Michael Burry Says This Is The Top — Is It?

Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder with it doesn't different

apps that don't talk to each other. Introducing Odo, it's the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, and more. And the best part, Odo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost.

“That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch.”

So why not you? Try Odo for free at Odo.com, that's OdoO.com. Pouters, pills, plunges, everywhere you look, there seems to be a new wellness trend. We all want to feel good, and if there's a way to feel better, I think, wouldn't you want to try it?

I would. What's the cost of being well?

And why are we so obsessed with it in the first place?

That's this week on Explained It To Me. Find episodes every Sunday, wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome to Frosty Markets, I'm Ed Nelson, it is August 6th. Let's check in on yesterday's market vitals. The major indices were mixed after a series of highs, more on that in a second.

“The current crude was relatively stable, treasury yields were flat, and finally Google shares”

fell nearly 4% on news that Deep Mind's chief scientist is leaving, and its CEO Demis Hassabis is stepping aside. OK. What's happening? The S&P 500 just hit another record, the fresh intro day high yesterday followed Tuesday's

performance in which the index rose nearly 2% to its first record close since June.

The Nasdaq also gained nearly 3% that day, and the Dow crossed 54,000 for the first time. Across the markets, it seems as though investors have shaken off the AI anxieties that have defined much of the past month. But someone isn't buying it, and that is Michael Burrie, in a note on Tuesday, the investor who called the 2008 crash said he's sticking with his bets against Nvidia and Microsoft

and Tesla and Palantir and the semiconductor index, he said, quote, "I continue to believe it is possible we are near a major top, adding that we could see, quote, "a 1987 type full." Our investors are left wondering who's right, the bears or the bulls. Here to discuss, we're speaking with Steve Eisman, the legendary big short investor and host

of the real Eisman playbook Steve, thank you for joining us on property markets. You are one of the other guys who called the 2008 crash, one of the other guys in that movie. Tom, there's no question about it. Exactly.

I mean, what do you make of this market right now? Because I thought we were all worried about AI, worried about the debt, worried about the reliance on a handful of AI labs, but we're sitting at record highs. So what is the market actually telling us right now? Number one, the U.S. economy is very strong.

All the banks reported mid-month in July and the credit statistics were as benign as they possibly could be. So there's no credit issues in the U.S. economy overall. It's a strong M&A cycle, the IPO calendar is not bad, and there's no question there's still a K-shaped economy, but you know, if you look at the numbers of Vs and MasterCard,

the overall payment volumes are quite robust, where you do see things like the K-shaped economy would be like at a company like Proctor and Gamble who has no revenue growth. But you know, that's not what's driving the economy. Right now, you know, things are fine, there's no one, you know, despite all the hysteria about AI is going to destroy every single job on planet Earth, the employment numbers

are still very, very strong.

“I think that's why the market keeps going higher, because things are just okay.”

Now, I do think that the AI story has gotten a lot more complicated. You know, if you and I were sitting here a year ago, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who had anything negative to say, you know, maybe someone like Gary Marcus has been on my show. He's probably been on your show as well.

I love Gary. Gary has a lot to say, and it's all great, but Gary was like the loan, you know, July of last year. Gary Marcus was like the only person on planet Earth or anything they could have to say about AI.

and I both had the same thesis, which was underwriting mortgage underwriting standards

have deteriorated dramatically, and then what was good about the thesis was every single month, secure aization data came out, showing credit quality of hundreds of billions upon billions of mortgages. And so you could see, you could actually see the deterioration every single month. You had a data set that was incredibly robust that came out every single month and said

to you, you're right, so you had this reinforcement. And you know, if you're going to construct a negative AI story, well, you don't have

a secureization data base, it's going to help you.

So what's the negative story?

“So let me tell you what I think is potentially the negative story, but it's not here yet.”

So what's made the AI story more complicated is the following. There's no question that the business is much more capital intensive than anybody possibly could have imagined. So you know, companies like Microsoft and Google and Amazon, you know, companies who once threw off cash, like it was water, have negative cash, so that's a big change.

Now that doesn't mean that these companies are on the verge of anything bad.

It just means that the dynamics of their business as I've really shifted, they're investing massively, whether they'll get great returns, we don't know yet, but that's one big check. And I think the other major change is that the LLM, agentic AI business, which is really in propaganda, but AI and really just a few other people, doesn't seem to have any modes around it, because you know, people switch from models to models.

And now you have the open end models from China, which are much cheaper, and people seem to be switching to, and so maybe there'll be a price war, maybe not.

“Where I think the, the chink in the armor potentially is, I read this report that basically”

said something like 70% of Amazon and Google's and Microsoft's AI, CAPX businesses are from open AI and in propaganda. So if this, this, this is what I'm looking for, if a massive price war broke out, because of the Chinese models and open AI and in propaganda and big trouble, that would unwind a lot of the, of the AI trade, because then open AI and in, and fabric would not be able

to spend as much, which would mean that the fewer chips would be bought, you could figure out the rest. But until that happens, you know, these companies are, keep spending money like it's water. So, you know, Nvidia is going to report on, I think August 26, I mean, it has to have a good quarter. I couldn't, how could it not have a good quarter when I have this

“line is spending $225 billion this year on CAPX? So, until we see real weakness, I think,”

out of open AI and and, throughout pick, I'm not on Bernie side. Well, this is very interesting, because as you mentioned, we're seeing more numbers on the reliance on open AI and anthropic, at least among the big tech companies, just today, Bloomberg reporting in their own analysis that 70% of Microsoft's AI revenue is coming from open AI. A company which, of course, Microsoft had invested in. So, I think it's a fair thing

to say that Microsoft is investing money in open AI and the money is coming back to them in the form of their AI revenue, which literally is most of their entire AI business. You brought up an important point, you know, if we see a price war come into play, if anything goes wrong for open AI and anthropic both of whom are losing billions of dollars, then the whole thing on wines.

Losing billions is, is it you from this one? If only they were just losing billions. Right. Losing a lot more than that. So, I mean, the question to me is, how likely is that if? To me, it's quite likely at this point. To me, it seems as though the signs are going in that direction and at the very least, I would expect the likelihood of that

Markers don't work that way.

Okay.

“I mean, you know, the news is still the economy is still good. If there is a price”

war, the market's going to kind of have to have it hit over the head by a 2x4, because it's been a bull market for so long, everybody just buys every dip. In other words, it's purely reactive at this moment versus proactive and predicting what might happen. This not going to be proactive at all. You know, Michael is trying to anticipate. God bless.

He's got more guts at this point than me, because I just think it's for me, it's premature.

I'm waiting if it does happen. I mean, you think it's very likely and I wouldn't necessarily

disagree, but it could be a year from now. So that's the thing. I mean, if it's two months from now, that's one thing. If it's a year from now, then all these companies are going to be spending money like they've been spending money and it's the same story. So assuming then anthropic and opening, I do get into trouble, the operative question, the real question is, wait, how long is it going to take? And I don't think anybody, I certainly don't

have an answer to that question. And I don't think anybody else has an answer to that question at this point. To what extent do you think that other investors on Wall Street, to what extent do you think the market is awesking the question? I agree with you that no one has an answer. I don't have an answer. You don't have an answer. But you and I seem to be awesking that question

at the very least, which is instilling a little bit of a sense of hesitancy or at least anxiety around the whole ecosystem. Do you think that people are awesking the question or is it the numbers are just too exciting, no one cares? I wish I could answer that question. It'd be nice if we could only get all the investors a room and do a little group therapy. And then we could have an answer.

I just don't know, but otherwise, I don't know. I just don't know. I mean, one thing that I'm even a little surprised about is the fact, I thought that when the 10-year climb to both four and a half percent, that could be a demarcation line. And if the market's

“going to get a correction because of rates, I think the 10 years got to go probably above”

five. So it's definitely a bull market. You know, things get shaken off. I mean, I'm surprised by the fact that I thought that this last week were hellacious, just awful. And the stock went down for one day and then climb back up, which part of their numbers were

your most concerned about the Spendock? Two sets. So one was 28 percent revenue growth,

which is fine. 55 percent expense growth. And then 785 million in free cash flow, which is basically nothing. You know, our company, like I was describing before, that used a throw off cash, like it was border now has no free cash flow. None. And the other thing, you know, when you dig into the numbers, which was interesting, is the depreciation of the chips is starting to hurt. I think it was something like 6 billion in the quarter up from

like four billion, maybe three months ago. I could be off, but not by that much. But what starting to happen is all that it kept X, which went on the balance sheet, is now starting to roll through the income statement. And that's going to be a weight on them for years. If you had to think about how this will play out over the next several months or so, I mean, Barry is saying, this is the top or he's saying, it's possible that this is the

top. I don't know how he could say that. I mean, I mean, you could say it. I don't really know how you could say it. I mean, there's no, it's again, it's not like some time when we had a secureization data where he and I both had the secureization data. There's no, he doesn't have a data point that you and I don't have. So if you had some evidence that there was a price war breaking out on between and fabric and open AI and the Chinese

models, I'd say, okay, you know, that's, that's a very important data point. And he's

“got a point. But otherwise, I just think he's, you know, with all the respect him, I think”

he's just putting a finger in the air and saying, okay, let's give it a shot. And maybe it would be right. But, but I don't think he has any data that he could point to. I mean, look, like I said, bank credit quality was great. Employment data is very strong. You know, well, what data point can you point to right now that would say this is it? What would you want to see if you were to call a top in that regard? What would you be needing

to see? You hinted at it with some of the pricing days of, yeah, again, I need a price

going up. And until we have that, things will continue to, I think, go on kind of the way

they have.

“All right, Steve Isman, host of the real Isman playbook. Steve, we always appreciate your”

perspective. Thank you so much. It was pleasure to see you again. After the break, an update on tariffs and Iran. And for even more markets insights, you can subscribe to my weekly newsletter simply put, at simply put.proxymedia.com. Support for the show comes from Vanguard. To all the financial advisors listening, let's talk bonds for a minute. Capturing value and fixed income is not easy. Bond Market's

a massive murky and let's be real. Lots of firms through a couple flashy funds your

way and call it a day, but not Vanguard. Vanguard's bond line up is built around institutional

quality. And institutional quality isn't just a tagline. It's a commitment to delivering the kind of investment solutions that your clients deserve. That means access to more than 80 bond funds actively managed by a global team, although 200 sector specialists and traders.

“While some firms like to spotlight a single storeportfolio manager, Vanguard takes a different”

approach. They believe the strongest active strategies come from collaboration, with ideas shared across the entire investment team. That means your clients benefit from the collective expertise of hundreds of investment professionals, not just one person's perspective. So if you're looking to give your clients consistent results, gear in and year out, go see

the record for yourself at vanguard.com/audio. That's vanguard.com/audio. All investing

is subject to risk vanguard marketing corporation distributor. Support for the show comes from BCX, the public ticker for private tech. For generations, American companies have moved the world forward through their ingenuity and determination. And for generations, every day Americans can be a part of that journey through perhaps the greatest innovation of all, the US stock market. It didn't matter whether you were a factory worker

“into Troy or a farmer in Omaha, anyone can own a piece of the great American companies.”

But now, that's changed. Today, our most innovative companies are saying private rather than going public. The result is that every day Americans are excluded from investing and getting left further behind while they select few all the benefits. Until now, introducing VCS, the public ticker for private tech, now available wherever you buy stocks. VCS by FunRise gives everyone the opportunity to invest in the next generation of innovation,

including the companies leading the AI revolution, space exploration defense tech, and more. Visit get vcx.com for more info. That's get vcx.com. Carefully consider the investment material before investing, including objectives, risk, charges, and expenses. This and other information can be found in the funds prospectus at getvcx.com. This is a paid sponsorship. Support for the show comes from Odo. Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder

with it doesn't different apps that don't talk to each other. Introducing Odo, it's the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, and more. And the best part, Odo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch. So why not you? Try Odo for free

at Odo.com. That's OdoO.com. We're back with property markets. Between the war with Iran and new tariffs, global supply chains are facing major upheaval. Yesterday, Iran and Oman agreed to a new route for ships transiting the straightaway moves and are closing in on a deal, but Iran says it won't open the straight until the US lifts its blockade. Over the weekend, President Trump pulled

back from quote the biggest attack since World War II. In order to give diplomacy another try, you want the latest negotiations are quote the last chance to end the war. At the same time, the Trump administration has injected fresh uncertainty into global trade. At the end of July, Trump invoked Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose sweeping new tariffs on 60 economies covering 99% of U.S. imports. On Monday, 25 states sued to block them arguing

the administration is using Section 301 to replace the IEPA tariffs. Of course, those are the tariffs that Supreme Court struck down earlier this year. So we wanted to get a better understanding as to what is actually going on here and how everything is affecting global supply chains. So who better to speak to then, Ryan Peterson, CEO and founder of Flexport

want to make sure everyone understands your expertise. You run a logistics firm. You have a really good insight into how supply chains are moving around the world when it comes to freight. And of course, this is what is largely being affected by tariffs and by the war in Iran. And both are on again, off again, I can't get an understanding as to what

“is actually happening. What is happening? What do you read?”

I think your summer is pretty good. It's confusing because it's on and again, again, there's been the Iran War especially. It's just like really difficult to understand. We've had so many different peace deals in last chances already that it's hard to really get a sense for like how that's going to play out. But I predict if powers on that are not that great. On the tariffs piece, also we have quite a bit of uncertainty, although

I would argue a little bit more than we had before these Section 301 tariffs came out. Well, they're going to get, they are going to go and get challenged, as you mentioned, the state's doing. There's a lot of other lawsuits as well. The Section 301 tariffs have a longer track record of surviving these lawsuits. There's a bit more process behind them. Iypo is kind of like a really blanket authority that, as the president interpreted it,

where he could just wake up on the wrong side of the bed. And somebody pissed him off and just like throw a tariff at a country. And Section 301 requires a lot more process. And they've gone through that process. They've created these, the Commerce Department, excuse me, has done these studies to say, this or that country, the sector. It's been a lot more detail, a lot more thoughtfulness. Let's call it. So there are more likely to stand. I thought

Iypo was always a little bit, most people thought it was on pretty shaky ground. So

that's a bit on the tariffs side of things. It's a whirlwind if you're out there as an

“employer or export or trying to deal with all this. Yeah, how does it affect freight and logistics?”

If you have a tariff regime and you don't really know what's going to happen the next day, and then say, it does happen. Like does that mean that suddenly you're paying those tariffs? Is there a lag time to what extent is the confusion of all of this actually impact the movement of goods around the globe? It is about the uncertainty and it's about the rapid changes as well as high rates. Now, I'd probably like separate those. The last year we had boats, right? Like high

really high at some point, tariff rates, and I forget it was like 145% on China for like a few weeks. They remain pretty high on China, but so there's the high rates piece, but they're much lower now, even these sections three or one, either like 10% or 12 and a half percent depending on the country, and that's kind of a manageable rate is what importers are saying. Like if it stays there and it's stable and predictable, then they're pretty good. Last year you had boats,

you had both high rates and a lot of unpredictability. So in 2025, there were 53 changes to the tariff code in 52 weeks throughout the year. So it was like complete chaos. Some of these things were implemented with no notice. In fact, this one was done with almost no notice because section 122 ended on July 24th at midnight and this one kicked in at 12 o'clock 1 a.m. And they announced it just a few hours before that. So for a little planning time, and the way that manifested itself was just like

a lot of mistakes were made. That companies filed the wrong, paid the wrong amount, filed the wrong duty amount, then when it comes to getting refunds, have like struggled to get the, you know,

they got the refund because the Supreme Court and those have started to flow out of the 166 billion

of refund that's owed from the IEPA tariff, 122 billion are in process right now. I don't actually have the figure from the government about what's been paid, but there's a lot in that 122 bucket that aren't getting paid out or heavily delayed in part because it was so difficult to comply

“that if you filed wrong, you're not, yes, you'll get a refund, but you have to go through this whole”

legal process to first correct your entry. And then you can get a refund. So people are definitely dealing with the repercussions of like not having their data organized, not having filed correctly. I think it's one place, you know, plugged for my own company where we as being a technology company and having databases for managing this, giving us a real leg up and helping companies get it right. Well, this is what I was going to ask you about is the tariff refund process. I mean, we know from

US customs and they're reporting, which they had to give over to the courts because of all of the

lawsuits is that apparently the administration has issued a hundred billion dollars in tariff refunds

since the Supreme Court ruling, but to, to your point, this is one of the things that you guys specialize in, you actually have a tariff refund calculated out. People figure out how to pay the tariffs

refund process? It sounds like it's a little bit of a shit show, but maybe that's too aggressive.

“Well, I look at the government some credit here. I actually thought they've done a pretty good job.”

They built this system called Cape, which is sort of an attachment or a module on top of the primary technology system of the of customs of customs of order protection. And they shipped it in just about two months or so, two or three months that it took them to build it, which in the scheme of government building technologies, like quite a feat, actually. If you go back and see the government technology system for customs is called ace automated commercial environment. And it was like this

10 to 15 year debacle to deliver the piece of software. So for them adding a module that says

high stakes and complex is like refunding, you know, 100 billion, 160, 6 billion. And just a few

months is to my view as the technology is like pretty good. I'm kind of impressed. Where the problems are coming about are actually less because of customs. It was actually because of shortcuts that the broker, the customs brokerage and the importing community, these businesses took too many shortcuts. So like when you're filing, especially where you see the pain right now, where people are not getting refunds, because you said it was 100 billion. I hadn't seen that sap, but yeah, that sounds

about right. The 122 have been filed for. And then there's 44 or so, 42 billion more somewhere around there that are not yet eligible. They're going to be a later process for those types of refunds. But so there's still 20 billion that have been filed for and have not been refunded. And what those are is a lot of that is stealing aluminum where people made a mistake. So there's still an aluminum duties that were unique in the US customs landscape historically. You would only

need to know if three things to know how much customs duty you owed. It was the value of the goods what country of origin are they from? And their HS code, the classification of the code. If you had those three things, you spent out of duty, you know, how much you're owed. Now, with still an aluminum duties that Trump put in last year, you now have to know, it's not enough to know the classification of the goods. You got to know of this object what percent of the value is stealing aluminum.

“And then you need to know the country of melt where was that still an aluminum made or cast or”

smelled, depending on how it was made. So companies didn't have that data. And if they did, they were not very good at like breaking it out in a way that could be stored and could be audited. And so

a lot of them kind of faked it. What they would do is say, well, okay, it's 25 percent. And there's this

field when you're, it's pretty technical. So forgive me, forgive me, audience out there if I bore you on this. But there's a field where you transmit the duty amount that's owed. And a lot of people just put the number in there and sent it to the government. And they might have got it right in terms of the duty amount owed. But they were supposed to break out the percent aluminum. And you only pay, so the sealed aluminum duties, you're only supposed to pay that higher duty amount on the valuation,

on the percent of the goods that's made of steel and aluminum. But these people that they even fat finger, they were just shortcutting it. So now when you go to get a refund, you can't get a refund on that entry until you go back and clean up the process. And so it's just like a good

“example of like, honestly, this stuff's not hard if you have a good database in place. And you”

understand the rules, you can do it. But it's a new field. It took a lot of the customs workers community steel has it been able to add this database field to their software system. So it's kind of you're seeing the pain of an industry that just has an embrace technology. It's just fascinating though to hear all of the complications. And yeah, I guess all of the details technically are boring. But what it tells me is that we have invented so much such a

incredible network of complexity. And I don't see what we've even done it for. I mean, this isn't

to collect tariffs. This is to give tariffs back. This is to undo all of the complexity that was originally put in place in the first place. I think that's actually a real good point is that in some level there's this compliance burden that is as high as the tariff burden. I think the direction you're going to go, the direction of things seem to be going in the U.S. But also in Europe and other areas is the government's what way more data about what's crossing borders. They want to know

in that sealed aluminum example. Where are these sub? What does it made of? Not just the overall classification of the products, but like what percent of that product is steel and aluminum? Where is that from? And you're going to get to a point where what they want is they want to know that for every item. What is this thing made of? Where is each of those sub components coming from? And modern supply chains are incredibly interlinked complex global structures. So like keeping up with all of that

for a company is really hard because you buy something, you buy an object and you put a component,

You don't know. Now, you know, tracing this back to tier 1, tier 2, tier 3 suppliers. I mentioned it's not just the United States. I mean these regulations are increasing.

“Europe now requires when you import wood. You have to be able to show the GPS coordinates of where”

the tree was grown. So they can for anti-dforestation. I mean, I think that's a noble cause, but you now need to be able to show where was the tree grown. And then you need to receipt from the trucker to show that this truck did in fact pick the goods up at that forest and bring it to this sawmill. And they want to see that leg monitored. And so that's the trend of where things are going. And importers and exporters need to get ahead of this with good database technology to

track it all. And you want that database to be networked so that other people can contribute and add to it, etc. So I think from a Flexport standpoint, it's like positioning ourselves. We feel like we've made the right bet technology wise to help people manage this. But it is a kind of a free market guy. I can see the burden that this puts on companies. And there comes a point when you're

“like government, like maybe you should charge me a couple percent more terror if it not make”

me do all that stuff. Like what is it you're trying to achieve? It's not obvious. You're just getting in our own way with ever more complexity and no real purpose. It seems like from my perspective. You go to them. But before I do, I just need to get your views on what's going on in the straight-up of moves. Is it closed? Is it open? If so, how open? What are we actually now? I want the container shipping side of things. It's pretty much you can call it close.

It was like one or two transit a day. And it was at peak. It was almost 100. So it's really not like very very little container shipping is happening there. The tankers also weigh way down, although they're more tankers, transiting than container ships. I guess more valuable to those economies. It's kind of a, from my, my world is container shipping. But in the container shipping world,

it's sort of a backwater. Although, Jebel always the ninth largest container port in the world.

That's in Dubai or it was before before this war. It's basically that way because it's a transit shipment hub. Like lots of ships bring containers there to be, you think of a hub for, in a hub, spoke network. And that traffic is all moved elsewhere. They're doing the route. Those transit shipments elsewhere, lot in India. And of course, they're all routing around Africa. The Red Sea has been closed since, really since December of 2023, almost all container ships

are routing around the southern tip of Africa, rather than going the Red Sea because of the hooties, which are in a wrong link to kind of proxy groups. So there's no end in sight to this.

“I think hopefully there's a peace deal. But even that, I'm not sure that it gives enough reassurance”

because we've had these fits and starts. We've had peace deals. And then the next day, you've had ships get attacked. So I don't know that that's going to call them the insurance markets. It's costing about 10 to 15% of the value of the ship just to ensure it for one voyage through and you think about that. It basically turns you, you know, it's hard. I don't even know how they underwrote that policy to be honest because how do you know what's the odds of a ship getting hit?

Is it 10% or not? I mean, it's a pretty catastrophic event, obviously. And it's not just the ship that gets lost all that cargo. You might have a $200 million ship with a billion dollars of the merchandise on it that can go under. Ryan Peterson is the CEO and founder of Flex Boat Ryan.

Always appreciate your time. It's official. The AI boom has become almost entirely dependent

on open AI. As we discussed, new reporting from Bloomberg confirms that roughly 70% of Microsoft's AI revenue came from just one company last year that company was, you guessed it, open AI. This would be concerning enough if it were just Microsoft, but it isn't. Bucklees estimates that 75% of Amazon's AI revenue is coming from open AI and anthropic. UBS estimates that 30% of Google's cloud revenue comes from open AI and anthropic. And if we were to convert that to AI

specific revenue, well, then it would be roughly 75% as well. In other words, if open AI and anthropic didn't exist, Big Tech wouldn't really have an AI business at all. And the reason that's bad is because Big Tech has literally bet the farm on one thing and one thing only. And that is AI. Now, you might tell me who cares because open AI and anthropic do exist. So everything's fine. To which I would respond, yes, they do exist for now. Because keep in mind, open AI lost

21 billion dollars last year. And as for anthropic, we don't know. But our estimates put that number

to be subsidized by someone else. And who is that someone else right now? Answer Big Tech.

“The more you dig in to the economics of AI, the more you realize that it is a house of courts.”

And that doesn't mean that it is going to collapse. But it does mean that in order to not collapse,

nothing can go wrong.

“Okay, that's it for today. This episode was produced by Claire Miller and Alison Weiss”

and engineered by Benjamin Spencer. Our video editor is Brad Williams, our research team is

Dan Shalon, Chris Nodon, Hugh and Mia Savaria. And our social producer is Jake McPherson.

“Thank you for listening to Prophecy Markets from Prophecy Media. If you like what you heard,”

give us a follow. I'm Ed Alison and tune in tomorrow for our conversation with the one and only Professor Aswaf Demodoran.