America Finally Has a Housing Plan. Trump Is Blocking It.

a lot of the tools out there that are supposed to make your life easier just aren't great

“at talking to each other. That means you end up having to toggle between a dozen different”

apps and services just to keep the lights on. Enough of that. Now there is ODU. The all-in-one fully integrated platform that might actually help you get it all done. Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you try ODU for free at ODU.com. That's ODU.com. Support for the show comes from BCX, the public ticker for private tech. The US stock market started history's greatest way of a wealth creation, from factory workers in Detroit to farmers

in Omaha. Anyone can own a piece of the great American companies. But today our most innovative companies are staying private longer, which means everyday Americans are missing out until now. Introducing BCX, a public ticker for private tech. Now available wherever you buy stocks.

“Visit getVCX.com for more info that's getVCX.com. Carefully consider the investment material”

before investing, including objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. This and other information we found in the funds perspective that getVCX.com. This is a paid sponsorship. Here's a finding that should stop every tech leader cold. Organizations most confident in their AI deployments have more than twice the security incident rate of those that aren't. 72% versus 33%. That's from teleports 2026 infrastructure identity survey, a more than 200

infrastructure security leaders. Teleport establishes a unified identity layer for humans, machines, and agents that has cryptographically backed that enables agents to be controlled and contained with the same rigor that you apply to other actors in your infrastructure.

“Because in the new era of AI, the problem isn't agents.”

It's the privileges we're giving them. Download the free report at goteleport.com/vox. Welcome to Profty Markets. I'm Ed Nelson. It is June 25th. Let's check in on yesterday's market vitals. The S&P 500 and NASDAQ declined as chip stocks extended their losses. However, micron stock popped more than 9% in after hours. As it quadrupled its revenue in the latest quarter, we will see how those results impact the rest of the chip sector today. Oil dipped

below $70 for the first time since before the war, the yield on tenure treasuries fell.

The dollar climbed as Bitcoin crashed below $60,000 to its lowest level since October of 2024. And finally, Ali Barbar shares sank 3% after anthropic accused the company of quote "illicitly accessing its AI models". What else is happening? America finally has a plan to make housing affordable, but present Trump is holding it hostage. In a rare bipartisan feat, Congress passed the most significant piece of housing legislation in 36 years on Tuesday. The 21st century road

to housing act aims to lower housing costs and increase supply. It cuts red tape on new construction and makes loans easier to secure. It also sets limits on the role of institutional investors in the housing market. A policy which Trump himself has championed. But yesterday, Trump abruptly cancelled plans to sign this bill. He said he wouldn't sign it until Congress passes a separate voter ID bill called the Save America Act. Homebuilders rallied anyway with KB Home up 17%

dream finders homes up 13% and centric communities up 10% joining us to discuss this bill, speaking with Darrell Fairweather chief economist at Redfin Darrell. Thank you so much for joining us on the show. I'm just going to tell you how I feel about this right off the bat. I'm here your response. I'm pretty disappointed by this because I saw that bill, which I was very optimistic

about. It seemed like we were finally making a bipartisan effort to get the cost of housing

down, which has exploded. We can go through many different metrics, but the fact that, you know, I often look at the age of first time home buyers, which is now 40 and back in 1991, it was 28, we could go through the list and then the president shuts it down. I don't know where I thought we all agreed. Could you just walk us through this bill and then also your reactions to it either

because there is a lot of great stuff in it. There are provisions that tie government money to local

“municipalities increasing their supply of housing and making it easier to build, which I think is so”

important. There are provisions about manufactured and modular housing, making it easier for people to finance those types of homes, which could unlock a lot of additional housing supply. You can put an ADU in your backyard that's manufactured or that's modular and that's a great way to increase the housing supply. There are also provisions in there about providing money for homes that are risk of natural disasters and then you have some stuff in there about investors buying homes.

You know, I think overall this bill ended up in a really great place that housing advocates can get behind and it is disappointing that it's not going to become law today. But I remain optimistic that

this will get over the finish line. Why do you feel optimistic that this will ultimately happen?

Because it's so supported on both sides. I mean, I'm just looking at how it passed 358 to 32 in the house 85 to 5 in the Senate. Like this is as bipartisan as they come. Is that why you feel optimistic about it? Yes, it's bipartisan both Republican and Democrat lawmakers support it and also people support it. People recognize how unaffordable it has become to buy a home or even

“to rent a home and they want their leaders to take action. So I think that this is the future that”

people have gotten on board with the idea that we need to increase a supply of housing if we really want to make housing more affordable. And this is the direction that the country is headed in. I don't think that just one person is going to be able to stop it. One of the provisions that's been a little bit controversial. It seems that everyone agrees that we need to do whatever we can to increase the supply. I think. I mean, I'd be interested to hear if maybe there's some pushback

that you're seeing from the NIMB community, perhaps. But I feel like we're making headway there. But there are some controversy over this bill to limit the ability of institutional investors to buy up single family homes. That is part of this bill. What is your view on that provision? This has been a popular topic in the world of housing. Should we be letting Black Rock go out there and buy thousands of homes and is that having a bad effect on the price of housing? What is your

view on that debate? I think that this final bill came to a very logical place with respect to that issue. I do not think that private equity or institutional investors are the reason why housing is gotten so unaffordable. I think they're more a symptom than a cause. Although the bill claims to ban them from the market, what it really does is it caps the number of homes that they are allowed to own and puts in some regulations on how they can rent those homes out. They need to allow

renters to have an opportunity to buy the homes and they also need to keep records of rental payments if those renters have history for when they go to buy a home that can be used for their credit history. So I think where we ended up in the end is actually a pretty logical place and I know that Elizabeth Warren is going to say that they banned institutional investors. I don't think that's what actually happened.

“It was moderated. I think that's a good thing. Where are all we in terms of housing prices at this point?”

I mean, I think we'll know that high, but how high and how have they changed over the past year or so?

So it was actually just last week that the median home price crossed over $400,000 for the first time

according to our redfin data. And I think that's one of the reasons people are upset. It's really difficult to find those $300,000 to $100,000 homes that are affordable on a middle-class salary now. And then on top of the home price, mortgage rates are high. They are nearly more than double what they were during the pandemic. So if you were buying say a $400,000 home a couple of years ago during the pandemic, you would actually have to pay about $1,000 more per month just because of the difference

in interest. And that's why people have gotten so frustrated because mortgage rates went up so quickly in 2022. They've remained high, partially due to the trade war and due to the conflict in Iran.

And that continues to make housing just so inaccessible, especially to first-time home buyers who

have to get them mortgage in order to be able to afford a home. Cash buyers can navigate around interest rates, wealthy people can navigate around interest rates, but regular people can't. Could you explain further the connection between what we've seen in the Middle East in Iran and how that ultimately funnels through to housing prices, or I guess housing becoming less affordable overall? Yes, so the reason why mortgage rates are so much higher now than they were

reserve has to raise interest rates in order to suck money out of the economy to get demand to

come down and inflation to come down. And this has a disproportionate impact on the housing market,

“the housing market is very interest rate sensitive because you have to borrow in order to buy a home.”

So when inflation started going up because of the trade war and then because of the conflict in Iran, that directly made mortgage rates higher. Mortgage rates for 30-year fixed rate were 5.99%. The day before the conflict in Iran started and now there are above 6.6%. So you can definitely see the difference that the conflict in Iran is causing to the market. And that lowers demand for housing, but it also makes it less likely for home owners to sell.

Because many homeowners have these record loan mortgage rates that got during the pandemic

back when everybody was refinancing or buying. And if they were to give that up and to buy again, they would have to pay much more for that new interest rate. So these high interest rates are really just suffocating the housing market. We're seeing near record low amounts of homes being sold

“because both buyers and sellers can't afford to make it happen when these mortgage rates are so high.”

It's this terrible combination of your higher prices because there's low supply plus all of these other exogenous factors which are causing higher interest rates. So you're paying more to borrow and then also paying more to buy. Seems like this is exactly what you don't want. And it does

seem that this is becoming more and more a political issue that is at the center of our politics.

I mean, the idea of buying a home is central to everything we do in America. It's central to the American dream. And increasingly, it's becoming impossible. Let's assume this goes through. Let's assume that the bill pulse is Trump does sign it. Is there anything? I mean, are you optimistic that once this pulse is, we might actually see housing prices come down and is there anything that might get in the way of that outcome? So I don't think that home prices

will go down in terms of the sticker price that you see. But what will happen is that home prices won't go up as much as they would in the absence of this bill allowing more supply to be built. And we're projecting that over the next decade home prices will still go up, but they will go up slower than wages and slower than inflation. And effectively buying a home will become more affordable over time.

“And we can make it more affordable over time even more if we add more supply. And that's what this”

bill really does. It's not just the federal bill. There's also a lot of action happening at the state level and the local level. And I think in general, the Yimbee's, the people who have been advocating for more housing supply in general are winning all across the country. All right, Darrell Fairway, the chief economist at Redfin. Darrell, this was extremely informative. Thank you so much. Thank you.

After the break, Meta gets into prediction markets. And for even more markets insights, you can subscribe to my weekly newsletter simply put at simply put.proftimeedia.com. Support for the show comes from Vanguard to all the financial advisors listening. Let's talk bonds for a minute. Captering value in fixed income is not easy. Bond markets are massive, murky, and let's be real. Lots of firms throw a couple flashy funds your way and call it a day.

But not Vanguard. Vanguard bonds are institutional quality. The institutional quality isn't a tagline. It's a commitment to your clients. It means top grade products across the board. The lineup includes over 80 bond funds. They are actively managed by a 200-person global squad of sector specialists, analysts, and traders. Lots of firms love to highlight their star portfolio managers like it's all about that. One brilliant mind making magic happen. Vanguard's philosophy

is a little different. They believe the best active strategy shouldn't be locked away with one person. They should be shared across the team. That way, every client benefits from the collective brain power not just one individual's take. So if you're looking to give your clients consistent results year in and year out, go see the record for yourself at vanguard.com/audio. That's vanguard.com/audio all investing subject to risk vanguard marketing corporation distributor.

Support for the show comes from sofa. If you're a parent helping your child navigate college, you know just how fast the cost can pile up between tuition, housing textbooks, and everyday living expenses, funding higher education is a major financial commitment. That's where today's sponsor sofa comes in. sofa offers private student loans that can cover up to 100% of school certified costs.

books, food, and other educational-related expenses. sofa's private student loans are all about

“flexibility. They offer competitive fixed or variable rates, multiple term options, and monthly”

payments so you can build it around your budget. The application process is completely online and you can check your rate in minutes. And for families exploring their options together, adding a qualified co-signer may help improve chances of securing a lower interest rate, and there are zero fees required. That means no origination fees or late fees, no surprises. What you see is what you pay back. Head to sofa.com/profgstudent to check your options

and get your education funded a smarter way. That's sofa.com/profgstudent. Originalated by

sofa bank and a member FDIC terms and conditions apply, please borrow responsibly.

Support for the share comes from LinkedIn ads. There's no worse feeling than making a major investment in something. Only to realize it didn't exactly live up to the hype, such as buying

“a nice piece of tech that ends up in storage collecting dust or taking a business workshop where”

your main takeaway was a little more than a few motivational words. If you work in marketing, this can happen with ads. You optimize for the numbers that look great, impressions, reach and reactions, but when they don't show revenue, well, that can turn into an unfun conversation with the CFO. LinkedIn has a word for that. Both spend. Reach the right buyers when LinkedIn ads and invest in what looks good to your CFO.

According to the 2026 DreamData benchmark report, LinkedIn ads generated the highest rows of all major ad networks. It's a 121% you can target by company industry job title and more. It's time to cut the bullspend. Advertise on LinkedIn, the network that works for you.

Spend $250 in your first campaign on LinkedIn ads and get a $250 credit for the next one.

Just go to linkedin.com/scot. That's linkedin.com/scot. Terms and conditions apply. We're back with ProfG Markets. The world's largest social media company may soon be expanding into prediction markets. Mark Zuckerberg recently directed his team at meta to create a prediction markets app similar to calcium and polymarket called arena. An initial version of the app involves making bets on real world events using in-game points, although wagering with real money

has not yet been ruled out. So here to discuss this potential new direction for meta. We're speaking with the reporter who actually broke this story. We're speaking with Mike Isaac, New York Times technology correspondent Mike. Great to see you. Thank you for joining us. Met is working on a prediction market platform. I guess something like calcium,

“something like polymarket. What do we know about this?”

So when I found out about it, my jaw kind of hit the floor just because it's kind of an intense thing to do especially right now. It's a moment where all of these markets are being heavily scrutinized even if they are technically playing in a legal gray area according to every analyst. But Zuckerberg, as far as my sources have told me, Zuckerberg himself has ordered this up. It's one of these things where he's really in a student, I would call him in a student of just like

obsessing over what people do online and leaving, let's say leaving value judgments out of it some of the time, but like just saying prediction markets, calcium polymarket, or two of the largest fastest growing activities on the internet for a while, how can we bring some of that activity into Facebook? As far as I know it's going to be a standalone app, but also have the social graph from Facebook and Instagram kind of integrated somehow because their

whole point is do it with your friends and family. That's where you make bets on things in the world. It is striking because I mean for a guy who's led a company that has been scrutinized for engaging in the kinds of digital addictions and digital habits that a lot of people would say or bad for you, or health wise, bad for you, mental health wise. This is sort of the next controversial thing, is prediction markets because it's controversial for the fact that it's quite similar to

gambling in a lot of ways. And I guess I'm just struck by the fact that he doesn't seem to care about that, or maybe he does, and he decides that the money is worth it. I mean, do you know if that's been part of the calculus for the people over at meta? It's a great point, and I was after the story broke

even more stuff. There's a few things. One, there are a lot of people inside of meta right now who are

not happy that they're actually working on this. I think as you might imagine, prediction markets are very controversial, like a lot of folks call them pathways to gambling. A lot of folks call them outright gambling under a different name and are upset that they're not called gambling apps. They're, again, they're still in this process of where does regulation exist at all around them? You know, it's like stalled in Congress as far as some of these bills are going. So like,

it's controversial to begin with, and not a ton of people knew about it. It was a small team working on it under the direction of Zuckerberg. That said, I saw another document that was

talking about what they do is a lot of these risk assessments internally, like essentially pros and

conseless. And one of the things they had a category that specifically was about regulatory risk.

“And because they're playing with not real money, they said this was like low risk and that's how”

they can sort of justify it. I still think that's probably a rosy view. Like it's, you're in the middle of exactly what you're saying. You're in the middle of a bunch of high profile court battles, class action lawsuits, essentially calling your app addictive in a lot of ways. And then you bring about like, it's just like inviting more pain and scrutiny. But I think Mark Zuckerberg has a high pain tolerance threshold, especially if he believes this is something that can benefit him and

meta in the long run. Yeah. And I would add on to that the fact that we've got the sequel to the social network, which is going to be all about this. So it's going to be even more public pressure, which I guess he's not that worried about. The fact that they're doing in-game points is striking. It seems to me that maybe that means that they don't want to delve into the

“regulatory cesspit to aggressively. But I do wonder, I mean, how are you going to make money doing that?”

Or is that really even the point? Do you think that ultimately the strategy would be tested, see if it works, and if people like it, then we'll start using real dollars? There's a version of this where, you know, the folks I talk to have not ruled out as you noted, have not ruled out ever making a financial component of real money component to it. I think Zuckerberg, again, he cares about behavior and activity. And if there's a way to capture

behavior, even if it's not directly financially motivated, there are indirect ways. He's all about indirectly monetizing a lot of stuff that's on their platform. And at the end of the day,

we'll always go back to scale. We have three and a half billion users. The two things we need to

think about is how to keep them coming back and then shoving different forms of monetization in there. So I can imagine a world in which this highly, I'm not even going to say a word addictive because that comes loaded. But like, let's say this highly engaging activity brings people back to Facebook more often. How many more? What is your ad inventory do there? It opens up. You get more

“time spent. And so even if they never make it for money thing, I think if it works, it could it”

could yield some sort of benefits to them. It is striking just how good of a copycat Mark Zuckerberg is. If it's, you know, starting reels as a copy of TikTok and Instagram stories which copied snap, now he's copying calcium and polymarket. I mean, it's been a winning strategy before. So, I mean, I feel like we have every reason to believe it might be a winning strategy again. Just going back to what you said about how the team at Meta feels about this.

The idea that people, they, they don't want to be working on this. They're not excited about this. It's an interesting point because we're at a time in the markets where investors are starting to feel the same way about Mark Zuckerberg, specifically when it comes to spending on AI, which is he's spending all of this money on these data centers. He hasn't communicated a clear vision for where we're going to see a real return. I mean, that was already a concern and he's

doing probably the worst job of all the hyperscalers in communicating. Here's how we're going to make money out of this thing. I'd be curious to know, is that a feeling that is growing among the staff at Meta? Do we know if there is a lack of trust or faith or concern that is growing aside from the prediction markets? Yeah, you nailed it. I think the, so this sort of controversial app that they're building also comes at, I was talking to someone there who's been around for a long

like people are morale is really, they made the case like, look, we're still making money and we're building things or whatever, but like AI and the threat of competition around them has got a level of

“paranoia in across the board that they're going to get unceded. I think at the top ranks and then”

at the bottom ranks, you're just sort of going through enormous layoffs and real structural change on how they've rejigered a lot of the engineering teams in a way that is actually having the bleed, uh, attrition's going up because other companies are coming in and taking those engineers. So it is like a very tumultuous time inside of Meta right now and I think the, uh, I've only seen a few like moments inside over the years where folks are outright sort of on the verge of mutiny

and one of them was around the Trump election stuff and Miss Info suddenly being a thing and really now in the wake of the layoffs and all the sort of turbulence like it's, it's pretty gnarly inside and the, the top is trying to calm the troops, but it's, it's been hard, I think. All right, Mike Isaac, New York Times technology correspondent really fascinating stuff. Mike, we appreciate your time. Thank you for having me.

The Can Lions Festival, the advertising world's biggest annual gathering, kicked off this week in the south of France over five days, thousands of executives from advertising media tech and entertainment all descended onto Can to network, hand out awards and debate where the business is headed. So we wanted to hear from a Can regular our very own Skark Alloway who's going to give us this dispatch from the ground, Skull, good to see you take away his learnings from this year's

Can. Well, first and foremost what is on everyone's mind is the absolute invasion of the

tartan army here. You're going to see a bunch of ginger babies who want haggots, not mother's milk and nine months. The tartan army's just taken over the south of France. It's very exciting. If the tartan army were one fifty-one year old Jewish professor wearing a team Scotland, go! You're going

“to need to give that in the in the laundry soon. I think you're on day seven. You think I, well,”

I bought my team in Manchester so I'm ready to switch a loyalty. Okay, so three, I think three bit major things, things. One, I think last year, everyone was a AI is a threat and going to take over everything and this year, it's more about how do we incorporate AI and also, I think a little bit of a cyber-leaf that creativity is one of the places that it's not under attack from AI. And that is, remember this, about the same last year that was the AI co-commercial,

do you need your media agency, do you need creative, and the answer is that with AI, you probably

need like creative is even more important in terms of standing out, right? You got this giant ship and needs cells and the cells is creative. So 13,000 people, biggest can ever in 90 countries. The biggest trend here is creators and that is, there's now last year, there were 400 creators, this year, there's 500 brands are going to spend about half their marketing budget on some sort of creator economy, whether it's an influencer or a YouTube, the stars, the ironic thing is the industry,

you see that celebrating the industry itself and they seem to have not broken up and realized they're no longer the protagonist, that it's no longer the means of production deciding what could advertising is, it's consumers deciding which creators they want without the middle,

“without the people actually, you know, if you say you should be Madison Avenue, giving awards”

to each other, now it's a bunch of studios or people in ring lights. And then I would say the other really big trend is sports and that is, there's now lion sports as the ultimate cultural religion, whether it's the world cup, whether it's advertising, finding the only place you can get live is on sports, it does seem that that is the new kind of cultural touchdowns but does it sort of the takeaways I get from can this year? What about some of the tech companies? Like

snap, I know you had that, there was the snap party which we were wondering if you would actually get invited to that party, giving what we said about the snap specs was you were not to complementary of that new product but then also matches come out with these new glosses as well is that getting a lot of play, the snap specs and then also the new meta glosses? Not really, I would say I went to the snap dinner and I met a bunch of very impressive people and

one of the most, one of the amazing things about the market, a snap is hard at much a really talented

people from meta and alphabet and I and I said why would you, I mean these are talented people who decided to do a snap and I'll say why did you come over there? I share Evans vision and a

for snap, you call a VP and meta and you say okay, we'll give you options worth a million bucks.

“If the stock triples, it's worth 5 or 10 million, where is the stock more likely to triple in the”

next 24 months? Meta going from two trillion to six trillion or snap showing any sign of life and going from four to 12 bucks to share. So it's weird, despite it's almost like their low stock price is a bit of a feature, not a bug but I was very impressed by their ability to recruit people and I don't think it's because they share Evans vision of a computer on your face future and the other thing about Big Tech, opening I had a big party with a bunch of creators.

That's the first time at the festival, this year. And it reminds me, it's a 10 or 12 years ago when the most sought after event was to go to Cheryl Sandberg's book signing party and I felt like this is just so hilarious that she runs her finger through their hair before she shoots them in the fucking face. These guys are basically inviting the people who's house they just robbed while they were sleeping. So the notion that a bunch of creators are showing up to open AI, it's like inviting a

hijacker to an air show as a way I would describe it. But we've been here before. It was one of the bigger events people have been talking about it. But yeah, I don't, you know, I'm focused on quite frankly, I'm focused on the Spotify party tonight, Mumford and Sons and then the Yahu party DJ TSTO because I know you were wondering about that. It doesn't sound that cool, but you did get invited to the snap party. Well, I thought ludicrous last night. I'm like 1990 called the monster

target spec. It could be better than that. So you, but you, a final question, you did get the invite from snap. They didn't resend. Yeah, because the show didn't air till Monday that event was snowy go. The event was sunny night. Good. Now to be fair, their smart people, they're, I actually, this is going to sound weird, but there's much of shit posting of snap

I've done at four bucks to share in nine billion or whatever it doesn't market cap. I actually think

“snap's a pretty decent buy right now because I think at some point Evan wakes up from the silver”

dream, either spends the group or closes it down and the company's actually the core platform. Sure, hold us have had to spend three and a half billion dollars on a stupid wearable to figure out that Evan is more Mark Zuckerberg than any of Steve Jobs. And by the way, that's just fine. A core platform with a half a billion people a day is a great business. But I would say the tech companies have taken a back seat. The stars of this can are the 500, 600 people walking around and you see a

crowd around them. You know, like, oh, she does the most famous food blog in Sweden. Yes, create influences. Yeah, influencers. And they, and then the most encouraging thing about the creator economy is 50% of the spend is going to the nano and micro influencers, meaning the long tail. So it's different than kind of social media or podcasts where it's a winner take most. There does appear to be a lot of opportunity for little niche players, which is encouraging for the

“ecosystem. You're in Europe. Are you seeing any interesting European companies in Canada as well?”

I actually think, and this is a prediction, the best performing one day IPO, the biggest pop of a tech company of an IPO in June is not SpaceX at 22%. There's a company being taken out by JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs. I think it's pricing next week sometime. And it's actually an Italian company, and it's the Berkshire Hathaway of forgotten but beloved brands. Any idea what I'm talking about? I do not. Nobody does. And that's the strange thing. AI in American companies has sex so much

oxygen out of the room. There's a company called bending spoons. And it's a roll-up of all of these kind of forgotten but beloved brands. So ever note, event bright, meet up, AOL, Vimeo. All of these

really interesting companies. They never got quite iconic status, but we're good companies that's

spent hundreds and millions sometimes billions to establish a great customer base and recurring revenue. And this company has gone in and bought them on the cheap uses AI to clean up the back end, cut costs. This is a company that Q1 of 2025 did about a 250 million loss, 120 million. Q1 of 2026 is going to do over 600 million and just went profitable to 27 million. It's going out at a valuation of around 19 billion. So technically six to eight times revenues, which looks

cheap in this market. And these are, and the thing about this is while they're consumer brands, 88% of the revenue is recurring revenue. So it's sort of SaaS, meets Berkshire Hathaway, meets consumer internet. And I think this company is going to be, it's going to register a stronger

And when people look at the financials in the momentum they have, I think this thing's going to get a lot of attention. And then once they have a public currency, think about the hundreds of

enough thousands of companies that are on the list of great internet companies that never got iconic

or got public on their own that are looking for a home. So the thing I love about it, it's not

“AI and it's not American. It's Italian and it's doing really well. And that's why no one's heard of”

it because the AI companies have sucked all the attention oxygen out of the room. Anyways,

bending spoons, my prediction, the biggest first-day pop of a tech company is going to be this

little-known company out of Italy that has found all these orphaned brands that are great businesses. Okay, Scott Gallo, I thank you. Enjoy the policy tonight. Thanks, brother. Congratulations on

“team England. That should have been a penalty for Ghana. I got admitted. You got to be honest.”

But I'm glad they're doing so well. Yeah, we should have scored at the end there. We're no we're doing okay. No mail draws. Not the best, but we'll see. We'll see. Panama soon. All right, brother. Okay, that's it for today. Tune in tomorrow for our conversation with AI researcher and skeptic Gary Marcus. We're discussing why AI models are actually

“done more than investors think and what that means for the AI trade. Also, be sure to join us on”

Monday. We've got Robert Armstrong joining us for a Markets half-time report as the first six months

of the year come to a dramatic close. This episode was produced by Claire Miller and Allison Weiss and engineered by Benjamin Spencer. Our video editor is Brad Williams. Our research team is Dashalon, Isabella Kinsel, Cristino Donahue, and Mia Sauverio. Our social producer is Jake McPherson. Thank you for listening to Prophure Markets from Prophure Media. If you liked what you heard, give us a follow. I'm Ed Allison. I will see you tomorrow.

Make presentations for that thing or design merch for that thing. You can do anything. So people can see your thing. Feel your thing. Love your thing. The next thing you know, it's a thing. Canva, the thing that makes anything a thing.