Travis Kelce’s Six Flags Activist Role & the Rise of Celebrity Investors

Summary

---

Motley Fool Money – Episode Summary

Travis Kelce’s Six Flags Activist Role & the Rise of Celebrity Investors
Release Date: October 22, 2025
Host/Analysts: Travis Hoyam (B), Lou Whiteman (C), Rachel Warren (A)

---

Episode Overview

This episode explores the increasing involvement of celebrities in high-profile investment and activism campaigns, using the recent example of NFL star Travis Kelce’s role in an activist push at Six Flags. The team discusses the strategy behind Jana Partners’ celebrity partnerships and the broader trend of stars like Ryan Reynolds and Magic Johnson leveraging their brands in business. Additional topics include the launch and potential impact of OpenAI’s ChatGPT browser and the latest M&A rumors in the media world, specifically around Warner Brothers Discovery.

---

Key Segments & Discussion Points

1. Travis Kelce’s Activist Stake at Six Flags

[00:05–06:16]

Main Points:

• Travis Kelce’s Role: Headlines peg Kelce as taking an activist role at Six Flags, but Jana Partners is the primary actor; Kelce brings publicity and a marketing “twist.”
• Activist Playbook:
  • Activists rely on PR and attention to influence shareholders.
  • Notable precedent: Jana has enlisted celebrities such as Dwayne Wade, CC Sabathia, and Shaquille O’Neal (via Starboard and Papa John's) to boost campaigns.
• Six Flags’ Struggles:
  • Company is underperforming (stock down 50% YTD, 9% drop in Q2 attendance, over $5B in debt post-Cedar Fair merger).
  • Previous post-merger strategies haven’t yielded results; ex-CEO stepping down by end of 2025.

Notable Quotes:

• Lou Whiteman [00:57]:
  “Activists is just a PR campaign at heart. You can have correct ideas about a company, but if you can't get those ideas out into the world... you're still going to lose even if you're right.”
• Rachel Warren [03:24]:
  “It’s an incredibly smart marketing strategy... not new in the space. Think about Daniel Loeb and George Clooney versus Sony, or... the Whole Foods and Petsmart campaigns.”
• Lou Whiteman [05:18]:
  “Activists, like short sellers, play an important role... This does look like a good target. So I'm curious to follow it and see how it develops.”

---

2. Celebrity Investing: Value Beyond Capital

[02:42–03:43]

Main Points:

• Marketing Power:
  • Celebrities often own small stakes but generate disproportionate publicity (e.g., Ryan Reynolds, Magic Johnson, Jay-Z).
  • In consumer-facing businesses, “attention” is currency—celebrity association can materially impact brand and perception.
• Strategy at Six Flags:
  • Kelce may be vital for marketing, but Jana has also brought in experienced consumer and tech executives to drive operational improvements.

---

3. Is Activist Involvement a Signal or Noise for Investors?

[04:55–06:16]

Main Points:

• While Six Flags’ stock is up 26% recently, it’s down 35% year-over-year.
• Activist targets can offer opportunity, but past restructurings at Six Flags raise doubts about quick turnarounds.
• Individual investors should be cautious; not every campaign delivers results, though targets in distress can benefit.

---

4. OpenAI’s ChatGPT Atlas Browser Launch

[06:48–14:53]

Main Points:

• Product Launch:
  • ChatGPT Atlas browser launched (currently MacOS only).
  • Unclear if this browser meaningfully disrupts the sector—Google Chrome dominates with 60%+ share.
• Business Model Uncertainty:
  • OpenAI could pursue subscription or new forms of advertising, as the browser provides deeper integration of its AI and valuable user data.
  • Monetizing is urgent for OpenAI, whose cost structure is rapidly increasing.
• User Experience:
  • Early impressions: Atlas prompts frequent upsells; unlike Chrome’s free model, this could deter adoption.
• Market Position:
  • OpenAI lacks the vast user base and integration advantages of Google or Microsoft.
  • “Sustaining innovation” (existing product improved slightly) vs. “disruptive innovation” (radically new experience).
• Skepticism:
  • Some wonder if the browser was actually a strategic priority or a reaction to antitrust buzz around Chrome.

Notable Quotes:

• Rachel Warren [08:18]:
  “The browser allows OpenAI to embed their AI right into the user's web experience... gives them unprecedented access to valuable real-time data.”
• Lou Whiteman [10:05]:
  “All of [OpenAI’s] moves... from funding to products, are moves of desperation, not of strength... They are in a position of weakness because they don’t have the customer right now.”
• Rachel Warren [12:56]:
  “They're taking... existing technology and presumably trying to make it better with their own AI innovations... We don’t know if that’s what consumers want.”
• Lou Whiteman [14:13]:
  “I wonder, absent all of that talk [about splitting Chrome], if browser would have really been... the North Star they were guiding towards.”

---

5. Warner Brothers Discovery & Media Consolidation

[15:43–20:32]

Main Points:

• Deal Rumors:
  • Rumors: Paramount/Skydance interested in acquiring Warner Brothers Discovery but were rebuffed.
• Industry Context:
  • Both companies viewed as “second tier” behind Netflix/Disney; consolidation may be only viable path to compete.
  • Paramount’s cash (backed by Larry Ellison) enables M&A ambitions.
• Asset Valuations & Debt:
  • Warner Bros Discovery: $77B enterprise value, $4B free cash flow, substantial debt; pricey compared to sliding revenues.
  • High debt across the industry complicates mergers/acquisitions; regulatory scrutiny likely for any major deal.
• Strategic Path:
  • Consolidation could create a stronger challenger to Netflix/Disney, but success depends on execution and integration, which is risky and costly.

Notable Quotes:

• Lou Whiteman [16:59]:
  “They’re going to just try to consolidate the second tier. They have the cash to do it... For Warner Brothers Discovery, it feels like a question of just what price can you get. This hasn't worked.”
• Rachel Warren [18:10]:
  “This speaks a lot more to kind of the consolidation of the media industry amongst some of the few big players... A major acquisition could really reshape the media landscape.”
• Lou Whiteman [19:16]:
  “There is a successful play here from consolidating all of this... I do think that that is a viable path to joining Netflix and Disney in this top tier. The issue is execution.”

---

Memorable Moments & Quotes

• Jana’s Celebrity Activism:
  “This is the classic activist campaign with just a little twist from the Swifty World.” — Lou Whiteman [02:42]
• Browser Disruption Doubts:
  “The new product has to be 10 times better than the old product for people to actually switch.” — Travis Hoyam [09:13]
• On OpenAI’s Position:
  “They are in a position of weakness because they don’t have the customer right now.” — Lou Whiteman [10:05]
• Media M&A Realities:
  “Which knife do you want to catch here, Travis?” — Lou Whiteman [16:31]
• Industry Reality Check:
  “This just seems like… if none of these companies had debt, we’d be having a different story. But somebody’s got to pay for all this. Is it just Larry?” — Travis Hoyam [18:10]

---

Timeline of Important Segments (Timestamps)

• Travis Kelce & Six Flags Activism: 00:05 – 06:16
• Role and Value of Celebrity Investors: 02:42 – 03:43
• Activist Investing for Shareholders: 04:55 – 06:16
• ChatGPT Atlas Browser & OpenAI Strategy: 06:48 – 14:53
• Media Consolidation – Warner Bros Discovery/Paramount: 15:43 – 20:32

---

Tone and Takeaways

The analysts bring their signature blend of skepticism, humor, and insight:

• They view celebrity-driven activism as a PR play with potential but stress that operational and financial discipline are more critical than star power alone.
• On OpenAI, the tone is notably skeptical—analysts see the browser launch as more reactive than strategic and doubt its disruptive credentials amid entrenched competition.
• The discussion about media giants is realistic, focusing on debt, regulatory challenges, and the difficulties of executing successful M&A, even when economics suggest consolidation is necessary.

---

Useful for investors:

• Provides clear perspectives on the limits/potential of celebrity activism and investor hype.
• Offers grounded skepticism on unproven tech launches and the realities of industry disruption.
• Frames media consolidation as necessary but unpredictable, with execution as the primary risk factor.

---

Transcript

[A]

Foreign.

[B]

Travis Kelce is taking an activist role at Six Flags. So are we going to get Taylor World next? Motley Fool Money starts now. Welcome to Motley Fool Money. I'm joined today by Lou Whiteman and Rachel Warren. Look, the big news over the past 24 hours has been Travis Kelce taking an activist role. At least that's what the headlines say at Six Flags. Jana Partners is actually the one, I think fronting a lot of this money. But Lou, this is at least interesting. The, the interest here is that, you know, he has a background going to Six Flags, but we also have Dollywood, Dolly Parton. Is this going to be Taylor Swift building her own theme parks? Is that the, is that the next thing here?

[C]

I hate to say it. It would probably work, right?

[A]

But.

[C]

No, absolutely it would work.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

I, I, I, I don't think that's what's going the end of the day. I love activists. I've worked with activists my whole career and a lot of it is active. Activists is just a PR campaign at heart. Okay. You can have correct ideas about a company, but if you can't get those ideas out into the world, into the, you know, to the shareholders, you're still going to lose even if you're right. So there is always an element of trying to attract attention to yourself. A lot of times it's with really over the top language. It's about accusations. There's a lot of ways to do it, it. But look, Jana has used celebrities before. They used Dwayne Wade of the NBA and pitcher CC Sabathia when they went after Fresh Pet. Famously Starboard Value, another firm. They use Shaquille o' Neal to go, to go after Papa John's.

[B]

And that at least seems more successful. I, you know, do you see Shaq in those commercials?

[C]

Well, well, but, but, you know, it, it all works. And yeah, no, I mean, so this is just a way of going at it. I think if you look at Six Flags, very, very ripe for an activist here. They, it's been a disaster. The stock's down 50% year to date. No one involved. No one is going to these parks at the, in the volumes that we're supposed to. They did a major with merger with Cedar Fair that was supposed to solve this. It didn't. So, you know, Jana, I, I don't know if Janet wants to say you need to improve marketing. You need to improve your customer experience in a way. Six Flags already tried that. We could, we're going to, you know, have fewer people coming through, but we are going to treat them better and they're going to that spend more. So I don't know if this will actually work, but I do think that this is just, this is the classic activist campaign with just a little twist from, from the Swifty World.

[B]

Yeah, Rachel, this seems interesting in the sense that celebrities or influencers seem to be more involved in investing. I think Ryan Reynolds, if we can go to more kind of the startup VC world, he's brought a lot of attention to the businesses that he's involved with. He's on the commercials. You know, it's implied that he's a huge owner. Sometimes that's not necessarily the case. Magic Johnson, you know, I, I, I at one point thought he actually owned the Dodgers. He owns like 2% of the Dodgers.

[A]

Right.

[B]

You know, Jay Z, that was the thing. He bought the Nets. He owned a teeny tiny portion of the Nets. He got courtside seats. But you know, the, these celebrities do bring attention. And in an attention business like theme parks, that seems like a valuable thing to bring to the table.

[A]

Yeah, I mean, it's an incredibly smart marketing strategy that we have seen replicated by numerous firms. This is not new, you know, for Janet Partners, it's not new in the space. I mean, you can also go back, you think about how well known figures like movie star George Clooney back in the day was involved in the activist campaigns like the one led by Daniel Loeweb against Sony over a decade ago.

[B]

He even tried to build a casino at one point.

[A]

Right. So this is something we've seen before. But I will say for JANET Partners, I think the addition of Kelsey to this is a really smart marketing move. They have a very successful track record of shareholder activism, as Lou was talking about. And they've driven, you know, significant changes at major companies. A few other examples, you think about how they took a stake in Whole Foods, they pushed for changes before Amazon ultimately acquired the company. Right. You know, they had a role in the acquisition of Petsmart back in 2014. And I think that this is something that is very much needed at this point in time. Yes, there's this, you know, presence of Kelsey, but they also, the hedge funds brought in experienced executives from consumer and tech industries to advise on improving marketing. You know, the guest experience, technology. This is very needed by Six Flags right now. They are reporting steep net losses. They have over $5 billion in debt. A lot of that's tied to the Cedar Fair merger. They had a roughly 9% drop in attendance in the second quarter. And their CEO that had come in from Cedar Fair as part of the merger. He announced he's stepping down by the end of 2025. So there's a real role here for Janet Partners to play. And I think that's one of the key takeaways.

[B]

Lou, is this the kind of thing that we should be paying attention to? 6 flag stock up 26% over the past week, but you look out over the past five years, shares are down over the past one year. They're still down 35%. So is, are activists the kind of thing that we should kind of follow, or is this just kind of noise for regular investors somewhere in the middle?

[C]

Look, activists, like short sellers, I think, play an important role. I think it's case by case, again, just like short sellers in this case, like I say, I do think that the target makes sense, whether or not the solution makes sense or how the solution evolves. You know, that's something that an individual investor has to look at. I'm a little, I want to hear more from Jana here because like I say, Selim Basul was in here before the Cedar Fair merger and was trying to do a lot of what he was doing. Sounds a lot like what they're talking about. And it didn't really work then. So I'm not convinced. Like, I'm, I'm not ready to put my money into chase this. But generally speaking, activists have done a lot of good work cleaning up companies that were in desperate need of it. And this does look like a good target. So I'm, I'm curious to follow it and see how it develops.

[B]

At least it's something. We could maybe do a research trip, go on a couple roller coaster rides.

[A]

Let's do it, guys.

[B]

Might add some value to the show.

[C]

Yeah. But Travis is welcome to come along. Right?

[B]

When we come back, we are going to talk about ChatGPT's new browser. You're listening to Motley Fool Money.

[D]

When did making plans get this complicated? It's time to streamline with WhatsApp, the secure messaging app that brings the whole group together. Use polls to settle dinner plans. Send event invites and pin messages so no one forgets mom 60th and never miss a meme or milestone. All protected with end to end encryption. It's time for WhatsApp message privately with everyone.

[B]

Learn more at WhatsApp.com welcome back to Motley Fool Money. ChatGPT yesterday introduced a new browser, ChatGPT Atlas. I had a chance to try this. It's not available everywhere, just Mac os. But Rachel, I just want to Go high level. Is this something that we need now? The browser is pretty established. We're going on, what, 30 years of kind of looking the same. We've moved things like the search bar into the actual, you know, address line. So kind of melded those. Google really owns this market. Something like 60% market share with the Chrome browser. They've already introduced a lot of AI features into it, but it isn't. AI isn't taking over. So is this something that's going to be successful or is this just another spaghetti at the wall thing from OpenAI?

[A]

I think it's too soon to tell. As a Mac user myself, I'm very curious to try this one out. I haven't had a chance yet. I do think that there is an element of OpenAI is trying all sorts of different things to see what sticks. But I also think that they are very strategically trying to build out their ecosystem. And I think one of the biggest things that I'm curious about right now is what would the business model be right for this browser? I mean, there's kind of this idea that there could be a bit of a hybrid approach where they could make some money from subscriptions, from sort of a new type of advertising network. So the browser allows.

[B]

We talked about payments a couple of weeks ago too. That seems like something they want to integrate into this. Maybe it's easier if you own the browser.

[A]

I think so. Well, and you think about how the browser allows OpenAI to embed their AI right into the user's web experience. So that gives them unprecedented access to valuable real time data. That's obviously something that would be really valuable for advertisers. I think it's very much kind of designed to gather data in a way that's fundamentally different from traditional search engines. And we're already seeing, you know, they're being integrated with platforms like Shopify and Etsy. So maybe users could complete purchases within the chatbot. But you have to think about the fact that OpenAI's model as it is right now, is hemorrhaging costs and losses. And so they're on this very aggressive monetization push. And I think that's what a lot of this goes back to. Now. We might see some really valuable tools come out of that. Right. But I think it's far too soon to say whether this is going to be something that's going to be broadly adopted by users. I mean, how many of us are going to switch from Chrome to this? That's what I'm not sure about.

[B]

Yeah, the idea in tech is generally that the new product has to be 10 times better than the old product for people to actually switch. So Lou, that was sort of the context in which I started trying Atlas and let me tell you, I didn't get very far and I had multiple pop ups asking me to upgrade to a paid version or an upgraded version of ChatGPT. That's the kind of thing that's going to turn people off. So I appreciate, like Rachel said, they're trying to figure out their business model. But here you have Chrome that is free, that is basically just helping Google's ad business and it's consumer, it's 100% consumer surplus. And then you have a new product that comes out that basically does the same stuff with AI stuck in it and now they want you. It's sort of an upsell machine. I just don't know if that's what people want.

[C]

It's a shame they couldn't come out with this. I don't know, six months ago, a year ago, when there was like all around OpenAI glittered, right? And maybe you would have gotten more then, but I think that Shine is off of it. This is a move and look, I feel like a broken record here with OpenAI and I don't mean to pick on them, but all of their moves, from their funding moves to what their products, their announcement, the kind of, some of the pivots they may be doing in terms of what business they're chasing, which you know, fine, but these are moves of desperation, not of strength. They're all understandable and I do think like introducing a browser, it does make sense, but they are in a position of weakness because they don't have the customer right now. They are the ones trying to get the customer.

[A]

So they.

[B]

What do you mean when you say they don't have the customer? Because they do have something like 5 million paying customers. You're saying that like Google has a.

[C]

Bigger business or Google had all things ready to go and they're just layering this in. Microsoft has its giant Office suite that they can just layer these in. Quite annoyingly, I might say I'm not enjoying having an OpenAI prompt every time I go into Excel. But you know, so it's there. Yes, OpenAI has customers, but they started from zero. Google started from billions. So they need to backfill so much just to get to the starting line. So they're trying things. But to your point, I look, Firefox is sitting on my machine. Bing is sitting on my machine. I still Kind of just go to Chrome. Because I go to Chrome, it is going to take something that just, wow, this is a ton better. Not just, it is the same. To get me to switch from your report, from your reports. I'm quite happy. This is another thing that little old me as an Android Windows users have to miss out on. That's fine with me. But, yeah, I don't blame them for trying all this. I also don't think it's going to be very successful.

[B]

Rachel. The other thing I keep going back to is something Brian Chesky said recently about OpenAI and ChatGPT are actually not AI native. And we'll see exactly what he means, I think over time, because that sounds sort of explosive, but, you know, it's an application, it's accessing the Internet, it's not a new piece of hardware, it is not quite as disruptive or, you know, the change is not the same as going from, you know, a PC to an iPhone or a mainframe to a PC, those kinds of disruptive layers. This is an area where this is not really disruptive at all. It's just taking the old thing and making your own version of the old thing. So that's what I kind of struggle with here, is seeing, is this, is this what we're dancing around? Is this just a sustaining innovation that OpenAI is trying to make into a disruptive innovation?

[A]

Yeah, I mean, I don't think when you look at some of the products, right, if you will, that they've launched recently. It's not as though they're recreating the wheel. They're taking, I think, a lot of existing technology and presumably trying to make it better with their own AI innovations. And I think it kind of remains to be seen with the. That's going to be effective or not. I mean, you even take this example of the browser that we've been talking about here. Is this its own monetizable product within the broader OpenAI ecosystem, or is it going to serve as a sales Funnel back to ChatGPT? Right. I think there's still a lot of open questions as to what that's going to look like and how effective it's going to be. But again, I'm going to stress, I mean, they need to monetize in a more effective way. I think we're really just starting to see what that's going to look like. I think they are rolling out all of these different products, some of which are, I think, quite familiar to us. Right. A search engine is nothing new. And I think they're trying to see if they can make it better and if consumers want that. And that's still, we don't know.

[C]

Maybe I'm being too cynical, but I would love to if I could like get Sam Altman Moment of truth. Was a browser really a priority a year ago or was this something we all know that there was talk that Chrome would have to be split off as part of Alphabet's antitrust settlement.

[A]

Oh, interesting.

[C]

This feels like and I've been in so many boardrooms where this has happened, where you start talking about an idea and that idea sort of made sense because Chrome had its ready made audience, right? You would have gotten all those customers with that. But you spend so much time on that and that didn't happen. And then suddenly that is the shiny object you're chasing now. So it's like, okay, we need to build our own browser. Then I wonder, absent all of that talk, if browser would have really been like this. The North Star. They would. They were guiding towards. We'll never know. But I'm just kind of curious how much of it is after the fact with those discussions, them kind of talking themselves into how great it would be if they had a browser.

[B]

One of these products is going to have to stick or OpenAI is not going to meet the revenue targets that they have promised to investors. And that's what all of this trillion dollar build out is based on, is them actually turning this into revenue. So we will see if this is a help or a hindrance to that. When we come back, we are going to talk about Warner Brothers Discovery potentially not splitting itself in two and getting bought out. Instead, you're listening to Motley Fool Money.

[E]

This episode is brought to you by Jack Daniels. Jack Daniels and music are made for each other. They share a rhythm in the craft of making something timeless while being a part of legendary nights. From backyard jams to sold out arenas, there's a song in every toast. Please drink responsibly. Responsibility.org, jack Daniels and old number seven are registered trademarks. Tennessee whiskey, 40% alcohol by volume. Jack Daniel Distillery, Lynchburg, Tennessee.

[B]

Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. Warner Brothers Discovery is back in the news. There are now rumors that Skydance is going to be or Paramount Skydance, after that merger is interested in buying the company. Look Lou, we've been talking about this one for a long time. It makes all the sense in the world. Doesn't necessarily make the companies profitable or you know, businesses that are going to be competing with the giants in streaming but what did you take away from this?

[C]

So the news is that definitely all the rumors are true that Paramount did approach Warner Brothers and they were rejected. And I think it's worth looking kind of both of these companies separately because there's kind of two separate dynamics going on. I don't know which one is investable right now, but they're both interesting. Warner Brothers Discovery is a mess and Paramount is really being aggressive and mean.

[A]

Which.

[C]

Which knife do you want to catch here, Travis?

[A]

Right.

[C]

You know, for Paramount, they realize that for all the billions they have and all the billions they've spent so far, they are still second tier. Their solution, and I think it's the correct one. They're not going to invest in so much content that they get the next Stranger Things, they get the next knives out. They are going to just try to consolidate the second tier. They have the cash to do it. So this is just them saying money's not going to stop us from.

[B]

And when you say they have the cash, Larry Ellison is behind this. And yes, the cash is that Larry and his son.

[C]

Yes, yes. And it's fine until I see otherwise. I think that this project will be funded. Right. For Warner Brothers Discovery, it feels like a question of just what price can you get. This hasn't worked. It didn't work pre merger. You know, even now, like, we're joking about this. They're trying streaming. They launched CNN All Access, but ironically, All Access, CNN does not include access to CNN if you're not a cable customer. So they are just a mess. I feel like they. There will be a deal here whether it's Paramount, Skydance, Netflix says they're not interested. I think Comcast, Peacock might be in a similar boat to Paramount. So maybe they get involved.

[B]

There's a lot of bad assets out there if somebody wants to put them all together.

[C]

Absolutely.

[B]

Rachel, you know, what's the thought here? I want to put some numbers behind this. Warner Brothers discovery has a 77 billion DOL. Enterprise value as of today, $4 billion in free cash flow. They've got debt. I don't know. This just seems like there's a lot of. If none of these companies had debt, we'd be having a different story. But somebody's got to pay for all this. Is it just Larry?

[A]

I mean, it's possible. Honestly, I think if we're looking at this, this speaks a lot more to kind of the consolidation of the media industry amongst some of the few big players. I kind of look at Warner Brothers Discovery and I tend to think they're better as part of a bigger entity than two separate public companies. But it is kind of interesting to think about, right? I mean, a major acquisition could really reshape the media landscape. And as you noted, Netflix, they've said, oh, we're not interested in the legacy assets, but could they be interested in the remainder of the business? There is, I think, a strong case for that. I mean, Comcast would face some potential really high antitrust hurdles, but they've been seen as a really strong possible contender. I think also one has to recognize any kind of potential deal that would involve an acquisition versus the split of Warner Brothers Discovery. That's probably going to attract scrutiny from the US Government. There's going to be a lot of competition and antitrust concerns. So if in fact this goes the route of an acquisition, I think this is going to be a much longer term story than we would have expected if in fact the company's just split into two public entities.

[C]

So not investment advice because they have to do it right. But I actually do think that there is a successful play here from consolidating all of this second tier or also ran Paramount is not a standalone service, but I subscribe. They do have assets that are of interest to people. If you can collect all of those, I do think that that is a viable path to joining Netflix and joining Disney in this top tier. The issue is execution. M and A is really tough and it's really expensive. So I'm not interested in investing myself right now at this early age. But I do think that there is a path to success there for them. I don't know what the path to success is for Warner Brothers Discovery apps.

[B]

Well, what about price though? Because you know, Disney has the theme park business, they have the second biggest streaming Service. They're worth $240 billion. From an enterprise value perspective, Warner Brothers discovery, you know, 77 billion is a lot. And their, their business is going down. Their, their business is moving in the wrong direction. So I, I don't disagree. But if these assets are not cheap.

[C]

That'S the execution question, right? You know, it's harder to do. It looks a lot better on paper than it does.

[A]

And who's going to want to pay that much for those assets when dwindling as we see right now?

[B]

That's also a question even for someone like Larry Ellison. Buying a hundred billion dollar company is at least notable. It's not nothing, as always. People on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about and the Motley fool may have formal recommendations for or against, so don't buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows the Motley Fool's editorial standards and is not approved by advertisers. Advertisements our sponsored content and provided for informational purposes only. To see our full advertising disclosure, please check out our show notes for Lou Whiteman, Rachel Warren, our production leader, Dan Boyd, and the entire Motley fool team. I'm Travis Hoyam. Thanks for listening to Motley Fool Money. We'll see you here tomorrow.