Support for the show comes from Schwab. With Schwab investing themes, it's easy to invest in ideas you believe in, like online music and videos, artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, and more. Schwab's research process uncovers emerging trends. Then their technology curates relevant stocks into themes. Choose from over 40 themes. Buy all the stocks in a theme as is, or customized to better fit your investing goals, all in a few clicks. Schwab Investing themes is not intended to be investment advice or a recommendation of any stock or investment strategy. Learn more@schwab.com thematic investing.

Support for property comes from Vanta. Building a business achieving SoC two or ISO 27001 compliance can help you in bigger deals, enter new markets, and deepen trust with customers, but can also cost you real time and money. Vanta automates up to 90% of the work for the most in demand frameworks, helping businesses get compliant quickly. And with over 300 integrations, you can easily monitor and secure the tools your business relies on. Join over 6000 fast growing companies that use Vanta to manage risk and prove security in real time. Get $1,000 off Vanta by going to vanta.com profg. That's v dash, a.com profg.

This week's number, $68 million. That's the value of coins Americans throw out every year. Why did Buddha start pulling coins out of his butt head? Because change comes from within. Little dad joke. Thread the needle there pretty well. Today on proPG markets, we're discussing Tesla's earnings, the ban on non compete agreements, and 24 hours trading at the New York Stock Exchange. Here with the news pulling data out of his ass is propG media analyst Ed Elson. Ed, what is a good word?

I'm very well, Scott. I enjoyed our photoshoot yesterday. That was fun.

I bet you did, you little attention whore. I liked how uncomfortable you were on camera. That was kind of cute.

Yeah, no, I was.

But I liked when they started telling you to wear my clothes. Cause yours looked so bad. That was my favorite part.

I'm pretty sure you told me to.

Wear your clothes, which as I'm.

I think everyone else wanted me to wear my clothes.

Yeah. Which, as the boss, that qualifies as them. It's collective weed, right? Yeah.

Apparently my clothes aren't form fitting. And yours are, right?

No. Yeah, mine. Mine accent my human growth hormone at the age of 49. Get to the headlines.

Ed, let's start with our weekly review of market vitals. The S and P 500 was volatile. The dollar fell, bitcoin dropped, and the yield on ten year treasuries climbed. Shifting to the headlines, Spotify reported a first quarter revenue increase of 20% from a year ago and a record high $180 million profit. These earnings come after a trying year for Spotify, where it laid off more than a quarter of its workforce and raised prices for the first time in a decade. Netflix memberships rose 16% in the first quarter from a year earlier, substantially higher than predicted. However, the streaming company announced it will stop reporting quarterly subscriber numbers and revenue per per user starting next year. The stock plunged to 9% on that news. That's its worst performance in two years. Meta's revenue increased more than 27% from last year, beating analyst expectations. But shares fell more than 15% after the company issued lighter than expected revenue guidance and also announced that it would increase spending on AI investment. FIFA and Apple are nearing an agreement over the tv rights to a new World cup style tournament for club teams. The deal could be valued at about $1 billion and the month long tournament will be hosted in the US in 2025.

And finally, president Biden signed a bill into law that gives TikTok up to twelve months to arrange a sale to an american company before it gets banned in the US. TikTok's CEO said it would challenge the law on grounds that it violates the First Amendment. Scott, your thoughts?

So, in order, Spotify first quarter revenue increased at 20%. It feels like the year of efficiency is that people are doing more with less, which obviously impacts the bottom line in a very positive way. But also, I wonder, of a lot of this can be reverse engineered to a couple industry dynamics. The first is that the market is consolidating and there's fewer options. So people are, you know, and they're cracking down on passwords. So it has given the streamers not only across video, but across music pricing power. And it's no longer about as much about growth as it is about profitability. But the tale that wags the dark here is Netflix. And Netflix has given everyone cloud cover to raise their prices because they have pretty aggressively raised their prices. I wonder if this is. I mean, Spotify is really the kind of the, it's almost, I would imagine, as dominant in their medium as Netflix is in video. So good for them, I guess, is there. I don't know if they're also cracking down on password sharing or what's going on, but I would imagine this is. They're going to have some of the same champagne and cocaine of increased revenues and lower costs.

Yeah, I think that's exactly right. It's the same thing we saw with meta a year ago. They increased the revenue, which is a combination of price increases, as you mentioned, as well as a jump in usership. Plus they reduced costs, they're spending less on content, and they've also brought headcount down around 20% from a year ago. So the result is, and the thing that Wall street is so excited about is just this dramatic margin expansion. Gross margin for the quarter was 27.6%. That's up around 250 basis points from a year ago. I think the question for me would be how have they been able to increase monthly active users by 20% despite increasing prices? My best guess would just be that the average us consumer is doing better than we think we saw bank earnings the other week, which showed that consumer spending is actually accelerating, hence the increase in their credit businesses. We've been seeing similar stories coming out of the Fed data. So I think maybe the story behind the story here is that consumers are generally doing fine, maybe better than fine.

And the advantage that streaming audio has over streaming video is the churn, because pretty much every streaming video player has, I think, between four and 8% churn, which means every year you have to almost replace a third of your customer base. Except for Netflix. Because of the absolute volume of content, there always seems to be something you're kind of looking forward to watch.

Whereas a lot of people download the.

Entire season at Ted and then cancel Apple television. Whereas with music, it's different. Right? There's something you want to listen to every day, because it has everything. So it seems that after kind of five or seven years of underperformance, Spotify is finally getting their day in the sun. I'm actually a big fan of Spotify. It's hard to imagine one app could distill an entire medium down to an icon. So Spotify has done, I think, a pretty impressive job. Netflix memberships up 16%. I thought that was amazing. I mean, that's a huge number. The thing that was most interesting, though, was that there's a decision to stop reporting quarterly subscriber numbers and revenue. It's like buying clothes. That accentuates your. The positive. Like me. If I were a woman, Ed, I would wear a lot of miniskirts. Cause I have fantastic legs if I were a woman. So I would be like, hiking up the skirts I'd be in a lot of. Daddy would show up. Daddy has more legs than a bucket of chicken. If daddy was a mommy, I'm sure that's a hate crime. But anyways, my point is, you want.

To accentuate Brunello cuccinelli a size too small.

That's it. Right? Anyways, size too small, that hurts. That hurts. That's often.

You said the my codes are too big.

Well, yeah. You literally look like an old man that takes no pride in your appearance. Size too small, that hurts my feelings. Okay. Anyways, they're all trying to come up with the right words that will. That will make their company and numbers seem the strongest. So Alphabet doesn't break out by division, it's numbers, because people would figure out that it's essentially search in the seven dwarfs, that almost everything loses money. YouTube makes really good money by most standards, but they have this juggernaut, the world's largest toll booth ever constructed in the history of mankind, called search. So they'd rather just report one kind of lump sum and not break it out. They also want to give too much information to their competitors. The only thing that's a little bit scary here is that if I tried to read into the tea leaves here, what they probably realize is that they're going to have pricing power and international growth, but that everyone in America has already signed up, and they may, in fact, have a few quarters where they have flat or negative subscriber growth in the US. And that'll be the lead in every headline.

Netflix could report great revenue growth, great profitability growth, but if their largest market begins to plateau or even decline in terms of subscriber growth, that'll be the lead, and investors will take it down. So I imagine they've said, our numbers are going to be fine, we'll have good growth, but that growth will be in international, which will likely have lower revenue because you don't have the same pricing power in markets where they don't have the same disposable income. This is me guessing, but the choice of words is surprising, surprisingly deliberate and strategic in earnings calls and the way they report data, doesn't that just annoy you?

I mean, one, because one of the central issues of these Hollywood strikes was transparency around data and viewership. And what Netflix promised SAG AFTRA and then delivered on for a second, was, we're going to be more transparent. We're going to start reporting these detailed statistics about subscriptions. And so the idea that they would now walk back, that transparency, to me, is just a betrayal of what they agreed on. And then the other reason that I don't like this is just, as an analyst, I want more data. I want a better, you know, more comprehensive, accurate understanding of the company, and this is a subscription business. I want to know how many subscribers they have. Netflix is saying, actually, we don't. We don't want you to see our business in full. We don't want you to have a comprehensive understanding, likely because they think we don't think you'll like what you see. But doesn't this just kind of annoy you as an analyst and as an investor?

Well, Ed, there's a lot of things that annoy me. Look, the question is, should a company in a certain sector be required to have certain disclosure around certain topics? If you're a subscription business, you are described as a media company with a subscription component. Should they say, you have to report average revenue per user churn? Should there be recording requirements, just as they have a definition of EBITdA? The bottom line is companies have kind of been just muscling around analysts in the investor public for a while. And my friend Richard Kramer calls it most analysts, sycophants, and stenographers, that the only analysts that get access to the company and the CEO are people who are willing to basically smear Vaseline over the lens and make them look good no matter what. I agree. There should be some sort of, I don't know, standard metrics. Meta's revenue increased more than 27 from last year. That's incredible. A company of this size up this much, the shares falling 15%, similar to Netflix. I think the market will always look for excuses around why the stock got taken down. I think a lot of times it's just. It's kind of Occam's razor.

I think it's just that the stocks got out a little bit over their skis. I mean, these stocks have had such incredible growth. I think the market was just looking to let a little error out. And also the AI investment thing, it basically kind of connotes that we're entering a new arms race called AI, which is exceptionally expensive. And I wonder if investors thought, okay, the year of efficiencies that we really loved is coming to a close, and we're going back into this investment phase in AI. And while AI holds great promise, the one thing that's guaranteed, the reality is it just costs a shit ton of money. So they took the stock down. Any thoughts?

I would bet that a lot of investors were having flashbacks to a few years ago when the company decided that they were going to spend 10 billion a year on the metaverse. And as we've discussed, and as you predicted many years ago, that was a terrible idea. That's been proven as measured by VR headset sales or, or lack thereof. The difference to me here is AI is not the metaverse. And unlike the metaverse, which had basically no relation to Meta's underlying business, which is advertising, AI can do a lot for Meta's ad business. It can optimize the algorithm, it can boost engagement, it'll improve targeting, which will increase usage by advertisers. It'll also allow Meta to increase prices on their ad sales. I mean the upside on AI for Meta to me is huge and it's right there for the taking. So when I look at this, my initial reaction is that investors have probably unfairly punished meta here. And I think it's because they're conflating spending on a terrible business, which is metaverse, with spending on a great business, which is AI.

Yeah, no, AI. Aio. Like, I really hope this AI thing pays off because the amount of money and hype around this shit is just. Or that it destroys humanity. I mean, our expectations are just so big one way or the other. Yeah, we'll see. I think everyone's wondering at some point we're going to have to get to the show me part of the show where just the staggering amount of money that's going into this thing, they're going to have to show signals or start reporting hard metrics around how this starts to pay off. I think they'll get another sort of year of leeway. But at some point people might go, is this a lot of jazz hands? Because the investments they're making here are pretty, are pretty extraordinary. FIFA and Apple are nearing an agreement. Basically, FIFA and Apple want to recreate the World cup. I'm super excited about this. I wonder how many games these young men can play. And they are young men because between the FA cup, the Euros, whatever you call them, the thing I'm going to in Germany, the domestic leagues, La Liga, the prem, etcetera, how many tournaments can they support?

But when you have Apple and FIFA behind you, it's pretty valuable. And FIFA has, I mean, Apple has a reputation for doing things in a very high quality way. FIFA has a reputation for being corrupt motherfuckers hiding in between the Nether Netherlands of international law or the lack thereof. But Apple SD pockets. They need something to really kind of ignite Apple tv, so to speak. I think it's a great idea. I'll go. What do you think?

I think it's a really good idea. I find it strange that the headlines are reporting it as a new tournament. It's a reframing of a tournament that already exists, which is the Club World cup. And that's a competition that basically takes the best team from each continent and has them play. And then we find out who the best team in the world is. What's interesting is that it's not a very big deal among football fans compared to, say, Champions League. And I think the reason for that is because it includes all these teams from outside of Europe, and those teams just aren't any good. Like last year, the finals between Man City and this no name brazilian team Fluminase. Now, what's different about this tournament is that it's now going to take multiple teams from each continent, which crucially means it's going to take multiple teams from Europe. So now you're going to see Man City versus Arsenal, Chelsea, Barcelona, Real Madrid. Those are the games that make all of the money. So I think this is a huge deal for Apple if it goes through, because it's possible that this new reframing of an existing tournament could become the most culturally relevant competition in all of football besides the International World cup.

So I think if this works, it would be hugely profitable.

I was also wondering, just as a brand guy, if it represented a seeding or a transfer of brand equity and passion from national brands to club brands. In other words, do you have more people more passionate about Liverpool, Man City and Chelsea than you do about team England?

Yeah, I think that's a great point. And I'll bet there's a lot more money in it. Plus, they'll be doing it every year. I mean, World cup is only every four years. Same with the euros. Champions League generates more than $2 billion per year. If this is the ultimate tournament, I don't know, maybe it'll be generating double. This deal is worth a billion.

Also, just as I think about it, the cost to put it on is probably less because it can't be inexpensive, both from a capital and a human capital standpoint, to pull Bukaya Saka from Arsenal and have him train with the team England and get to know the players. New uniforms, new coach, a new kind of operating dynamic, as opposed to. All right, Arsenal just head to Atlanta for the game. So this, to me, feels like a winner at TikTok. Hello, ladies.

Look, you nailed it.

I sat on Bill Maher two years ago. I like to name drop. Did I tell you I'm going on Bill Maher tomorrow?

By the time this says, you'll have already been on it.

That's right. Get this. Get this back to me. I'm going on with Don Lemon and. Wait, hold on. RFK Junior.

RFK.

What should I ask RFK? We're gonna be in the overtime panel discussion together. What would you say to RFK Junior on the overtime panel on Bill Maher?

What's your workout routine?

He's in good shape. He's 70 years old and he's in really good shape. Yeah, yeah. No, I'm gonna ask him that.

You and RFK?

Yeah, me and RFK Junior.

Do you have a plan for what you're gonna ask him?

I guess I would ask him, like, is your radical narcissism and reckless views on vaccines a going to accidentally elect a fascist and create tremendous unwarranted death, disease and disability among children? There's that. That's probably where I would kick it off. Shit, I don't know. And then Don Lemon, me and D. Lamont, the very handsome Don Lemon. Anyways, I'm excited about that. Oh, I'm sorry. TikTok.

TikTok.

Look, I'm thrilled about this. I think people get it wrong. I think that this, they're not gonna lose their TikTok. I think this is smart. I think we're gonna look back and across a bunch of things we regret about big tech. One of them will be letting the ultimate propaganda tool in to create a frame through which our youth views America and the rest of the world. I think it's stupid. I think Americans are easier to fool than convinced they've been fooled. And I think that's what's going on here. We do need systemic wide privacy legislation, but there's no reason why we can't walk and shoot gum at the same time. And the thing that I think the media and people miss is that it's framed as a ban. And, you know, it's all or nothing. And I just don't think that's accurate. I think we're probably going to see an actual divestment. Once they're forced to divest, they got twelve months to negotiate with the White House to figure out some sort of accommodation and figure out, is there a way we could make you comfortable and continue to operate here? Saturday was literally one of the best days.

This is how old I'm getting. I couldn't break away from C SPAn. And I started calling people saying, this bill might go through. And I'm like, what the fuck are you calling me for? But in one fell swoop, we passed a bill for aid to Ukraine, aid to Israel, and forced divestment within a year of TikTok. And I was just, I thought all three of those things are really important. I think Speaker Johnson deserves credit, so. But yeah, I've wanted this for a couple years and I thought it was going to happen. I'm glad it is. But again, I don't think anyone's going to lose their TikTok.

We'll be right back after the break with a look at Tesla's earnings.

Support for propti comes from how I built this from wondery behind every successful business is a story. And some of those stories might surprise you, like how Chobani's first yoga factory was discovered on a piece of junk mail. Or how the founder of a multi million dollar cosmetic brand, Drunk Elephant, was told by everyone, including her own mother, that the name sounded like a dive bar. Which it sort of does. But they're huge now, so it doesn't really matter. On the podcast how I built this host guy Ross talks to the founders behind some of the world's biggest companies to learn how they built them. In each episode, you'll hear entrepreneurs share moments of doubt, failure, and how they were able to overcome setbacks on their.

Way to the top.

How I built this is like a masterclass in innovation and creativity. It can be a how to guide for navigating the challenges of life and business from the people who've done it all. Follow how I built this wherever you get your podcast, listen early and ad free right now on wondry. And for more business content like this, listen on wondry. With shows like how I built this business for us and many more. Wondry means business support for this podcast comes from Grammarly isn't it so frustrating.

When you have to read someone else's bad writing?

Isn't things just the worst when you.

Have to read some read bad someone.

Okay?

Isn't things just the worst when you have to read isn't things just the worst when you have to read bad someone else's writing that is also bad?

Worst? It is absolutely worst.

You hear that? That was written without Grammarly. Sloppy writing can cause serious issues in the workplace. A few misspellings here, some poorly chosen words there, and good communication goes completely out the window. Thankfully, Grammarly is a trusted AI writing partner that saves your company from miscommunication and all the wasted time and money.

That goes with it.

But Grammarly is more than just a grammar check. It can help generate AI prompts or even help you strike the right tone and personalize your writing based on audience and context. We here at the profgy team use Grammarly and what I would say is that we take this very seriously. This is something my mother drilled into me at a very young age. If you want to come across as educated and intelligent, you need to write well, and one of the pillars of that is grammar. Plus, Grammarly integrates seamlessly across 500,000 apps and websites. No cutting, no pacing, no context switching. Personalized on brand writing. Help is built into your docs, messages, emails, everything. So why not join Grammarly to work faster, hit your goals while keeping your data secure. Learn more@Grammarly.com dot support for proPG comes from mint mobile.

We cover a lot of so called disruptors on the show, companies that move fast break things and try to find innovative ways to move a product category forward. Some of them take big swings and fall flat on their faces, make MoviePass, Google Glass, 3d television. But other places actually pull off the vision. So let's talk about mint mobile. They took the radical step to nix all retail locations and sell the wireless plans exclusively online. That's why Mint mobile can offer wireless plans for just $15 a month when you purchase a three month plan. All of their plans come with high speed data and unlimited text and talk delivered on the nation's largest 5g network. Plus, you can use your own phone with any mint mobile plan and bring your phone number with you, along with all your existing contacts. To get this new customer offer and your new three month unlimited wireless plan for just $15 a month, go to mint mobile.com profg. That's Mint mobile.com profg. Cut your wireless bill to $15 a month at mint mobile.com ProFG, dollar 45 upfront required, equivalent to dollar 15 a month. New customers on first three month plan only speeds slower above 40gb on unlimited plan.

Additional taxes, fees and restrictions apply. See mint Mobile for details.

We're back with profit g markets Tesla reported worse than expected earnings for the first quarter, with revenue falling for the first time since 2020 and profits dropping more than 50% year over year. The company also burned through $2.5 billion. That's its largest free cash outflow ever. However, Elon Musk also vowed to launch their more affordable vehicles as soon as 2025, and the stock rose 14%. Scott, this was, by almost every metric, a pretty awful quarter. Why do you think the stock rose?

I don't know. Maybe it was the opposite. To date, it's been the worst performing stock in the S and P, so maybe there's some people who felt it was oversold came in. Musk has obviously a reputation as someone who just has incredible insight into how to leverage technology or new technologies. So right now the company is playing a serious game of jazz hands and they're like, let's talk about our energy revenues and the margins there. Let's talk about AI, let's talk about autonomous robotaxis. Let's do anything but talk about our core business, which is an automobile business, which is like any other automobile business, getting increasingly shitty and hard to maintain profits in. And you're seeing that at Tesla, the markets seem to really like the conversation around going all in on AI. I think it's sort of a couple of things that people felt maybe the stock was oversold, although I don't think that's the truth at all. I think it's when you look at it relative to other big tech companies, it trades at a higher multiple than big tech. And if you look at it relative to auto companies, it trades in an insane multiple.

So they want to pretend they're anything but an automobile company. And it seems like he emphasized in the call that he wants to really highlight or pimp out the fact that they're buying so many of these gpu's and says they're going to buy more. It's like, don't look at the automobile side of the company, we're AI. Right? So he's also talking about a new, more affordable ev. I just think that's crazy. I don't think he's going to win a war on affordability against China with BYD. I mean, Byd's trading it an EV to EbItda of, get this, of six. And Tesla trades at 35. I mean, Google, meta and Microsoft are 20, 21, 26. So Tesla, whose business appears to be in structural decline, trades at a higher multiple than these amazing companies with ip.

And you kNow, yeah, the real AI companies.

Yeah, meta is growing at 27% and trades at 21. So I just think the market on this day at least seemed to think that a was either oversold or that musk plus massive investment in AI is chocolate and peanut butter.

Yeah. Elon said, his quote was, if you value Tesla just as an auto company, you fundamentally have the wrong framework. And he also said we should be thought of as an AI or robotics company. The auto business, as we'Ve said, did terribly. Delivery is down 8%. Also seen price cuts, so revenues down 13%, gross margins down from 19% to 16%. The list goes on and it makes up 80% of the total business. Do you buy this Tesla is more than a car company argument?

No. And I want to identify as a giraffe. I mean, look, it's an AmazinG automobile company. It deserves to trade at the upper range of what automobile companies trade at, but this is what they do. They wrap steel around a battery and four tires, and they do an amazing job of it. I think it's an amazing car, but he wants you to believe it's anything but what it is. He actually. His track record in AI is pretty. I don't know, pretty disastrous. He was involved. To his credit, he had. He's a visionary on AI, got involved very early in OpenAI, but he doesn't know how to manage it or turn it. I mean, arguably the stupidest decision in business over the last ten years from a wealth standpoint, not that he needs. It, was Elon Musk leaving in a huff from OpenAI. And I get the feeling he goes home every day and twists the legs off his Barbie doll or kicks a dog and thinks, fuck, I could have owned 20 or 30% of OpenAI if I just wasn't such an asshole. He's playing catch up in AI, and there's just no doubt about it.

So I don't, again, look over here, don't look at my core business, because I want to pretend I'm something I'm not.

We've also been hearing a lot about robotaxis. Earlier this month, Elon tweeted that the robotaxi would be unveiled in August. August 8 was his date. And then he also said on the earnings call that this Robotaxi fleet could be, quote, the biggest asset value appreciation in history. But the report gave us no details on the rollout. It gave us no details on any regulatory approval. It didn't really give us details on anything. So, as it stands, if you were an investor, would you be taking the robotaxi business seriously at all?

I think he's lost a ton of credibility. He said in 2017, I think within two years, there'd be a million autonomous Tesla's on the road. 2019 kind of came and went, let me think, five years ago, and I can prove that. I mean, I think you wearing Bruno Ciscinelli will result in the largest asset appreciation in history. That has about as much credibility. Yeah. Okay. Big words, big words. How and why?

The FTC has banned non compete agreements which prevent employees from working for or founding their own competing companies after they leave their job. According to the FTC, one in five american workers are subject to non compete agreements. So once the ruling goes into effect, 30 million people will be free to change their jobs at will. The only exception will be made for existing non competes with senior executives. But all told, it's estimated this will increase average annual earnings by more than $500. Scott, you've been advocating for this for a while. You've actually wrote a no mercy, no malice blog post about it. Why do you think this is a good idea?

It's simple. The more people bidding on your labor, the more potential people who want to rent your labor, the higher the rents you can charge. And non competes do nothing but reduce the number of bidders on your labor. This is a straightforward transfer of wealth, from employees who tend to be younger, to shareholders who tend to be older. Yet again, another transfer of wealth from young and middle class earners to wealthy senior executives who have reason. I mean, if, if l two is purchased but for $160 million, and they don't want me to compete with them, or they, for whatever, six or twelve months, and they can define what the competition is, I don't even think you can justify that, but at least I can empathize with it. But telling a hairdresser that they can't walk across they're not. Competes in hairdressers now and in chefs. What's next? Not competes for babysitters again, this is just so wrong. And let me just say, Lena Khan could potentially replace Marguerite Vestier as my new brain crush. I like that she's doing this. I think it's great. And what do we have in America? Do we have a dearth of corporate profits?

No, they're at all time highs. What we have is as a percentage of the economy, wages continue to not be, not outpace inflation. They did the last quarter. Look, for the last 30 or 40 years, the tension between capital and labor. Capital has beaten the shit out of labor, which means we need more laws that transfer back some of that capital from shareholders to employees. And this is one of those things. I love this. What do you think?

Well, I just think the stat that really supports your point about hairstylists and cashiers and security guards, etcetera, is that one third of minimum wage jobs are subject to non compete agreements. A third, which is kind of insane. But the US Chamber of Commerce and all these other big business lobbying groups are suing the FTC to block this. They believe it is, quote, unnecessary and unlawful. And their big complaint is that this is going to compromise their ability to protect their ip. Could you take us through what that means? Exactly why they're concerned about that, and why banning non competes might affect intellectual property and the protection of that ip.

Yeah, you're the AI team, the deep ops AI team at Snowflake, and there's 18 of you, and you all walk across the street to a competitor. That's the fear that those people take that IP. Now, there are laws that are distinct from non competes that say, if you use our IP and people have been fired and arrested and some even gone to jail, if you take a disk with the code, that's illegal. I don't think you can basically make employees indentured servants. I think they should go where they should go. And your job is to create compensation and IP that people decide to stay with you out of, you know, personal decision. You could argue that at a senior level, because trade secrets are so important that you might have garden leave policies or you might have some sort of non compete for a certain amount of time, not very long, but when you have non competes at every other level, it's just simply put, I mean, the data that struck me, it's estimated that this, that this law or this change would increase average annual earnings by more than $500. How the fuck can you be against that?

How are people saying, oh, labor's making too much money, the average. The average earner is making too much money and corporations aren't doing well enough. I mean, come on, this feels like a no brainer. I'm really happy about this. I trust it'll hold up in the courts. I think it's good. It just is so shocking and exciting to me that America keeps getting it right lately. Yeah.

Just some statistics about what a good thing it is. I mean, it's. In 2008, Oregon decided to ban non competes for hourly workers and that increased average wages by 3%. Hawaii made a similar move back in 2012 for tech workers, and that increased wages 4%. And then I think the biggest piece of evidence for me that this is a good idea is that California has banned non competes basically forever. I mean, since the 19th century, they've banned them. And despite that, it remains the largest state economy in the US. It contributes $4 trillion in GDP every year. It's home to the largest companies in the world. And in fact, a lot of people and scholars believe that it's because of the non compete ban that Silicon Valley ever happened in the first place, because it promoted competition between engineers, between companies, which led to this highly productive and highly competitive business environment. I guess the only thing I would ask you is, is there anything we're missing? Is there any downside that we're not factoring in here?

The catastrophizing will be that there will be chaos and that you'll have full teams right before a product's about to launch, go to the highest bidder and take all of their human capital and their ip over to the competitor next door. And it'll create a lack of innovation and chaos across companies that just is not borne out. As a matter of fact, the FTC estimates that an additional 8500 new businesses will be created each year. And we have the case study and you just brought it up, but it bears repeating. Just AI alone in the Bay Area has recreated by value the entire global automobile industry in just several weeks. Or increase the market, the market cap creation of these companies. It rivals the entire market cap and the entire auto industry. And guess what? They've been operating with this banning of non convenience. So are the other 49 states for some reason more susceptible? And I mean, it's just, this is an easy one. This is an easy one. Yeah. Does it make it a little bit harder for companies? Are they going to have to pay employees more? Might it hit their bottom line earnings when they can basically sequester an individual from the rest of the market in terms of renting out his or her labor?

Yeah, probably. And guess what? That's a good idea. We need to give restore more leverage to workers from employers.

We'll be right back after the break with a look at 24 hours trading.

Support for profit g comes from Greenline financial literacy is a lifelong skill. And like any lifelong skill, it pays to start young. If your kid is old enough to earn an allowance, they're probably old enough to start learning the basics of how money works and how to be responsible with it. That's where Greenlight comes in. Greenlight is a debit card and money app made for family. Parents can send money to their kids and keep an eye on kids spending and saving. And kids and teens can build money confidence. My kids and I use greenlight.

The best testament I can give to.

Greenlight is that we were a Greenlight family well before they approached us about.

Advertising on the pod.

We like it.

It's smart.

It's easy. We're a Greenlight family. With a Greenlight app, kids learn how to save, invest and spend wisely, thanks to games that teach money skills in a fun, accessible way. If you want to help your kids learn about money, consider Greenlight, the easy, convenient way for parents to raise financially smart kids and families to navigate life together. Sign up for Greenlight today and get your first month free@greenlight.com. Scott that's greenlight.com Scott to try Greenlight for free.

Greenlight.com Scott.

Support for ProfG comes from Atlassian. Atlassian software, including Jira, confluence and Trello, help power the collaboration for teams to accomplish what would otherwise be impossible alone. Because individually we're great, but together we're so much better. That's why millions of teams around the world, including 75% of the Fortune 500, trust Atlassian software for everything from space exploration and green energy to delivering pizzas and podcasts. Whether you're a team of 2200 or 2 million, or whether your team is around the corner or on another continent altogether, atlassian software is built to help keep you all on the same page from start to finish. That way, every one of your teams, from engineering and it to marketing, hr and legal, can stay connected and moving together as one towards shared, company wide goals. Learn how to unleash the potential of your team@atlassian.com. Dot that's Atla double S I A n.com atlassian.

Support for today's show comes from public.com dot. Everyone always wants to tell you about what you should do with your money. Where should it go? What should you spend it on? But how often do you hear about what your money can do for you? That's what they want to talk about@public.com. Dot public is an investing platform with a mission to make the public markets work for all people. They started by introducing the world to fractional investing, and they also offer a high yield cash account. How do I know all of this? Well, it's because I am an investor in public. Why am I an investor? Because I think these are good people. I hate payment for order flow. They don't do that. And I think they're genuinely interested in fomenting a generation of investors, not gamblers@public.com. You can access an industry leading 5.1% APY with a high yield cash account with zero fees and no subscriptions required. Plus, you can get unlimited transfers and withdrawals. And it's FDIc insured up to $5 million. So if you want to see what an industry leads, 5.1% APY will look like, you can check out public.com dot. This is a paid endorsement for public investing, 5.1% APY as of March 26, 2024, and is subject to change.

Full disclosures and terms and conditions can be found in the podcast description. Us members only.

We're back with profit g markets. Since the 1870s, the New York Stock Exchange has kept regular trading hours, allowing stocks to trade from morning to afternoon. Schedules have shifted through the years for example, the exchange was open for business on Saturdays until 1951. But today, trading hours are Monday through Friday, 930 to four. However, that might change. The New York Stock Exchange is now considering 24 hours trading seven days a week. This move could legitimize round the clock trading, a trend that's grown alongside cryptocurrencies and platforms like Robinhood. Scott, what do you make of this news?

Well, you could argue this is an attempt to keep up in terms of innovation. I would argue it's probably the exchange is wanting more money, because it's hard to imagine there won't be more trading if it's 24 by seven versus what is just, what, 35 hours a week. Right now, what this potentially does is it opens the US stock market to more asian investors. The thing I don't like about this is that I like the idea of having a cooling off period, and that if something happens on a Friday, the stock goes crazy. If it goes too crazy, they have circuit breakers. They shut it down until people can take a breath. But what we also have is something happens on a Friday, you have the weekend to take a beat and wrap your head around it. And one of the reasons we had this run on Silicon Valley bank is that there was a lack of friction around transferring your deposits, because everyone can now transfer deposits off their phone. And I just wonder if it creates more volatility when at three in the morning there's some sort of bad news or a strike in Iran, and people can go on and start selling like crazy, and then people feel like they can't go to sleep or they need alerts on their phone.

And the other thing I don't like about this is I do not think it is good for people's mental health. I have paired my holdings in publicly traded stocks to probably 15 or 20% of my net worth because I just hate checking my phone. And what's crazy is because I have a scorecard. The number I get every day from my stocks has a disproportionate impact on my psyche because the other stuff doesn't have a number on it. I don't know, it just feels like the financialization of everything. I think it was coming. It's hard to argue against it, but personally, I don't like it.

Well, I wanted to get your thoughts on sort of the cultural implications of a move like this. I mean, I know my friends who work on Wall street and sales and trading, and even guys who work in hedge funds. The only thing that protects their weekend, really, is the fact that they can only make their trades from 930 to 04:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and then they get to take the weekend off. So I'm wondering what you believe this might do to the culture of Wall street and how it could impact the lifestyle of basically any financial services worker who might be listening to the podcast right now.

I mean, the bottom line is, is this going to be harder? It's just going to be. I remember I have a close friend of mine worked for a hedge fund and he would have to wake up really early to look at the european markets. It's just like the markets never rest means that a lot of these people are never going to get the rest themselves. I also wonder if it's going to expedite the incorporation of AI that will kind of service bots going out there and monitoring everything and looking for keeping tabs around. Okay, if there's this level of volatility, you need to wake me up or. I don't know, it just feels like a lot of this is going to. I wonder how much of this additional human coverage that's needed is going to be accomplished with bots.

I think one of the things that prompted this was crypto, which can be traded 24 by seven. But also there's this startup that's backed by Steve Cohen of 72, and it's this startup called 24 exchange. And they recently applied for SEC approval to launch the very 1st 24/7 stock exchange. So I think this is also kind of a reactionary move, maybe to fend off competition from crypto and also from this new proposed stock exchange. But just a thought experiment. If it were up to the market and the 24 x seven exchange and the current 930 to 04:00 p.m., exchange, both were in a similar position. In terms of liquidity, who do you think would win? What do you think the market would decide it prefers? Because there's the mental health benefits of the current framework, but then there's also the possibility of just increased liquidity and as, as you mentioned, increased interest from investors around the world, like in Asia. So what do you think the market would say is the best system?

You mean, will the market opt for increased financialization and liquidity and additional trading volume fees, or a concern for the mental wellbeing of Americans? Let me think, let me think. I ponder, I ponder we're going to 24 by seven and it's not going to go back and traders will like it if traders are consumers. It's like probably having, I mean, there was probably some benefit to having linear tv where if you didn't watch Channel seven at 08:00 p.m. On Friday nights in 1972, you missed the Brady bunch. That might have been better for us than having it accessible all the time. This is the equivalent of streaming video versus linear, right? It says you can have on demand trading at any time and you can binge trade. I mean, I just think what happens when traders start getting ridiculously fucking high and they can trade at 02:00 a.m. Because who knows, they might do better. They might outperform the market. Some of the trades I've made have definitely been feel like they're inspired by meth. We will look back on the 930 to four trading day with nostalgia. We'll look back on it and think, oh, you know, Florence Henderson, we're just going to feel good about it.

And I don't know why. Like how we ever put up with it.

That's the way we need. Let's take a look at the week ahead. We'll see earnings from Apple and Amazon. We'll also hear the Fed's next interest rate decision as well as the unemployment data for April. Do you have any predictions for us?

Well, my prediction is as I started thinking about RFK Junior because as I said, I'm going to be on with him on Bill Maher. And my prediction is the following. We talk about so many things that impact the presidential race, whether it's immigration or bodily autonomy or the Middle east. What we're not talking about is, I think the thing that's going to decide who wins president is RFK junior. He's already polling significantly into the double digits. And what people forget is the reason why Bill Clinton won an unknown governor from Arkansas was because of Ross Perot. Ross Perot, I think, got about, I dont know, 15 or 18 points. And two thirds of it or 60% of it came from Bush, which was enough to put Clinton over the top. Ralph Nader handed the presidency to George Bush over Al Gore. Everyone that voted for Nader would have gone to gore, the majority of them. And RFK junior now has a big enough base. And if he stays in the race, and I think he will because I think hes a total narcissist, hell stay in the race. And with those sorts of numbers, it really just comes down to who he pulls from.

And so far it looks like hes pulling more from Trump than. I dont know if I told you this, I actually talked to a friend of mine and we actually got not fairly far down the road, but we got the money together. And I said, lets offer the RFK campaign a million bucks if they pick Aaron Rogers as the VP. Or at least say a million dollars. Dont even say why we love Aaron Rogers. And well give you a million bucks in the campaign because he needs money to get on all these ballots. We need a million bucks. Well give you a million bucks if you put Aaron Rodgers. Because I thought if you put Aaron Rodgers on the campaign, hes this big bro, stupid conspiracy guy who believes in vaccines were human guinea pigs. I think that would help pull from Trump. And I thought, this is how we get Biden in office. Let's just give a bunch of money to RFK if he picks Aaron Rodgers instead, he picked a Sergey's wife.

Ex wife.

Yeah, he picked Sergey's ex wife who believes that you can solve infertility by getting more sunshine.

Well, you know why he picked her?

Well, 15 million reasons. Why. Isn't she gonna give. Isn't she gonna give him money?

She's got the money.

She's got the money.

Yeah, exactly.

It wasn't for her understanding of geopolitical issues and her deep understanding of the 6th fleet in the Indian Ocean. Jesus. How fucking stupid is that? I mean, really? Really?

Maybe that's what you should ask him.

Yeah. What the fuck are you thinking?

Tell us about your running man. Yeah, anyways, but what happened to the Aaron Rogers fund?

We circled the money. It was pretty easy. And we thought, okay, what's the best outreach to the campaign? And then he announced that he was going. I thought when the rumor was he was going to pick this ex wife of Sergey, who's sounds like a, you know, a modestly talented lawyer, I thought. I didn't think that was real. I thought, he's crazy, but he's not stupid. Ends up he's both. Anyways, it saved me a million bucks. But look, on November 5, or whenever the day is after the election, what we're going to realize is that RFK junior, or specifically who voted for him, determined who won president.

This episode was produced by Claire Miller and engineered by Benjamin Spencer. Our associate producers are Jennifer Sanchez and Allison Weiss. Our executive producers are Jason Stavis and Kathryn Dillon. Mia Silverio is our research lead and Drew Burroughs is our technical director. Thank you for listening to Prof. G Markets from the Vox Media podcast network. Join us on Wednesday for office hours, and we'll be back with a fresh take on markets every Monday.

That's right. You didn't ask me about my boot lounge. You didn't mention that we were number one on Amazon.

Number one on Amazon. You want to brag about it for a bit?

Well, I just did, Ed. Number one. I had to brag about it. I had to bring it up. Numero uno and Amazon. That's right, that's right. That's right. To resist is futile. Give in to.

How are you feeling? You feeling good about it?

Or, you know, once I attained massive wealth, I became depressed. It's much harder than you think, Ed. I hate those people when they say that. I literally hate those people. I want to kill those people. I'm like, okay, come here. Like, just have a truck run over you and see if that. Will that help? Will that help? Will that help ease your pain from what it's like to be rich? I've never understood that shit. All those articles about those guys getting therapy after they got rich. It feels fucking amazing. It feels really nice. I'm really grateful. And by the way, just the same offer to everyone out there. If you buy the algebra of wealth, a simple strategy or a simple formula for achieving economic security, and you post a receipt on any social at all, I will donate dollar 50 to charity Water, who is bringing potable water to sub saharan Africa. A wonderful charity. So it gives me a chance to pretend I care about the world while getting to number one and the New York Times seller list.

He cares. He says he doesn't, but he cares. Also, make sure you tag him at Profgalloway.

Thanks for saying that. The $50. Ho, Prof. Jeez.