval is expansive and is large enough to swallow a whole lot of other large things. Covering 253 acres, it's big enough to fit eight world landmarks. Yankee Stadium, the Roman Coliseum, the Taj Mahal, the White House, the Rose bowl, the island home to the Statue of Liberty, Churchill Downs, the Kentucky Derby racetrack, and the entire country of Vatican City. With room to spare. Toby, I desperately. Toby, I desperately need to go to Indy. This seems like the biggest party.

[Toby Howell]

It is literally the biggest party. I also have just some other random facts. Because we started going down an Indy 500 rabbit hole. Spectators consume over 8 miles of hot dogs and bratwurst on race day place end to end. That would circle the two and a half mile oval track more than three times. So people are putting down some dogs. The other fun fact I have is the very first race held at the Indianapolis motor speedway in 1909. Did it involve cars at all? Do you know what it involved?

[Neal Freyman]

What vehicle did it involve in the horse carriages?

[Toby Howell]

It is helium gas balloon race, of course, which would be electric, a little bit slower than the race cars, but coming around. The outside is floating high on the outside. Why do you need a racetrack at all to do a helium gas balloon race? So those are my two indie facts as well. And the fact that they drink a lot of milk after they win.

[Neal Freyman]

Yeah, they do. And just thinking about a 2.5 mile oval is just crazy. Like you should go to a racetrack. I think it's. Maybe Talladega has one that, that, that is. That Big and just the banks on them and just the scale is. It's truly insane. Especially when the cars go around and you can't hear anything because they're so loud. Let's bring to the finish with some final headlines. Jeff Bezos isn't going to be awarded the key to New York City anytime soon. The fourth richest person in the world hit out at Mayor Zoran Mamdani in an interview yesterday for vilifying billionaires he says are crucial to the economy. Bezos specifically criticized a viral video Zaran posted announcing a tax on pricey second homes that was filmed quite intentionally in front of the apartment building belonging to finance mogul Ken Griffin. Bezos told CNBC it isn't right for the mayor to, quote, stand in front of Ken Griffin's house and act like he is some kind of villain. Ken Griffin isn't a villain. He hasn't hurt anybody. He's not hurting New York. In fact, quite the opposite. It. While mostly defending billionaires in the interview, Bezos did sometimes strike a more progressive tone. He said he would be in favor of eliminating income taxes for the bottom half of US earners, saying, A nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year pays more than $12,000 a year in taxes. Does that really make sense?

[Toby Howell]

The next part of that quote, though, was also controversial because he said, you could double the taxes I pay and it's not going to help. That teacher in Queens, Zoran Mamdani responded to that on saying, I know a few teachers in Queens that would beg to differ. So. So it was an interesting look into. Jeff Bezos is a world view which is basically America's problem is not that billionaires exist, is that the government is taxing the wrong people and it's spending too much. So a very odd sort of political billy, pro billionaire populism that we haven't really seen before. Jeff Bezos doesn't grant many interviews like this, which is why, you know, we're talking about why these quotes were going viral. So just a fascinating look as to what, what he thinks the problems afflicting the world are and how he would go about solving them. Finally, poor went out for slits. After 177 years, the beer that made Milwaukee famous is calling it quits. Slits, the once dominant brewery that traces its roots back to Milwaukee in 1849, is being put on hiatus by parent company Pabst. A quick history lesson. Because this brand used to be a big deal. Slits rose to prominence after the Great Chicago fire in 1871. By the early 1900s, it was the biggest brand in the entire world. When you're out of Slits, you're out of beer was its famous tagline. Then Budweiser passed them in 1957, and Schlitz never quite recovered. A botched recipe chain in the 70s tanked the flavor. And the writing was on the wall. The beer is getting one last hurrah. Wisconsin Brewing Company is brewing a final 80 barrel batch on Saturday using Slits original specifications. Neil, as someone who went to school in Milwaukee for two years and whose dorm was right next to the Pabst Mansion, I never actually tried Slits. But it's sad to see an American icon go out with a whimper like this.

[Neal Freyman]

Did you ever see it at any parties?

[Toby Howell]

I know.

[Neal Freyman]

I don't think it was a big deal.

[Toby Howell]

Not a big deal. And that is why, because, like, volumes got so low. It just doesn't make sense for them to produce anymore. But I could not believe it. I heard of Schlitz and, like, you saw it on signage, but no one was ever drinking it.

[Neal Freyman]

Now a big part of Schlitz lore, the shit. Schlitz Downfall is an ad campaign in the 70s that was dubbed by fans, Drink Schlitz or I'll kill you. It was such a disaster. They basically rolled this out around four TV spots in 1977. They had, like, macho guys, like a boxer or a lumberjack, saying, just looking very menacing and saying, like, if you don't have Schlitz, you don't have Gusto. I'm gonna play Picasso and put you on the canvas, like, threatening violence against people who wouldn't drink Schlitz. And it was just such a disaster. They fired the advertising firm that pitched the idea. They only ran it for a couple of weeks, and people just said, yeah, this was like, drink Schlitz or I'll kill you. And, like, we're not so into this, guys.

[Toby Howell]

It does show you that, you know, controversies tied to beer advertising has been going on for as long as people have been drinking beer.

[Neal Freyman]

That is all the time we have. Thanks so much, so much for starting your morning with us and have a wonderful Thursday. If you'd like to reach us, send an email to Morning Brew Daily, Morning Broadcom, or DM us on Instagram @MB. Daily Show. Let's roll the credits. Emily Milian is our supervising producer. Raymond Lu is our senior producer. Our producer is Olivia Graham and our associate producer is Olivia Lake. Technical direction by Nina Miller. Hair and makeup artists survive the most movies. Devin Emery is our president and our show's production of morning brew.

[Toby Howell]

Great. So they need. Let's run it back tomorrow.

[Ryan Reynolds]

Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile. I don't know if you knew this, but anyone can get the same Premium Wireless for $15 a month plan that I've been enjoying. It's not just for celebrities. So do like I did and have one of your assistant's assistants switch you to Mint Mobile today. I'm told it's super easy to [e-mail]

[Narrator/Advertiser]

Switch upfront payment of $45 for 3 month plan Equ equivalent to $15 per month required Intro rate first 3 months only, then full price plan options available, taxes and fees, extra fee, full [e-mail].