Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
I'm just saying, like something could like happen, right, something crazy could happen, right, Something crazy could happen while we're recording this and I have to go talk about it in like fifty two minutes.
Is that exciting? Like you come in here an hour before you go on television, and like you turn off your phone. Obviously your phone is sitting right in front of you, but like, let's pretend you turn off your phone and focus entirely on the Money Stuff podcast, And like what if something crazy happens and you get out of if you're at like two fifty nine and you go on air and they're like something crazy happening and you're like yeah.
They're like Katie, quick break this headline about the asteroid that took out California, and I'm like, we're receiving reports or something like that.
I think you keep your life exciting.
I do love adrenaline, like I crave adrenaline, but you know, sometimes I get tired.
Yeah, I'm pretty tired. I was out to a dinner until like midnight last nightly six hours later than my usual bedtime. So I'm in bad shape.
Yeah, that's crazy pants. Matt came over at nine in the morning with a smile on his face, and I was like, how are you upright?
I had a fun dinner last night, but it was way past my bedtime. So now I'm going to do this and then collapse.
No, then you're going to go watch the clothes on Bloomberg Television.
Our body batteries are turning in different directions. You are going to you're adrenaline filled asteroid reporting, and I'm going to nap. I did go over to you yesterday and asked if you knew where the nap rooms.
At bloom I can't tell you.
If there's bloom no naprooms at Bloomer.
If there's Bloomberg people listening, they don't exist.
No nap rooms. Hello, and welcome to the Money Stuff Podcast. You're a weekly podcast where we talked about stuff really to money. I'm Matt Levine. Am I right? The Money Stuff column for Bloomber opens.
And I'm Katie Greifeld, a reporter for Bloomberg News and an anchor for Boomberg Television.
Like we're in the like pest control season of the podcast.
We're talking about book.
There are like two hundred Bloomberg headlines on the last three days about cockroaches.
Yeah, I feel like the jokes over. We've squeezed as much Series a J cockroach as we can, so let's give it a rest. It's been like in the title, so many newsletters that I've gotten over the past four hours.
Yes, it will not be in the title of this podcast. Un last week screw up. They're right. So Jamie Diamond on the Jape Morion Earnings call used the very conventional metaphors. Yeah, but when you see one cockroaches, there probably more. He's talking about the First Brands and Tricolor bankruptcys failures. Yeah, credit bad things, kabooms, kabooms actually the real word that I love. And Mark Rowan said this, he said, it does not surprise me that we were seeing late cycle accidents.
Accident is what you call this. Like the word for what happened with First Brands and Tracklor was accident. Yeah, you made some loans, you didn't get paid.
Back, Oops, you spilled the milk.
Just it's like accident is the term. But yeah, so there have been some pretty big accidents in the credit space, and one dumb thing that is happening is that there is a dispute about whether they exist in the private credit space or the public credit space. But I don't
think it's at all interesting, like at all. But basically JP Diamond got on a call and it was like, you see the problems with private credit because these you know, companies on a bankround and then all the private credit guys are like those are like publicly financed banks led their deals, Like those are not and like they're not like private credit private credit. They're not like direct loans from like the classic. They're not like LBO, you know,
like the core of private credit. Like I don't know, they were funded by funds, Like are they private credit in some loose sense sure? Or some of them bank led and like you know with their bonds Like yeah, I don't know whatever. But the point is it's not like JP Morgan making bank loans on its packs, and it's not like core you know, direct credit.
Yeah. A funny detail in all of this is that Jamie Diamond didn't specifically call out private credit.
Yeah, though he did talk about like BDC's.
Being yeah yeah, yeah, I know, but like it's not like he said, like, oh, these guys made bad loans, blah blah blah. He did talk a little bit about you know, BDC's trading at a discount to their NAV but I think.
It's just such as the efficient markets way.
I'm saying they made right, right, right, But it did so happen that Mark Lipschultz of Blue Out was asked about his comments and appears that he took them personally, and that's where he told, of course JP Morgan to look inwards and the banks to look inwards at their loans. So it is this fun blame game that has played out this week. I feel like we wouldn't be talking about it so much had Jamie Diamond not said cockroaches.
I feel like that game is defin a good like tangible illustration for us to all seize upon.
But it is like taking a step back, like it is the case that like these accidents, as Mark running call them, are like true like bubbly signs like you don't make loans to like people who are double or triple or one hundred times pledging their assets, which like there are some allegation that no one really knows. There's some allegations Tray Color and or First Brands were maybe
you know a little loose with collateral. You don't make those loans unless you're really trying hard to make loans, right, Like I wrote about, like one thing that I think is interesting about first brands is like the people who had a lot of exposure. You know, there's like this Jefferis run fund. There's this like trade finance origination platform. They have like enormous amounts of exposure specifically to first brands.
Like what does that mean? It means like you're running a fund and you're like, you know, ideally you'd like to have diversified you know, trade finance receivables or whatever, but like you just need to find paper to put
into the fund. And if someone is like I'm going to generate a lot of paper for you, then like you'd love to deal with that person, right, Like you'd love to deal with the first bend if they're like, we can you know, sell you as much as you need, And so it create some that is for people to sell you as much paper as you need, which means either becoming very overlevered to generate paper for you, or just like writing fake paper or like you know, triple
pledging things so that they can like sell you more stuff because they sell your stuff and you get the money, and like that's you know, that's the trade they're in. So it does feel very toppy. Yeah, like Mark Owen said, accidents but also late cycle accidents, and like this is a private credit thing, just the credit generally these days, Like there's a lot of people going around being like, yeah, it feels toffee. Yeah, we're going to keep doing it. Yeah,
you know. I think one of the most insightful things ever said about finance was when Chuck Prince in two thousand and seven said, as long as the music is playing, you've got to get up and dance. Like that's what it is, man.
We all know we're coming to the end of the song.
Like, if you're in the business of making loans, you can't be like we're not making loans. Yeah, too many loans are too frisky right now, We're not going to do it.
Yeah, you can't do that yet. A dance, Yeah, got a dance, even if it's slate cycle and you know everyone's tired. It is interesting. I mean this has been held up as an example of we are in a toppy environment. So too, I said, we weren't going to talk about open Ai, but the open Ai Walmart deal. That has been a lot of hay has been made on social media about how truly we've reached the top or.
Someone like the headline and something like, of course it's a bubble.
Of course are here, we are in a bubble. I do want to talk a little bit more about this other comment that Mark Lipschultz said, because it seems like he did take this very personally. One of the things he said, when it comes to market caps, there are people who have meaningful interests in the industry not continuing to grow and succeed. Blackstone's market cap exceeds the market cap of most financial institutions in the world today. It's not as if that's not coming from someone, and of
course there are people who don't like it. Which is interesting that he use Blackstone specifically and not Blue asl But Blue Aule has a market cap of about twenty five billion dollars. Blackstone is somewhere closer to two hundred
billion JP Morgan is over eight hundred billion. But this is the point we've spoken about before, is how the stock market values some of these private credit players even though their assets are much smaller than like a traditional asset manager or even the asset management arms of these banks.
Yeah. I think the point he's making is like when he says that that market cup has to be coming from somewhere, it's not like a comparison to the aum of banks. It's a comparison to like their lending business. Right, It's like, yeah, you know, I think he's making more broadly, the point that like the business of making a lot of categories of loans is shifting from being a thing that banks, yeah, at least intermediate and under it, to being a thing that is kind of being led and
originated and held in the balance sheets of private credit firms. Yeah, which, again I don't know how interesting it is to like debate about whether the problems you're seeing or like private credit problems or bank problems. But like, on the one hand, I think the private credit people make a good point, Like, for I say this a lot, but like the funding model of private credit is a lot more systemically stable than the funding model of banks. Right, instead of having deposits,
you have long term equity capital. That seems good. The private credit people will also argue that like they have better underwriting incentives because they hold it on their books, whereas banks obviously hold a lot of loans on their books, but you think about a lot of what they do is originate the distribute model, where they maybe have less
skin in the game on their underwriting. On the other hand, thanks are regulated, and you do get the sense that it is such a good fundraising environment for private credit firms, such a frothy like if you want to sell your private credit firm a lot of like traditional asset measures, but it's like you do have some pressures to put all this gusher of money to work, and that might looseen your underwriting standards as well.
Can I say one more thing about cockroaches? By all means, this is so gross, Yeah, Jamie Diamond. So first of all, exactly what he said on the call was my antenna goes up when things like this happens. And my first reaction was, like an antenna like that on a cockroach.
You're saying he feels for the cockroaches, Well, it's just he can put himself in the shoes of both the lender and then he's gonna say the shoes of the cockroaches.
But perhaps he tipped his hands there. I don't know, but cockroaches do have antennas, and so does Jamie Diamond. What's a second on your priority list? Yeah, all right, I didn't win again. Well, someone won the Nobel Peace Prize, but also the Insider Trading Prize, but it wasn't inside did somebody?
Somebody won the Nobel Peace Prize was Maria Corinam, a shadow Venezuela and democracyativist. And also somebody won an amount of money on polymarket some some Yeah, the sum appears to be had fifty thousand dollars, which is like depends.
On your like, I could find something to do it.
It's not a bad payday for someone hanging out on polymarket. It's not like institutional grade. You know, you can't like run a hedge fund by like occasionally by once every year making fifty thousand dollars on the Nobel Peace Prize winner. But it's something, right, It's like, it's true, it's a
nice individual person's bet it. But anyway, there were some suggestions that it was inside of treading because it was done kind of right before the announcement, like in the in the you know, hours later ampter then announcement and in fact, a spokesman for the Norwegian No Balance Dude said, we have noticed that some have made significant financial gains
by placing bets on this year's prize. We will investigate whether this means that someone has unlawfully obtained information from us, because presumably they knew before they announced it, right, And so if like someone in the circle of trust that the Norwegian Nobel Institute went and like placed an anonymous crypto trade on polymarket, then would.
It have been amazing for what it's worth. Oh yeah, real sign of the times anyway.
A real sign of the times. And then that's what they seem to have thought happened, But it probably turns out one never knows, because these things are all like
somewhat anonymous. But like, you know, there's an interview of the guy who like allegedly did it, and he's like, you know, you can look to the there's all this public stuff basically like when they hit the button on the announcement, Like there's a lot of assets on the website, like there's a picture of my shadow for sure, and they upload those assets before they hit the button, before they like put out the actual press relief. And so if you're like scraping the folder on the website that
has all the assets. You can see like you know, something with her name in the web page, and then you can make an informed pat and so that maybe what happened.
Here that is really funny. Also to your point that fifty grand is an institutional money, I have to imagine that next year this inefficiency in the market won't exist, Like maybe they'll hit the button and then they'll upload the photo.
Yeah, there's some of this, like like this is a trade that occasionally exists in US public company earnings. Yeah, because you can, like, if you know, like the URL of like last quarter's earnings, you can just like change Q two to Q three in that URL and just refresh that page until something pops up, which might be before they officially announced earnings. Yeah, and so this is like a well known enough trade that companies are a
little better about not doing that now. So right, you think that like they will be a little bit more information secure next year, or they won't. I don't know.
I mean maybe they're not that bothered, but I just feel like that that body who.
Actually, like if you're the Nobel Institute and it turns out that some junior staffer was using your information to make fifty grand, you'll be annoyed with them. If it turns out that someone on the committee that selects the winner was betting on it, then you'll be really.
Annoyed bad because that's like, don't like that.
That's not insider trading. That's like you know market.
Right, that's like rigging the game.
That's rigging the game. It's like instead of betting on who's going to win the Nobel Peace Prize, you're like giving the Nobel Peace Prize to the person you bet on. It seems really really bad. No allegation to that happened. But if it's just like someone script your website, like who cares? Give them the money?
Who cares? That's a very Kathy would out of referencing, of course, last week's podcast No right.
No. I know people time out prediction markets. You know, I've quoted chain Complain saying it's like their goal is to help people understand and price the future, and people really want prediction markets to create incentives to make the world more informed, and it's like the ideal is like,
you know, you have a bet. I'm like, will Russia invade Ukraine or whatever, right, and like you have people who are really informed geopolitical analysts making bets, and then you have like a Russian general making bets, and then like you actually know right, and then like the market implied odds are really informative, and so people can make economic decisions based on this like probability that exists in a prediction market. Like that's kind of an interesting ideal
and would be useful in a lot of purposes. And you know, as we've talked about here, the problem with that is like it's not clear. There is a lot of dumb money on like yeah, the market of like, well, Russia invade at Ukraine, and so it's hard to make a lot of money. It's hard to be institutional grade, and so like if you're a Russian general, you might be like, well I can make ten thousand dollars and possibly be shot, so I won't do it right. So
it's like it's like hard to incorporate information. And then like you have examples like this where it's like whoever this is like put a lot of work into figuring out who was going to win the Nobel Prize twelve hours early, and like one is that the sort of fact that will inform anyone's economic decisions about like the one's hedging who's going to win the Nobel Prize right.
Two is knowing it twelve hours early? That useful? And then three like the reaction might be that they just stop putting these assets on the web twelve hours early, and then it's like.
Well, okay, yeah, the trade is something like you haven't.
Made anyone more informed about anything in any useful way. It's just yeah, you get the money.
Yeah, well to that point, I mean you write in your newsletter that the point is that the Nobel Peace Prize prediction market is working the way it is supposed to. It incentivizes people to find out information and incorporate it into prices, which I agree with, but it feels kind of unsatisfying because you think about the example of you know, equity markets and a hedge fund analyst scraping a website
for earnings. Makes that market a little bit more efficient, and then it informs how companies invest capital and allocate capital, whereas here it's just someone now knows this early and like there's no follow through on that, which is satisfying.
People care about who in the Nobel Prize, but it doesn't have like economic consequences. They're not a lot of hedgers. Yeah right, yeah, but you know this is like what I've said about sports campling too. Right. It's like, if you like create an ecosystem where people professional and like semi professional and like just hardworking and smart people are dabbling in prediction markets, then like there's possible spillover to
like economically meaningful prediction markets. Right, There's some possibility that the people who spend eight hours building some scraping tools to predict the novel PCE prize will then go on to spend sixteen hours building scraping tools to predict the next Russian invasion, right, because like the similarish skill sets. Maybe, yeah, maybe, like maybe Russia's uploading its battle plans to a website.
Who knows. There's some notion that if prediction markets get bigger and attract capital and skill, then ultimately the thing you really want, which is that they inform people about the probabilities of economically meaningful future events. Some possibly that will come true. And like it's not in a straightforward linear way where it's we start with the most important markets and get really sos they get people to really
get predictions of the most important markets. It's we start with places where you can make money, and then that attracts money, and then that attracts more sophistication.
It probably also informs your behavior in other markets. Like if the prediction market for who is Russia going to invade next gets really informative and liquid, and you could imagine watching that and then going and buying a bunch of calls on oil.
Oh absolutely, although I mean right now, surely the oil market is more predictive of geopolitical events. No, you know, most prediction markets, but I don't know.
The frustrating thing about oil, it's my least favorite commodity to talk about. It never prices in a sustainable risk premium. So maybe you wouldn't buy calls on oil, or maybe you would, I don't know, buy treasuries.
Right This is one of the arguments for prediction markets. There's a lot of ways to implement predictions about future geopolitical events. And what that means is that you can't look at the price of oil or the price of treasuries and read out a prediction about future events because they kind of reflect a lot of different possible events. Yeah, whereas if there's just like a contract, will Russia invade wherever, then you can look at that contract and read off the probability. Yeah.
It's like very pure pleasure. Yeah right, congratulations to.
Yeah, fifty grand probably less than the Nobel Peace Prize price.
How much is it?
I don't know. You get a gold medal.
That's pretty good. Yeah, A look at the satisfaction.
Yeah, it's pretty good.
Yeah.
I feel like winning the Nobel Piece prisence is in some ways the worst. It's like, there's a decent chance that you're like imprisoned or exiled.
That's true. But in the event that you're not, imagine all the speaking engagements and fees that you can command.
That's okay, that's fair, that's fair, lucrative business winning a piece press.
Okay, Well, a bunch of people are going to write in and tell you how much.
Yeah, of course change. I think it's.
It's fun because we could google it. We're not going to do that, right, just yeah, staring at me.
We're up to eighteen five stock trading.
Eighteen five, baby, but you know in twenty twenty six, eventually we'll get to twenty three five?
Is a thing called the twenty four X Exchange, the twenty four Exchange twenty four X National Exchange. The intuition is that we want to trade stocks twenty four hours a day, but like you can't do that because you have to like restart the computers, so they're more modest. Target is trading slacks twenty three hours a day, five days a week, and their progress starts that as they launched eighteen hour a day trading five days a week, which is I feel like.
Their name should be twenty.
Three rec No, that's the thing, like if you're twenty four twenty four, that's the number of hours in a day.
If you say twenty three, I feel like what I know, But it's disingenuous.
Yes, that's why it's funny. Yeah, but like you know, you're allowed to be funny anyway, though. But they're now to eighteen hours, which is like, you know, kind of like extended hours.
Really all you need.
I don't know, it's all I need. I as we've established good about at six o'clock. But if you're, for instance, in Japan and you want to trade American stocks, it is convenient to be able to do it in the middle of your day.
Yeah, I guess like it's a global market, yeah.
For American stocks and slacks generally, and so it does kind of make sense that everyone should be able to trade all the time.
Also, you know, maybe you're in Japan, maybe you're just up at three in the morning.
Right, I try to be generous, like twenty four x Exchange actually says, you know, this is for you know, investors worldwide. And I don't really think that the paradigmatic user of twenty four hour trading is someone drunk on their computer at three am. But I kind of think that I think about that person a lot. I think that's a fun. Yeah, I'm not going to do it justice.
There's a famous great pit in like hedgehund market Wizards the Jack Schueger book, where he interviews one hedgehund manager who says, I want to hire people who wake up early on Sunday morning and log in to poker sites
to pick off the drunks coming home in another time zone. Nice, because what you're doing there is understanding where you have the most edge and then just exploiting your edge, doing it somewhat inconveniently for yourself in a just a cold bloodedly rational way anyway, Right, there's some people in a world of twenty four R trading who would come home drunk from the bar at three am and be like, all right, fire up Robin.
Hood's options, my single triple leverage EUTF now.
Yeah, and again, I don't think that's the main use case for twenty four R trading, but it's the funniest use case. Yeah.
Well, hopefully, you know, as this gets online, we'll figure out who exactly the players at three am Eastern are. It might be Japanese retail players. It might be people drunk coming home from the barn. It might almost said barn, I say that a lot more often than bar.
You come home from the barn more often than the bar.
Or it might be you know, sophisticated US investors looking to pick off Japanese retail investors. I don't know.
Well, yeah, I mean. The other thing, like, the thing that I think is interesting is we have this ecosystem where a lot of news gets disclosed outside of regular market hours because you don't want to be Traditionally, you don't want to be in the situation of disclosing a merger at ten am and everyone reacting to that sequentially and like reading the press release and saying, oh, I should buy the stock, and some people not having gotten the press release yet and like selling it outdated prices.
It's just a mess. And so what everyone does is they announce earnings at seven am or four or five pm, so people have time to digest the earnings before the stock opens for trading next And the purpose of after hours trading really is to let people react to news as it happens. So instead of, you know, if a hurricane hits at midnight, instead of waiting until the next day to dump your stocks, you can dump your stocks at twelve oh one. And when you say that, I
think it's intuitively appealing to a lot of people. Oh I can trade as soon as the thing happens. But I think it's like kind of bad for retail investors. Yeah, what it means is that instead of everyone reacting to news at the same time, because you have a buffer between when it's announced and when it can be traded, you have people reacting to news as they get it, as they analyze it, and so you're gonna have a
lot of people trading at wrong prices. And I do think that's the point where that's the appeal of after hours trading is like you'll just get more volatility, you'll get more wrong prices. If you think you're skilled and you enjoy a gamble or a game of skill, you'll have more opportunities to log on at nine o'clock and be like, I know what this news means, I'm going to trade on it. I actually wrote this week about
the Meme ETF. Yeah, the Roundtole Meme Slack ETF that was closed and then revived this week, and you know, it was revived at the very small like the first day of trading had it very small, Yeah, thousand dollars a couple hundred thousand dollars on it, and it traded kind of normally during the day, and then in the after our session it shot up because like you know, there's a few retail investors who are buying it, and the marketmakers all went home because it was after I
was trading in this tiny little ETF, and so there's no arbitrage mechanism, and so people are just buying it at crazy premiums to nav which should not happen in the ETF, but does if no professionals are awake. And I think if you have like more twenty four hours trading, there's gonna have more trading where no professionals are awake, and things trading at wrong prices, and like people want to trade it wrong.
Prices, You're gonna have uglier charts. Basically, Yeah, if.
You ugly tart means someone like made a very bad trade and someone else made a very good trade. Yeah.
Well you touched on something that I think we've talked about before. It is like, Okay, a world where you do have twenty four or twenty three hour trading five days a week, is whether or not you'd still get like these windows around the open and the clothes where everyone is sort of trained to trade the most.
I think you would, because professionals have a rhythm to their day where they want to stop trading at the close.
You know, yeah, not all but like you know in tix ones it's clinton time.
Yeah not even like to go home, but because like you need a benchmark to mark against. And then also just because of that like timing tradition, there is so much concentrated liquidity there and so if you're a huge investor who needs to move a lot of shares doing that at the close is really useful. I do wonder, you know, I never fully understood how crypto closes work because crypto just sort of from day one as a twenty four to seven market, and so.
For traditional currencies as well.
Yeah, that's right. Yeah, there's no like clothes, right, and like in stocks, there's very clearly a close and a lot of apparatus, you know, index funds and mutual fund withdrawals and redemptions and benchmarks and everything are all kind of organized around the clothes. And if you did move to twenty four to seven training, if you just did it in a natural, like nonpath dependent way, you'd be like, well, when is the clothes? Yeah, I don't think that's ever
going to happen. I think it's always going to be the main exchanges will have a close at four, And even if the main exchanges offer you know, seventeen hours of extended hours and everything is kind of technologically the same during the regular session and the extended session, I think there will still be a close that everyone can point to and where a lot of liquidity will be concentrated.
Yeah. I feel that way too, Like I do struggle to imagine a world where this is the norm.
It's just continuous, twenty four hour day, like nothing, no clothes. Yeah, I don't.
That doesn't seem feels like it goes against just the rhythm of being a human.
Yeah it does. It goes against like the stock markets rhythm. I mean, you say the rhythm of being a human, and I hear you. But like stock market, you can buy an Amazon anytime you want, you know.
Yeah, I was going to say, I mean humans did make the stock market, right, yeah.
Sure, yeah, no, right, right right. There is a human rhythm and there is a computer rhythm, and like humans have become adapted to the computer. And the stock market is from a time of you show up there and you leave to go have dinner, right, whereas like you know, Amazon is from a time of computers and you log in at midnight and buy something, right, And crypto is from a time of computers, and so you log in
at midnight and buy a crypto. Yeah, And I think that is creeping into the stock market, but I think we're a long away from it entirely taking over the stock market.
I did want to point out one thing that you wrote which actually made me grateful for the environment that we live in right now. You talk about how a decade ago it was possible to think that investing would gradually become doller and more efficient and more automated, and that people would just let robots and professionals manage their retirements and basically we wouldn't have any of the silliness that we do now.
That was like when I said it was possible to think that, Like I linked to something I wrote kind of predicting that. So that was dumb.
That's fine, you called yourself out, But I occasionally get tired. As discussed, we all get tired of the silliness and the headlines. But I think that the world that you described sounds a lot more tiresome.
So well, you say that as a person who goes on TV to talk about financial news every day for several hours.
Yeah, but you write about it.
Oh yeah, I agree. I agree, like all this dumb stuff. You know, once every five times I write about memestocks or crypti or whatever, I roll my asthm, like I hate writing about this. Yeah, clearly, I was like, Wow, at least that's something right about No, I agree. I think it's a person as an investor, if you stopped thinking about memestocks and like just you know, had like robots perfectly investors, like reasonably perfectly investors stock and you
didn't worry about it. You could spend more time like reading books.
Yeah right maybe right, Like it's a better world.
But it's works for you know, making jokes in a financial new letter.
That's true.
That's what we're all here for.
I have to go talk about all the silly things on the television, how fun and the asteroid if it hit yet?
Luck with that? And that was the Money Stuff Podcast.
I'm Matt Levine and I'm Katie Greifeld.
You can find my work by subscribing to The Money Stuffnewletter on Bloomberg.
Dot com, and you can find me on Bloomberg TV every day on the close between three and five pm Eastern.
We'd love to hear from you. You can send an email to money Pod at Bloomberg dot net ask us a question. We might answer it on the air.
You can also subscribe to our show wherever you're listening right now and leave us a review. It helps more people find the show.
The Money Stuff Podcast is produced by Anamazarakus and Mooses On.
Our theme music was imposed by Blake.
Maples, Amy Keane as our executive producer.
And Sage Falman is Bloomberg's head of podcasts.
Thanks for listening to the Money Stuff Podcast. We'll be back next week. Welcome our Stuff