Gas Is Back Above $4 — And Could Keep Rising

You know that rep who closes faster than everyone else, they're not quite who they seem.

“While they're walking into every call prep, writing perfect hand-off briefs and follow-ups”

and catching every signal in time, they've actually got Atia working for them around the clock. Atia's revenue agents qualify and work every account so they can move at scale with ease. It's how startups, including Granola, Motel, and Whisper Flow win, you can go to Atia.com/Proftshee

and you'll get 15% off your first year at ATTIO.com/Proftshee.

Support for the show comes from BCX, the public ticker for private tech. The US stock market started history's greatest way of the wealth creation, from factory workers and Detroit farmers in Omaha, and he went to own a piece of the great American companies. But today, our most innovative companies are staying private longer, which means every

day 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, at GetVCX.com. This is a paid sponsorship.

Recommendations can be amazing.

I mean, maybe someone recommended that TV show you've been obsessed with lately. But when it comes to home projects, it's different. If you don't like a show, you might lose a few minutes. If you hire a friend, a friend, a friend, a friend to fix a leaky ceiling, you could end up with a flooded kitchen.

Maybe I know a guy just isn't enough for your home. That's why thumbtack works so well. They'll match you with a top-rated local pro, and you can see photos of past work, credentials, and reviews all right in the app. For your next home project, try Thumbtack.

Higher the right pro today. [MUSIC] Welcome to Prophecy Market, I'm Adelson, it is July 21st. Let's check in on yesterday's market vitals. The S&B 500 and the Dow declined as conflict in the Middle East escalated.

The Nasdaq was flat, oil was volatile, more on that. In a moment, the yield on tenure treasuries rose.

SpaceX stock hit a new low of $120 per share, and finally, Warner Brothers shares fell

nearly 4% off for a judge temporarily halted its deal to get acquired by Paramount. The judge said the sale likely violates anti-dressed laws and scheduled a hearing for next month. Okay, what else is happening? Conflict over the straight of Hormuz keeps escalating, and now it is spreading to Saudi Arabia. As of Monday, the US had bombed Iran for nine consecutive nights in response to Tehran's attacks

on oil tankers, and Iran had retaliated with strikes across the region. But yesterday, Iran's Houthi allies in Yemen declared a naval blockade against Saudi Arabia. This blockade stands to threaten the primary way in which oil has been able to get around the straight of Hormuz through a Saudi pipeline to the Red Sea. These developments immediately shot the price of oil back up, crude is now about $89 a barrel

and the national average for a gallon of gasoline has yet again hit $4 in America up 15% in just the past week. So to discuss what is happening in the Middle East and also how it's affecting the price of oil we are speaking with Matt Smith, director of Commodity Research at Kepler. Matt, great to have you on the show, a lot happening here.

If you could just give us your initial reactions and a quick rundown, what has unfolded

“and how is it being reflected in oil prices right now?”

We're tracking those tankers that are passing through the straight of Hormuz here, ad jobbers becoming increasingly more difficult as there's been different routes to try and traverse the straight. And so what you've essentially got is you've got the Iranian route which is right at the top kind of the north and then you have the pre-conflict highway which was straight through the

middle and then at the bottom you've got the old money route which is the kind of the southern corridor. As we've seen escalations increasing here and you've seen some of the tankers being hit that were passing the old money route. All we're actually seeing now is essentially traffic grinding to a halt again except

for those Iranian tankers and friendlies that passing the Iranian route.

into May the traffic was very, very slow and then, you know, just over the last month or so we've really seen it pick up because of the signing of the memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran.

Now that has basically been, you know, dissolved and we've seen an escalation here in

attacks as you mentioned. There's been nine consecutive nights, we'll probably have the tenth today and so this is causing all prices to start to kick back higher again. Just looking at what happened with Saudi Arabia and that blockade, it seems as though oil supply was figuring out a way to kind of reroute itself away from the straightive removes

or around the straightive removes. But I guess my question is, to what extent was that successful and to what extent has that

“now been kind of blocked now that we've got this new development?”

It was working pretty successfully and so it was able to reroute about three and a half

million barrels a day of Saudi crude across to the Red Sea and so Saudi was exporting about

seven million barrels a day out of the Midies Gulf Prize. So it was able to reroute half of that crude. So that put them in a better situation more than most. So that has definitely helped somewhat cushion the supply shock because all of that crude was then going across to the Red Sea and was heading into the likes of India, China, South

Korea, these countries, the otherwise getting their crew from the Midies Gulf and it had stopped. And so it was definitely providing some support there in terms of supply and then helping to keep prices in checks somewhat. Now the who these are threatening to do that blockade, they're not actually doing it.

Yeah, we're not seeing tankers or anything being hit. But this essentially is the ace that Iran has in its pocket because we've had this escalation that's been happening in the last few months here and some of said, oh, you know, they could close Babam and Deb but they've kind of held that back until the point where the U.S. would essentially start perhaps attacking infrastructure, energy infrastructure bridges and that's kind of the point that we've got to. So then it's for Iran to up the anti here and that's basically bringing Babam and Deb into playing.

So it's really just a sign that essentially Iran has is getting to the point where they've really got nothing left to lose or, you know, they're just getting to the point where they're willing to do this kind of scorched tactic and so we'll have to see how this plays out. But the threat of stopping these flows will definitely have a British impact on prices. So the memorandum of understanding has been dissolved. We are now fully at war striking Iran on multiple consecutive nights.

Now, they are, as you say, playing the ice-cold, they are trying to block any of the other supply routes that have been resorted to over the past several months. I mean, it doesn't look good. And we're at $89 a barrel. Gas in America has gone back up to $4.

“Why should we believe that that number is going to come down within the next, I don't know, several weeks?”

Yeah, no, shouldn't. And actually, what has developed over the last few months here or essentially since the beginning of March, when this has happened, is everyone's been watching that oil price and you haven't felt the biggest impacts on that oil price. And the reason for that has been a number of different reasons. You know, China has really come out of the market.

China has just stopped buying oil.

They stopped back on their imports by about five, five and a half million barrels per day.

So that has been hugely helpful. You've also had essentially a lot of these refineries dialing back on their activity. So they haven't taken that crude. And that has largely offset the production loss we've seen from the Middle East. But what that has meant is that the pain has essentially been transferred from the oil price across to the products.

And so when you talk about gasoline at four dollars a gallon on the national average, we see diesel at five dollars breaking about five. And that's going to be really pushing higher because in barrel terms, it's about a hundred and seventy dollars a barrel for barrel of diesel. And so that's where that pain is coming through is in the products because we're not seeing those produced. Where is the the crude market is somewhat remains somewhat in balance because of this rerouting and because this less at lack of refining.

When you look at that that number $89 dollars a barrel.

“To you, does that say that investors are feeling optimistic about the current state of affairs or pessimistic?”

I mean, does that number hold any biases inside of it?

So I'm not saying prices are manipulated per se, but they are definitely under the influence here of things other than fundamentals.

And so because of that, you've got some of the simply not getting involved in the oil trade and that has been happening for a good number of months here. There's a lack of liquidity there.

“The flip side of that, that's why I point to the diesel market again is because the US administration is fixated on the oil price.”

Super fixated on prices, the pump is not necessarily paying that much attention or putting that much emphasis at all on diesel prices. And so that's perhaps the least influenced market out of all of the petroleum complex and that's the one that we're seeing absolutely ripping here.

I mean, this is essentially the most important question for the US economy right now, which is what's going to happen to the price of oil.

What's going to happen to the price of fuel as we saw in the previous inflation report. It was lower oil prices as a result of the memorandum of understanding that made the number go down more than the previous month. But now we know that whatever pricing was being priced into the market at the time was incorrect because the memorandum of understanding is over. We're now back at war. Someone argue we continue to be at war the entire time. I won't get into it. But it seems that what we have seen over the past week is going to have material impact on US consumers and the US economy.

And perhaps that isn't being fully reflected or appreciated or priced in by investors and traders right now.

“How impactful and how bad do you think it will be going forward?”

Well, we could just continue in the status quo right in that there's this back and forth between the US and the running terms of the attacking of tankers by run, the attacking of infrastructure by the US. And then in the background there is talks and whispers of diplomacy, which helps keep oil prices in check here, which in turn helps keep prices of the pump and check. But when we came into this thing there was expectation you can't close the straight of four moves for two, three weeks it will cause like Armageddon.

Yeah, here we are four and a half months in. And so it's really realistic to try and consider the scenario could this still be closed in November and December. Yes, there are work around this medium term plans here to reroute crude, but we really could be just continuing to scramble over the next four or five months here. And that's a reality if that happens you're not going to be an environment where prices at the pump and diesel prices are moving lower.

“What kind of price do you think that would that would result in if we find ourselves in the same situation that we're in today and to be clear I mean it seems like a couple chips are making their way through the straight of four moves.”

I mean is that right or is it just zero? That was like a week or so ago or even just before the weekend where you were seeing some getting through there. But the Iranians have turned their focus to targeting those because they were going through the Armageddon route. They were getting like a US naval escort and so those they're trying to deter any kind of traffic. So the only traffic that we're seeing going through right now is related to Iranian or Iranian and it's just empty tankers.

And so but but you're point we were seeing over the last month this increase in traffic going through increase confidence increase risk taking. And that really helped the all market not necessarily on the the all price. But in in the differentials you really saw the air being let out of the tires there the pressure taken out as we saw the stranded cargo's in the mid east Gulf getting out of there. But then again we've just is one step forward two steps back here where we're back to to essentially the doors being shut again.

So I'll return to my question which is if we find ourselves in the same position that we are in today four or five months from now. What would you estimate the price of oil? Will will look like it's got to be higher you know our hold on my hands here and you know in March. If you'd ask me that question or you may have done that's me but like you know all prices should be 120 hundred thirty hundred forty dollars if you close the straight for months and months and so. Perhaps I've been burned by saying that right but but maybe if we're going to be pushing above a hundred here that doesn't seem unrealistic at all.

If we're in the same scenario that we're now if four five months time if we're in the same scenario that we're in now. And it isn't about a hundred dollars a barrel what would have had to have happened to get it lower than that what would.

Well it would be would be drawing down inventories absolutely everywhere that we could.

You're being having tankers sneaking out of the straight of four moves however that was possible rerouting of crude as much as possible to but it's it's just difficult to see a scenario where you're not pushing into triple digits if this is still the situation in full five months time. All right Matt Smith is director of commodity research at Kepler Matt appreciate your time. Thank you. Thanks Ed. Thanks for the break. Why investors are so worried about the latest Chinese model. And for even more markets insights you can subscribe to my weekly newsletter simply put at simply put dot property media dot com.

There's a civil war happening in the democratic party and if there's one place that's playing out most clearly it's in Michigan.

“A crucial standard primary battle in Michigan that could determine control of Congress in November Congresswoman Haley Stevens and up dual LCA.”

A progressive Democrat and a moderate Democrat in the end it all comes down to the dreaded E word electability. But in Michigan one candidate is trying to turn the electability concept on its head if we think that voters walk around asking where do I sit on some theoretical left right spectrum. Then in theory the bulk of the voters are somewhere in the middle. The problem though is that that model hasn't really accurately predicted our politics for a very long time. If Michigan is wanted moderate why would they have elected Donald Trump twice.

Dr Abdul El Saiyan is making the progressive case for America first and he's trying to settle the Democrats at the illogical battle in the process.

This is about the many verses the money. I'm a stead herrington and this is America actually catch us every Saturday on YouTube or wherever you get your podcast. Support for the show comes from so far one of the biggest advantages wealthy people have is the means to hire people who can help them make better financial decisions. But for most of us there's six different financial apps that don't talk to each other that's where so far coach can help. Coach provides step-by-step chat-based guidance for all your finances helping you pay down debt save more spend smarter and invest.

“It doesn't just give you advice it can actually execute the moves for you with your approval. You can also ask important questions such as can I afford to buy a home this year or how can I improve my credit score?”

And because it's connected to your linked accounts the answers are tailored to your specific financial situation. And if you ask so-fi coach what should I do with $10,000? If you're lucky you might need the answer sooner than you think. You'll be entered for a chance to win 10 grand. Learn more and enter at so-fi.com/prophgeecoach. That's so-fi.com/prophgeecoach. This is a paid advertisement by so-fi technologies and is not intended to be financial advice. No purchase necessary. A purchase will not increase your chances of winning.

Open only to legal residents of the 50 US/DC. 18+ voidwear prohibited by law sweepstakes ends at 11.59 pm eastern standard time on September 15th, 2026. I'm stand-up comedian John Marcos Suraisy and I'm actor penis model Russell Daniels. The downside is our podcast where we bring on guests to talk about how miserable their lives are.

“Because let's face it, things are not getting better.”

Every episode we talk about what's wrong with our lives, our guest lives, the world, but in a fun way. Bottom line is you're going to walk away feeling better about your life. We've had so many cool guests Caleb Huron. Busy films, Stavros Halkius, Leveron Cox, Hassan Piker, Alana Glazer, I promise you're going to have a good time. Now on the Vox Media Podcast Network, this is the downside.

We're back with Profty Markets.

China just gave Wall Street its second deep-seek moment.

Chinese startup Moonshot AI released Kimi K3, the world's largest open source model on Thursday. On some benchmarks including front end coding, K3 beats the best models from open AI and anthropic. But the biggest story may be the price tag running K3 costs roughly a third of what anthropic charges for its flagship model. And businesses are starting to notice on open router, a marketplace for AI models. Chinese open-weight models now occupy the top five spots by weekly global token usage.

The Nasdaq fell about one and a half percent on Friday as US tech stocks sold off following the release of Kimi K3. So we wanted to speak with an expert who works hands-on with both open and closed models.

Charlie, thank you for joining us. So this Kimi K3 model that was just released has everyone kind of with their hair on fire. We obviously saw the Nasdaq race one and a half percent ship stock sold off. A lot of people saying that it was a problem David Sachs. The former AI's are called the release quote concerning. What do you make of Kimi K3?

“Yeah, I think the big story here is not necessarily Chinese models versus American models.”

I think the big story here is open source versus close source. So obviously the story we've been sold for the last several years is that close source is going to continue to dominate.

The American frontier, close source labs are going to continue to pull ahead and open source will never catch up to that.

And I think what we're seeing with Kimi with you know, other Chinese models like GLM, GLM cores are very, very big wave. It may not have done the rounds in the same way that Kimi did, but it was certainly a great model. And even like releases like inkling from thinking machines, which is an American company. What we're seeing is that basically the recipe to build these things, there's no secret source. The big labs, they don't have anything that the open source labs don't have, and open source is going to continue to improve the capabilities and intelligence of the models they release.

As we scale up the size of these models, the amount of data and compute that goes into them. And so yes, from one kind of aspect, it's concerning that this is like a Chinese model that is leading the charge with this sort of like open source versus close source debate.

“But I think there's really promising science for the open source ecosystem in general, and I think a lot of people are starting to realize that.”

That's potentially a better world to end up in, where compared to where you have maybe to do up, only with open and anthropic having these models that pull away from everyone else. And they dictate all the terms of access and control that intelligence. Just for the idea that what is the difference between an open source model and close source model? Anthropic, opening eye, Google, their flagship models are what we refer to as close source in the sense that I can ask a question, that question gets sent off over the internet, goes to their GPUs, which run the model.

They do the number crunching, and then they send the answer back to me.

I never get to touch the model weights, which you can think of with this big collection of numbers that do a bunch of multipliers to give me my answer.

Whereas with open source, I can actually download those numbers. Not only can I host that on my own GPUs, I can also do things like continue to train at myself for specific tasks. So it's really about being able to download the actual weights to the model rather than just being able to send a question to it. So you can think of this as like, you know, owning the disk for an Xbox game versus like having that Xbox game install through the cloud on your on your particular Xbox. I can actually see the physical disk.

“What would be the pros for developing a close source model instead of an open source model? Why would open eye and anthropic pursue those methods instead?”

I guess there's two answers here.

The first answer is the one that open eye and anthropic will tell you, which is that, you know, these things as they become increasingly intelligent.

We have to think very carefully about how they're applied in society. There's obviously real safety concerns, there's cyber security concerns, there's biological weapons development concerns. And so we should really think about who we trust to build and control this intelligence and anthropic in open eye as argument is you should trust us. We are the best at developing this intelligence and hence we should be the one to dictate how it's used and how it's applied. Basically, perpetuity. There should be a very small number of actors who can choose how what we do with with LLMs and intelligence.

And I think the real argument is that obviously this stuff is so lucrative that if you do manage to prevent anyone else from developing it, you can capture instantly high margins on the tokens that you're producing. So anthropic's rumored to have margins north of 80%. I think like when there is a case where a world where there's only two major players and you end up in the joyfully, that is a very real possibility to continue. And I think that's obviously very, very lucrative to open in anthropic. So open sources are threats to them in the sense that those margins are going to remain at 80% for long.

Of course, there are like security concerns. We have to really think carefully about how these things are used. But at the moment, it doesn't seem like open source versus close source. The intelligence ceiling that we've gotten to hasn't led to any increased concerns around, you know, Can I use this model through open source or close source? Like the risk of developing a bio-weapon for instance is about the same in either case. It seems that there has been kind of a shift towards both Chinese models, but also open source models, most of these Chinese models are open source or open weight.

Why is that happening, do you think? What is the value proposition that developers are deciding is greater when they use these types of models as opposed to one offered by Open AI or anthropic? I think there's developers who have a very, you know, an elastic demand for the frontier intelligence that will always want to use the most intelligent models. And then there's the ecosystem and the economy in general. The way I like to think of it is that for all the economically valuable tasks that we could closely use in LLM4, there is some intelligence threshold at which below that it's very difficult to do the task and above that you're getting very diminishing returns to having more and more intelligent models and usually intelligence is correlated with cost.

They've hit the threshold of intelligence, probably even a while ago with open source, open source has been accelerating rapidly, and you just don't need a favour or mythos level model in order to do some of these things and you get exactly the same performance if you use a model that's a tenth of the size or even a 50th of the size. Post-trains are also really important here because it means you can teach a much smaller model to do one thing really, really well as opposed to taking an open source of the shelf opens also close source model and trying to prompt engineer your way to doing that task.

“So post-training really changes the economics here and of course you can only post-trained on open source models because you can actually touch the weights as opposed to close source.”

And so I think margin pressures are big one and another one is like, anthropic and open AI I think are realizing that the recipe is the same amongst all these companies. Like there is no secret source. Yes, there's there's probably a long tail of optimization, small optimizations that anthropic and open AI have that the rest of the ecosystem doesn't have. But their mode is no longer in there being them being the only ones who can post-traine or sort of train is very very large multi-training parameter models. They're mode now, it's starting to shift towards okay. Well, if we have a little bit of a head start, what if we try and like hit particular verticals and so anthropic is very clearly doing this.

They're going after the verticals, so if you know finance and legal open AI as well. And so I think companies are really feeling it's pressure. If you're a startup or a company in legal or finance and you're using a lens to these particular things and you have previously just been an anthropic wrapper. You've just got some logic calling anthropic models. You don't have a distinguishing mode for anthropic between you and anthropic and so you're starting to think about, okay, what's the one thing I have that anthropic doesn't have.

And that's a really nice feedback cycle. I have users who love and hate my product for various reasons and they will tell me what they love and hate and I can use that to improve the intelligence of a model. And again, you do that through training and the only real way to do that is with open source models and so I think it's this combination of margin pressure and companies wanting to develop to develop their own mode to protect themselves against their vertical being eaten by these closed source frontier labs.

It seems like a big piece of story for an enterprise for a company that's trying to leverage AI as much as they can and Alex Cobb talked about this in his interview with Sam. I see that it's since gone viral is basically just the price. The anthropic tokens are expensive, open AI tokens are expensive, tokens from Chinese model providers are less expensive. So my question is, to what extent is there a relationship between price and being open source? Why is it that these Chinese models and these other models that aren't frontier lab models?

“How is it that they can offer a product that does the job pretty well, but literally a fraction of the cost?”

The answer to this used to be simply that the Chinese and open source models were much smaller. So the big labs are the only ones that have the compute to be able to train the really large models.

And of course, like the scaling laws that we have predict that intelligence increases, but with diminishing returns in model size. And so yes, of course, the big labs had better and bigger models, but you often could use a much smaller models to do the task. I think now it's more of a case of like, okay, some of these open source models are actually very large and I think K3 was a massive shifting point because you know previously we've gone into the just for it into the one trillion parameter. The range with the previous Kimi models and deep seek very, very recently, but this is you know almost totally parameters like this is a big boy.

And so now it's much more about, okay, we're really seeing under the hood that the reason that anthropic and open-air models are so expensive is because they have great margins because they were sitting at the frontier and there was no real competitor at the very frontier.

And again, a lot of this stuff like it is in the last week, you do demand frontier intelligence.

But now we're really seeing, okay, if we do have, you know, multi-trillion parameter open source models that any company can, you know, host on their own GPUs and can post train and then host on their own GPUs.

“Then what that's telling us and a lot of analysis is telling us is that the frontier labs margins are just massive. And so I think that the shift that's going to happen now is if there is an alternative that is essentially the same.”

And to 99.99% of people doing 99.99% of things is indistinguishable, like Kimi is indistinguishable from a fable or a GPD 5.6 sold.

We're just going to see those margins shift.

So instead of being 80% to the person who train them all, they might not be, end up being 40% and the rest of that margin is going to be distributed. One to the consumer and then two to the rest of the ecosystem. So the computer providers and the infants providers are going to be big wins of all this competition amongst, you know, model trainers. It's no longer the case where there's only one or two players who can do this in capture those massive margins. There's going to be much lower margins for model trainers and the rest is going to kind of be spread out amongst the ecosystem.

It seems to me that these models, Kimi K3 and plenty of others that seem to be released practically every month. And then we see all these benchmarks where they're performing either in line with open hours models or outperforming them.

If we know that they're already struggling to generate more revenue than they spend,

if we know that they're also stacking up billions of dollars in losses and they essentially need to develop more pricing power. If they want to get profitable and get cash-plipped cash flow positive over the next few years. And that's been open hours objective. It seems like this is exactly the kind of thing that will get in the way of that. Is this dire to the AI ecosystem? How does this actually play out for the largest names in AI? I've obviously been a big advocate and proponent of open source for a long time and want open source to win in some reasonably significant capacity.

I think my honest take here is that this isn't the death now for anthropic at Open AI.

“I think ideally and probably most likely now we're going to live in a world where there are a few key core frontier players.”

And then a large diversity ecosystem of open source model providers. The reason I think that is because of kind of the distribution of tasks in the economy that we're currently trying to tackle with LLMs. And the distribution of tasks in the economy that we should be tackling with LLMs in the next 10 years. I think what we're going to see is a little bit of a clarification. I think tasks that we can currently conceive of as being economically useful.

And all the jobs that we currently do, we are going to rely more and more on open source to be able to do those things.

I think very, very frontier things, for instance, science and maths discovery, which you know have a longer, they have a lagging period. There's a bunch of labs like periodic labs who are really looking forward to tackling science of a multi-decade horizons with LLMs and this new intelligence.

“I think the frontier labs are going to gain a lot of economic benefit from tackling those tasks.”

I just don't think we're going to live in a world where the labs assume everything. I think we're going to see this like rising tide of intelligence. Open source is probably going to continue to lag behind a little bit to some extent. I think those are going to be fairly parallel lines that the go up together. But you know, if you're doing frontier science and you are planning these very, very long, you know,

scientific endeavors in order to extract economic value from whatever it is you're doing, you are going to be wanting to using the best intelligence. And I think anthropic and open AI and other players like them will make, you know, significant profits and contribute significant value on those fronts.

“It's just that it's not the world we thought it was going to be two years ago where they would also get all the value underneath that of like, you know,”

car GDP and the things that we currently can see what was economically valuable. And I think that's a good, that's a good outcome for everybody. No one player wins. I think we still have significant, you know, capitalistic pressure to advance the intelligence of these models and the frontier labs will feel that at the very frontier. And then that's going to diffuse throughout the rest of the ecosystem as well. All right, Charlie or Neil, co-head of model training at base 10. Charlie, we appreciate your time. Thank you.

Thanks, honey. Okay, that's it for today. If you're catching this episode on Tuesday morning, I hope you'll take the opportunity to join our live stream later today at one 30 Eastern time. Scott and I are going live on Substack with economist Noah Smith. We'll be unpacking the biggest question marks about the economy with him.

And we'll also be exploring China's role in the AI ecosystem further head to propertymedia.com to subscribe. If you haven't already, the live stream is free and open to all subscribers. This episode was produced by Cla Miller and Allison Weiss and engineered by Benjamin Spencer. Our video editor is Brad Williams. Our research team is Dan Chilon, Kristen O'Donogu and Mia Solverio. And our social producer is Jake McPherson.

Thank you for listening to "Proftory Markets" from "Proftory Media." If you liked what you heard, give us a follow. I'm Allison, I will see you tomorrow.