E66: $FB's major pullback, Rogan/Spotify mess, Xi/Putin meetup and understanding supply chain issues with Bestie Guestie Ryan Petersen (Flexport CEO)
01:38:56 Share

The fact that sax is greatest moment in life was beating Peter til in a multi game chest. You ever see that picture of yeah of him with his arms raised that I can believe you be I mean, tell us about that moment they show that picture of sex.

I mean, listen, here's what I say. When I, when I saw that picture, I had a couple of thoughts. Number one, i've seen this picture somewhere else. And the number two is, oh my god, IT was on nb C2Catch a p re dator. I mean, I have never .

seen sex happier. I like the birth of his children. Moment was the .

day of paypal IPO. And so we did a party like a cake king a lot. That was the extent of the celebration.

And Peter did a ten be lot, did a ten games simultaneous, which means is playing as ten people at the same time. And he goes board to board, makes this move. And I was the only one of the that beat him. And somebody, I guess.

I put left.

I had put money down. I put like twenty box down or something on the game, which is the foolish thing to doing at Peter because he's like a chess master and and somehow I won. And you can see i've got the money in my hands.

Look at the look on Peter tels face. Look at the look on the, I mean, he's so angry and he, but he's ceased the joy in your face and .

he can't process IT and look at max maxes to .

my right and role.

But this is a few seconds before Peter smashed all the pieces off the board. And what you hit.

you flip the board.

He always does that when he loses. And his mother is when you call the sort loser he says, shows me a good loser and i'll show you a loser.

Wow, it's such a great life. I just want to also comment on the plates on sexy pants and .

how high that wasting the phone.

Is that a black?

He just get phone. Guys, this is like, I mean, this like nine.

five girl, strong roloff always had incredible here.

His hair is incredible way. Hair to this incredible fix.

Never notice.

We can give.

We are sources to .

the fans and.

And everybody welcome to another episode of the all in podcast again today. The dictator traf poy hopeth a. Rainman David sax and the sult of science, formally known as the queen of kenwood, is out of that business.

David friedberg, we ve got a lot on the agenda. However, one thing that we've had a hard time figuring out is the state of the supply chain, and it's confounding. IT seems like nobody knows what the health y're doing, but there's one guy who's been on twitter and we happen to know him.

He's been on my pod and free berg nose m and his name is ryan Peterson and he's a bit of an expert on this. And we thought we would have a best gusty come on. We don't do this too often.

Maybe is the third of tea gusty. And welcome to the pod. Ryan Peterson, from .

what's right.

right? Did you tell .

libya .

you on the show today .

right now? Is he like, not there?

SHE wasn't the room next, but I totally, the cash wasn't a super.

He is a very big thing.

Larry, wearing the way you beaks hoody right now. Anta, you're tell.

right? You just watch. You're going to be on.

You will listen to IT. Yeah, we really listen to IT together tonight. When ever comes.

right? What is the state now? Should we be worried about the supply chain?

Is IT getting Better? Is that getting worse? What's twenty twenty .

two gonna look like? yeah. And I think this a means a lot of things in the story is what's really happening. But you know, IT goes for everything from manufacturing products, which means sourcing all the sub components like semiconductors through logistics and final delivery all the way of a customer store and reflects more focused on that is sort of picking goods up from factories around the world and delivering them into profiling and is all over the world so kind of that global mile um what we sometimes called there you seeing real disruption um and in IT starts really with the pandemic shift in consumer behavior where people started buy more goods because I couldn't go to restaurants and travel in things. And so lot of span shifted on the goods and imports are up almost twenty percent imported container volumes.

So that's the start of IT all uh and then what we learned is our infrastructures dpi dated and unable to handle at twenty percent increase. And by infrastructure, I mean the number of ships in the world, the capacity uh of output of the ports, the number of trucks and availability of trucks and chasses, which is the trailers that all containers around. Would you didn't have enough of these things are the poor capacity.

Look at, uh, american ports Operate this. I just want on the statistic cty reasoning. And I keeps saying because IT appalls me, our ports Operate with a lower through put productivity level than mombassa can yet, and you know, which just do not have modern poor infrastructure. Rather, dance has been fully automated for twenty years, so they want to run twenty four, seven and keep container flowing through the port. They can do that with self driving trucks and everything.

Is that a technology issue? Or do you think that's a regulatory capture and union issue like a labor? Is you like a labor?

The time is there. You know it's existing for a long, long time. It's it's really about labor getting together with management negotiating these things and allowing to happen. And the the way that our our ports are run is is pretty crazy.

When you look at they treat labor as a fungible commodity is in the the port terminal Operators will say, I need this many workers tomorrow and the union provisions that many workers, but it's different people every day doing Operate complex if you know, having machinery that, you can like。 The number one thing in business is like, what did we learn today and how are we going to do Better tomorrow every day with your team. But if it's a new team every day, like that's not even possible. So I don't know how you can drive a productivity improvement when it's different workers every single day the week.

right? So they're not full time employees.

They're like staffe by the hour. There are union .

workers are paid by. They have annual contact.

decide who goes to work everyday, who get shift. And what we saw .

on the waterfront yeah where like the union decides you get to work today, these other people do.

What do is a even .

going further back in supply change to manufacturing? And how much are you hearing about and seeing kind of labor shortages because people are out for koba and hate someone sick gotta take ten days off. And when you know ten percent of the employees get sick and they love ten days of work, the facility sees a decline in productivity to, you know, seventy eighty percent of Normal. And then you know all of the output of that facility goes way down. I mean, you know, are you caring about more that stuff happening, particularly during this kind of omicron wave, where the real effective that hasn't really hit the supply chain system in and and we're still kind of seeing a build up of, uh, you know, of demand and we don't you know we haven't really kind of hit the problems.

So for the less eighteen months, china had this total zero tolerance policy and was very successful and keeping go a out of out of their country. And so manufacturing just kept running as if not no problem in china, which is the majority of this manufacturing with all icon, you starting to see that IT is still taking hold and is your tolerance. We haven't yet seem like major shutdowns and waves of shutoff.

Ns, but a little bit, you've seen that here in there. The zero response has shown up, for example, uh, at least twice where one lunch, one port worker in a chinese port got covered and they shut a whole port down for like three weeks. Yeah, that's crazy.

Really extreme. I mean, U. S. Workers have been getting coat, not stop. And and the ports keeps Operating even. You know, we have a lower level of productivity, but he'll shut the whole port down.

That happened both at N, T, N, which is the largest port in china or second largest, and ningbo, which is the third largest. So it's IT been very, very disruptive. It's also happened at the airports over there. So that's something definitely keep an eye on here over the next couple of months, even next couple of weeks.

Are we still having this like we're ordering too many goods and we're backed up? Or is that, that we're backed up for six months? Just trying to fufu all those pandemic orders, like what's the state of the backlog today.

if you can describe IT. So volumes are high, but there are sort of flat. They're over year, year. They're flat now. They are much higher than prep, anaemic, but they're pretty much flat year over year. And that's what has we still worried here is that you have increasing delays even though the inputs the same, and we have a complex system, where are the same amount of inputs coming in, but the delays is getting longer and longer. IT has a very worrisome sign. Like if you're ever building a come um technology system, you building this uh system and you're sending the mount of bits in and performing the job is taking longer and longer, that should be like that would be a very alarming sign. You going to want to some your best engineers and here the debug.

I think we're seeing that like cause a lot of companies people don't realize like when they buy capital equipment, like machines that you know are either sold to end users or machines that are used in their own production systems, capital equipment is typically assembled the last minutes. Not like you know there are companies that own huge pieces of equipment and they may ship them and they just get plug in and turn on, usually components associated with them. And you know, in businesses i've been involved in over the last couple years, we've got a lot of lab businesses and hardwork businesses and just getting capital equipment has been like delays like we've never seen.

It's like no a year or a year a half or something that used to take four to six weeks arrive because the company that makes that equipment is having delays with the each of their components suppliers and then all of the stuff backs up into the system and IT plays out with the end users now stuck waiting a year, year a half and the business doesn't make progress. And a lot of hardware companies and solo on valley right now, we are facing the significant shortages where they can get the equipment they need to ship product to their customers and they're sitting around burning money every month. And so the when the result will actually show up down the road, when all of a suddenly this revenue three, four quarters down the road.

And that's why i've been saying for you know couple shows now that the biggest thing i'm concerned about is when the revenue shortfall start to hit the companies that are dependent on the supply chains. But you don't actually see the revenue shortfall for a couple of quarters after the supply chain problems hit them. And just this quarter with the quarterly earnings were now seeing that the company yesterday that reported called in grade on their big food ingredients company and they just reported how supply chain problems have now backed up to effect a and the stock was down like ten seven percent yesterday.

And this is like a very stable, very mature, third largest producer of start in the united states. And their business got totally hammed but took a while before that hit them. Um and so you know IT feels to me ran I mean correctly from wrong. But like a lot of the the the business level in market level risk isn't going to show up for a while after the supply chain problems really persist within their organization.

This is the thing that the most concerned is what what's happen is, is now taking a one hundred and fifteen days on average across our customer base from when the factory says, hey, these goods are ready, come pick them up to when they finally get delivered warehouse in the united states. Before the pandemic, that was fifty and fifty events felt high like the ship is only taking fifteen days, like what the heck is going on, lot of inefficiency, lot of customs processing.

Hard to find a true that even in Normal times, when you go to one hundred and fifteen, all the some of these companies are so much less agile, like because you've place the orders and you're expected forecasting demand is so hard and now you're forecasting demand for twice as long of a time period, you're already place all that inventory of your demand goes down. Guess what? You already order the goods.

So i'm i'm really worried that we're going to find out in six months or in some time period in the future here that people have ordered way too many goods that these company is expected demand to stay high, keep booming. At some point, consumers start going to restaurant and start traveling a lot more. You get precoe consumption patterns, and all these companies get stuck with way too much inventory that they pay way too much to ship and get delivered in. The kids sell IT. And so I be very worried for like middle market kind of retail, the direct consumer econ, these types of businesses, they aren't very sophisticated and demand planning and end up .

with waiting magic. I think that there's been this weird depression actually. And I think that like these supply chain issues are not broadly distributed.

If you bear with me for second, if you watch the earnings reports, I don't know how close to you. You watch them right in the past couple weeks. But like apple and tesla basically said, as kind of reasonably well managed, particularly on the chip side.

And we see the whole thing easing q 4， q hundred next year. Amazon last night basically said, yeah, there's some you know toughness in the system, but we think it's sort of like you reasonably achievable and their past IT. And so IT seems like the bigger companies who have influences were able to manage through at the smaller companies, to your point, who really duce rely on.

Many actors in the supply chain have been really thrown left and right. They probably don't know where demand really is. So is that sort of the more new on setup the way that is running out?

Yeah and and and it's sort of it's very interesting. See this s flips. So prepense mic, the biggest companies paid the least for freight because they buy the most freight to the negotiate good rates.

Now they are paying the most and the biggest companies for a reason. They have the best businesses. They they have the best margins, the best, you know, they just built something that people want to scale to be huge.

Well, when times are tough and you need to spend extra to prioritized your free to get loaded, to sign a contract to make sure that these H A shit owners and uh airlines honor their commitments and service step up. It's the big company is that can afford IT and so they are now paying extra for free. But they're getting around.

These problems in fate is a really interesting market because it's pretty asic like either gonna shift the finger, unite the whatever the Price is, you probably still shipping IT. And so like you, I haven't ever looked at an apple, uh, at this level. But i'm sure that if you did, you see that it's a the the percent they spend on afraid is just negligible. So if they double IT with the chaos .

point IT teams like and I think we're seeing this a lot, the bigger companies can actually afford to integrate their supply change before IT didn't make sense of vertically in great. Like I think walmart announced that they've spent like eleven or twelve billion dollars kind of rebuilding the supply chain themselves.

Apple obviously has captive facilities all the way down to the fab, where they're driving the whole supply chain from fa B2Components of all the se fox on fac ilities tha t are Ope rated for the m are cap tive fac ilities. But the and tesler, obviously, you know, has a very deeply in a grated supply chain team. Where's G. M? Probably relied on sobs who relied on sobs who rely on subs.

And that's why gm delivered like no electric cars, but tesla was able to keep volume up. The guys that are winning or the ones that are integrating supply chains. And do you think that, that kind of becomes a persistent solution here where you know bigger companies, their competitive advantage becomes, hey, we're going to own our whole supply chain all the way. We're going to only more the infrastructure all the way through like amazon stone with delivery events and ultimately be able to kind of you know have A A true competitive advantage because of this disruption is going on right now.

Yeah potentially, I may I think all on my vision for flex form that we become that layer and we allow small businesses, medium size businesses to get access to work class logistics services and them sort of almost be a union that can represent them at the table is uh, against these bigger guys. Um I think it's very interesting to see a companies like the biggest companies have gone out and charter their own ships. Totally wild experiment to watch for my mom. I said here, a pop going .

you're bringing up a really important effect of all of this, which is what happens now in six or nine months, to your point, when the consumption of heart physical asset turns towards the consumption of services, which is typically does, right? If you revert back to the mean here, you know, people aren't going to be buying as many patterns and all of that stuff because they bought them, all right, they bought all the physical goods they need.

And to your point, these companies have over ordered all this inventory. Actually, palette is a perfect example because they basically shut down their entire supply in less at the end of this past quarter. A century said our inventory turns will be more than enough to meet you know, existing demand for the forseeable future.

That's an enormous capital problem that these companies now all of a sudden will face, right? So like the next step beyond all the supply chain issues could be um and I think sex has been talking about this a lot. A pretty bad recession of these companies have all this inventory and they don't know .

how to get working capital and the factory is the Prices on crisis. So the Price of shipping in container long run like i've been in this business and been a customer this business for twenty years and years, you can just rule of done and costing two thousand barks to ship a container from china to the west coast during um twenty sixteen that Price collapse yeah these women cycles of an asset market twenty sixteen IT was five hundred fifty bucks last year is twenty thousand dollars.

So it's up ten x over Normal to forty x over or more right over just a few years ago. And what what has done is create a real barrier to entry, like for A D X C E con business used to be go to china some product sap label on IT and go sell on zon. You are in business, and this is a huge number of people doing this right now.

You have to come up if you wanted ship. Ten containers are used to be needed. Twenty grain, ninety two grand.

That's like that's a real berried entry. So actually, i've talked to some companies in the space, we're really happy. Like if you haven't establish business, you're like, great. Now it's much harder for josh mode to show up in china, start competing with me. So IT, I was really surprising here that I thought that .

was a preoptic iscah take. At what dollar point does air fate compete with containers? Because when we start hearing about chips, I was always wondering ing again, i'm no expert but putting a bunch of chips on a plane versus putting him in a container, given how much those chips are valued by a tesla, who ever is putting him into you know a car? Um what the gone .

in line and it's one to as well. One thing to remember is that fifty percent of all the world's airfare flies in the belly of passenger points, which should kind of horrify you if you ever flying on a passenger train from from asia but to the united once to stuff down in that l and those are granted. So the the supply.

why are they .

grounded?

Oh, I see. So because now we're seeing .

kind of the back log playing a commodity cycle, right ran. So we're seeing my lady commodities because of the uh, this continues in the supply chains. Uh, suddenly commodity Prices are sleeking all over the place. And I mean, we think that settles down? Or do you think that kind of continues for in the foreseeable future until this all works its way out?

Yeah I have not the right person as about the money Prices maybe you know as you and but I I the logistics market, I don't see IT sorting itself out for the next year, the next couple of years. In fact.

you've you've warned that I might get worse, right? You've I mean, I saw on bloomberg, you said that there could be a union strike in maybe october. What are the prospects for that and what happens if if that takes place?

So it's on july. First of the west coast union is called the I, L, W, U. there. That union extends from the southern borders of from mexico all the way to alaska, and that includes canada.

So the whole west coast of the united states is run by this one union at the ports. And they are their contract expire on july first. And in years past of the last time this happened was in twenty and fifteen.

This is a contract of resign and and extended at some point but um in teen had a three months period where nobody could import anything on the west coast uh and some major companies with Christmas that year oh uh that's the life first. Typically these there's kind of slowdowns in the late months leading up to that. And we've already had slow dance for a couple of years with hundreds of ships are now waiting offshore. So yeah, I can make a prediction.

This is slowdown. Basically negotiating tactic by the unions in the past .

has been i'm not convinced that that's what we've seen over the last year versus you are there are legitimate problem staffing people.

So is there a role for presentin leadership in sorting out these union issues or dissertation out the issues with the port more generally or avoiding a strike in july?

I mean, IT seems to me that IT want to get elected. This inflation pitch issues are pretty top of mind in the news and are gonna on people you know you want to be seen doing things. And I do think there are things that can be done so ah there.

And as far as union negotiations, brains probably pretty as equip as any president ever been to negotiate with the union and get them to play nice and that screw up as real election with the with the strike. He's known as a union friendly president. Go sit down to do a deal with them where trump would probably never be able to do a deal with the union because they know that the sort of natural aversa.

So there's something there. There's a lot more to be done. And and you know I just some arguments with people that are like, you know, that's not in the president's hour to do such as such like that, but these are president and I says, pick up the phone and like you can do things that aren't legally in your power is just by asking for favors and other people do them.

And you see when unions get a good example convincing to change the zoning laws in L A. So you can stack containers higher would be another. Yeah, that's not the president, united states, Jessica, but if he calls the .

mayor of a layer, the city council.

can you explain that? What in alive, nia, you can stack a container more than too high in the trucking yard. By law, we get in a .

place to put these containers. But is is that a danger issue?

Was that like a issue? The side lines over the world. So that's not that legitimate to my in my view on and .

in california is White four or .

something too too high.

It's too high. A well.

at the trucker ards at the port you see him six, six. But in the trucker ards two is the limit OK. And so it's a it's also when I saw especially in california, um containers are a sign of free enterprise. H just the people in telephone you can't stand to see them are the really just subject h to the idea of capitalism in their neighborhood that .

but there could be like some kind of temporary waver that we do just to get through all of this backlog, which is to say, okay, let's just ease all of these small little things that slow the process down, just to get all these ships, you know, unloaded right off into the world where they need to be. And then we could refer back to what we are after things, you know, kind of Normal ize.

yeah. So we did that. So like I wrote about this, this zoning law. And what's what's happening then is if you can't stack the container three high, there's no where to put that third container.

So you leave IT on the trailer and now you have one less trailer in rotation serving the port to unload. And that's that's true across something helping you, right? Other thousands of trailers with containers on them because they are not allowed to stack them, look, get fined if they do.

So I tweet about this and the the city of long beat actually responded. I tweet about the six A M by three P. M. The city of all me, to change the zone law to allow stacking up to five high. I believe i'm told the fastest response by any government to citizen action like ever.

That's incredible.

You must feel great about that IT. That L A. Evolved through other and there's not that many trucking yards in long beach, a lot of them in less Angels company in run to main guys. I saw this a kind of thing like joe biden and could call these mayors and say.

hey, let's work on this, right? Yeah let's face IT his super union jail, right? Like I he would .

even say tesla over the isn't more pro union because folks be working more and getting paid more is I don't think there's a reluctance to pay, right? Clearly, like you're gonna have to put some money into the system and where the money comes from, we can figure that out later. But the point is that there is a there should be a desire to actually get the people on the ground to be working.

Wouldn't even the third shift shift right, right like that was another thing you are working on, on top of the stacking of these containers to get we know more of these, you know, to alleviate the problem you are also talking about, they don't even have a third shift some nights. But they seem to have edit .

a third shift to that become permanent or but IT.

is that a compensation if you run, like if we paid born with for show up because .

I just a supply demand is um there there's just a lot of factors and a lot of a lot of IT is so easy to point fingers to somebody else. Blame someone in the chain, supply chain. You got all these different people, and everybody has their own opinion.

You know, we are one way I wanted to cure what the union's opinion was. What what did they saying? Because everyone else is calling them and lazy and not working hard. What's really happening. So we I said to talk truck down to the poor couple of months ago, just because we I figure we get free talk .

as will talk to us.

And well, we, the and then they told us all about what their view point was. They viewed that the truckers are scare IT up, that fifty percent of all the appointments where a truck is was a common pick up a container of missing their appointments, right? And because and then and then so that's what sent me investigating way.

Why are they missing the appointments? That's when I learn, oh, they don't. The trailers, these chasses, because they're stuck under containers and can be unlock a lot of IT is going here.

The supply gets kind of like this, that metaphorical elephant in the dark room, right? Everybody sees their own aspect of IT, but you going to synthesize all those perspectives and kind of take a systems view and see if you can get some real understanding. I'm not convinced I have IT at, by the way, I think IT is more complex and I really be very simple narratives. If someone, even including me, says all this is exactly what's happening, like is really a lot of complexity in all of this.

right? How much how much of this is sort of the the the extreme end of the other spectrum, which is basically the U. S. Exceptionalism view that says, okay, we just need to really in house more of the stuff that we need so that we don't actually have to rely on some of these arcane methods of just transporting goods or from point a to point me.

there would be a shame if we have the best companies in the world who need to be able to source raw materials, components, finish goods anywhere on planet earth. And we should have a modern infrastructure that makes that possible instead of being like, oh, we can trade with the rest of the world, we're onna become like self sufficient.

You know, we might smoke up back to everybody being a farmer on subsistence former on our own land like I I think we should have global infrastructure that's really great and seamless and makes IT really easy. But you write, that might be an result. People can rely on the supply chains and started saying, hey, let's manufactured at home.

Let's manufactured in light america. Let's manufacturer close to to home. Uh, to my perspective will be a hame.

Well, I think the I think the product, the pendulum always starts from more extreme to the other. And I think the middle ground is probably that you need to have some horion eighty, right? You have to have some amount of IT that is not just singularly reliant on china.

Maybe it's maybe it's to central or later america, right? Some that domestic, but that domestic production probably has to be subsidized by something because we're never gna be able to run as efficiently and as cost effectively as, you know, cheaper international labor. You know, I must be invent something really, you know, incredible. So the baLance is probably in the middle, but it's onna take us a long time to kind of get everything.

And I saw a governor, abbott, was pitching people on, hey, just send your containers to texas. Were cheaper and more central in the country. Is that true? Is that a solution .

that takes much longer cost much more when if the union goes on stock on the west cocos, there will be one of your only options, bring stuff through the canal. What you'll very quickly see is that the gonna back up can't move that many more ships through the canal that are currently going to the west car.

So a lot, and you ve seen that a lot, where the bottle not just moves for a while last summer, the for example, the trains that we're going in the chicago, they were really having a hard time staffing the railroads out there. And I was taking them a long time to unload containers at the at the port, at the terminals england in chicago. And drivers, a lot of the truck drivers are owner Operators.

So these are entrepreneurs are on their own truck work for themselves, and they were able to pandemic to do three loads per day at the chicago rail heads, go drop IT off, come back at the other one three times. With the delays and the traffic jams that resulted, they were only able to do one a day. And so you opt out because you can go drive for U, P, S of that x, or take your truck and do something else.

So we had this huge reduction in drivers, and that's the kind of a feedback loop that we should all be really mindful of here, where a problem begets more problems than you get these positive feedback. Libs in the system, the real vicious cycles. And so, you know, bottle next move when you'll see as soon as they everybody started the ship to his important won't be able to hand the volumes either. It's not like it's magically Better just because it's a republican state or something.

Do we need more ports or do we just need to run them more efficiently? And then who determines who runs the port? Because I know that they i've seen some tweet of years where they license the government, I guess, own supports, but they licensed to people to have the franchise there, more ports, Better run ports. And then what's the business model of ports?

I say Better on ports. The I don't we need more ports and you can really create ports, air, handful of geographic locations that actually makes sense for report. Um and we have we have great geography like the separate cisco bay, like proba.

The best natural harbor in the world are one of them. And the oakland port perfectly fine. IT is who warns that is the city of oakland or the city of long bases of city of L. I, so the local cities own the ports in the united tes.

That is a difference between united states in europe, for example, where the sort of national strategic assets are still government owned, but can be Operated as a sort of public good for everybody instead of what what are the odds, given what's going on in oakland, that that's the big priority of the mayor of oakland? They like grant, a Better poor like you ve got a lot of lot of things on her on the list. And so that's one problem with our system.

And then second, they do rent this. The government knows that, and then rented to a private company that Operate IT. And then but those as a condition of renting the port, you must agree to hire the I L of view. You can't run in on union port in the states.

Should the government by the the federal government by the poor from oklahoman, the poor from long beach, offer them some you trillion dollars or billions of dollars and buy IT out from them?

It's not a terble. I think you're forcing everyone use union labor is not really like a private sector endeavors is like you can especially wait the way that the unions run so you can do that much. But like, here's an example where technology can watch what already made this technology.

We could ten next to three part of one of these parts overnight, which is today a truck driver shows up looking for a specific container, is like, I got this container numbers so they have to make an appointment that out. And as I said, they are missing fifty percent of their appointments. Well, on the back in inside the port, they get to go find that container in this, in the needle, in the haystack, and make sure it's at the front during that one hour when the guy shows up for IT.

And you could we already have this tech to make IT, what we call a free flow stack, where you just have this, the truck pulls up and you're giving the first the first container off the line, and then the mobile p tells them more to take IT. And he doesn't have to come for a specific container. And if you do that, you'll just be every thirty seconds coming out here instead of every ten, fifteen minutes, you'd easily take nex through put.

And this is we really have this tag. So uh, it's a matter of implementation deployment and how do you get around a lot of people that don't really want to see Better running ports? And uh, it's pretty sad to where I said they .

don't benefit from Better running ports, although at the back and they they suffer from higher Prices and inefficiency and not getting the things they want on time.

Well, if if you listen to ella and talk about unions and White tesler is not a union shop, is got nothing to do with wages, you know, he said will pay you the union rate or Better and its not about this treatment because he said listen to some mistreats to you, you're going to no assails rule and we'll get rid of them the issue is inflexibility, right? He wants to drive continuous process improvement at tesla, and he can do that with the union shop because every change has been negotiated.

And then if there is a worker is not living up to the performance bar, you can get rid of them and they can't repair pose workers and have work at different line. So that's why elon has always resist being a union shot, not the wages, not a treatment, purely inflexibility and IT seems like that's what you're seeing in in the ports as well is we can drive changes and improvements because everything so highly contractually negotiated. That's my material comment, right?

And what do you think about? No, I mean, it's was studying a little history here like, you know, we went through the container revolution in the sixties and seventies in the union, agreed to IT and they that dramatically transporting the waterfront that these guides, like you seen photographs from that euro, they would put IT on their back like burlap.

Thanks for the stuff like holding you on and off these these ships and kind of loading by hand. IT was a real was a massive employment driver, and we we still barely recovered from this, like the west highway in new york is finally like a nice park. But is that there for fifty years like to lp idathe peers and ugly as buildings. And some of those are still their same persistent water front, still mostly like that out of the they bridge is still like this old dilapidated building. So it's kind of funny to see how long IT takes like that infrastructure to change but there there was uh and I don't know, i'm not like the worlds expert on this history, but somehow they convince the union to adopt containerization, which is about is far more radical than anything we would be proposing now in how you would change their work flow or change their work like that was completely change where it's really this giant automated or this giant cranes replace the the worker couldn't buy .

and deploy his commerce secretary or I mean, isn't there's some cabinet officially he could deputies to say, go sol, this problem, go bring the parties together yeah.

I think I suspect that will happen over the coming months because july first is pretty bad timing for a metering election. If they were to go on strike and think he's got a lot of incentive to make sure .

that he have and that this seems like, I mean, you've been reading about this for months that no paying attention in the administration, I mean, we will vote. Been reading your tweet storm saying like some of washing really should be paying tention to these is .

over two administrations now, right, right? It's both administrations have been out to lunch on the student and focus on the union is a really .

big issue that's going to come up summer there is, I in mind you, an even bigger issue that that's even less attention, which is on january first of next year, january first twenty twenty three, which is tomorrow in shipping terms, that all the ships in the world will have to reduce their carbon emissions by thirteen percent. And these are internal combustion engine.

This is not right. How just explain what that means by whose Mandates that and how is that enforceable and why is i'd have to it's it's.

uh the international maritime organization is part of the united nations in the group that is overseeing global ocean. It's the regulatory body for ocean rate in the world and as the united nations groups to any member state of the united nations must follow the rules of the I M O and they ve also they will uh and so the I M O has said all existing ships in the world must reduce their carbon emissions by thirteen percent and again, it's an international completion engine. We don't know how to make IT thirteen percent more carbon.

We would have done that already. Can you actually buy indirect offset? I can you go and buy some amazonian rainforest .

credits and offset? No, you can offset uh and its not about the fleet either. So some of these fleets have uh L N G liquid natural gas so the fleet might be more efficient. But it's now it's down to the individual ship in a has so there is one way to reduce the emissions of the ship and that's to go slower. Uh, and if you go thirty percent slower, then you can achieve a thirteen percent prediction reduction in carbon emissions.

Well, if you look at on a poor container basis, by the way, the same about a carbon made IT because the ship is still Carrying the say no time is just go slower, but IT will reduce the supply of shipping capacity and slow everything down to another thirty percent that, that takes about the first twenty twenty three is in very little attention. But to might be it's going to be massively disrupted if we slow everything down, reduce the capacity of the network, that much further Prices are going to go to the moon. And it's it's like really as an law because he doesn't actually achieve any .

carbon reduction, the fuel type rec mate, i'm wrong. Is this like M G O, M D O, like it's dirty or fuel? Is that correct? So trainers.

the same group. I M O actually passed a new lodge, a jane first twenty twenty and got totally IT was surprisingly huge deal in our industry. And the cover head and we all kind of ignore IT, but that would eliminated the worst kinds of fuel.

Uh, sofa used to be, you could have this bunker fuel that was up to three percent sofa to let the crazy at a slr heri c acid, which is like apparently like fifteen times worse than carbon as a Greenhouse gas. And so that was eliminated now, uh, it's still kind of ugly bunker fuel, but it's not like I used to be. The reputation is probably still Carried over from .

from three if you your magic one as we wrap up here and change two or three things, uh, that to you seem like lineups and I think you've kind of hinted at them in order. What would be the change is just based on your intuition and your knowledge of the supply chain. What two or three things are the layups .

we got ta do right now? I think first is, is to start with some with matrix. Like, what if if you care about something, measure.

The method that the government been using for ocean freight delays has been how many ships are waiting offshore at the port of long beach. And this is like one of the most missed. I I don't know, he was just like, alright for all or incompetence.

But one of the worst things i've seen from government in terms of P. R, is they they pass this rule that the ships have to wait one hundred and fifty miles offshore, so that the carbon, so that the pollution wouldn't hit like, like, reasonable, good. But then they kept using the same metric for how many ships are waiting right outside the port.

And and I went way down, and they started celebrating that success. So like, let's actually use the right method, which is how long is IT taking cargo at the transport. You can just hide the ships and celebrate that there's n no ships there. If if we get the government.

you're saying that the government pushed the ships beyond the measurement window and then said they don't exist. yes.

And the transportation secretary, the port like director, got up this government .

that I went to an X, L sweater to hide my gut. And I was like, i'm in.

Yeah, Better to look at the scale. So if if we at least get them focus on the right metric, which I think we have, the best metric right now, we call the first export ocean timelessness indicator, is how long years are taking the cargo from when the factory says it's ready. So when IT can be delivered, now any solution that we create, we have a metric we know, okay.

there's A K, P, I here. Door door.

Yeah you mentioned the transportation secretary was part of that press conference where they are taking credit for changing the metric. So assume that booter j, who's in charge of dispersing one point two trillion dollar infrastructure bill, is there any money in the infrastructure built .

to solve this problem? There's seventeen billion dollars allocated to ports. I went in reit, and I couldn't find any money that was gonna spent on building ports. IT was like.

here's a crazy thing. We just had this trillion dollar infrastructure bill is best to modernized and update the infrastructure the country and is doing nothing to solve the most pressing supply chain issue in the country, which is the value at the ports, which is driving inflation, which is causing illustration increases in recking the economy.

There is a term in washington, which is called the Christmas tree bill. And the infrastructure bill is an example of which is this is not a directed shot on goal. What this is is a random, you know, tree that you go on, hang little things on top of and eventually the whole thing is covered.

So that kind of looks beautiful from a far. But when you get really close to IT, it's a little bit chaotic and you don't understand what's going on. And so to your point. The fact that ryan can say there seventeen billion dollars allocated to something like ports, but it's unclear to him who's an expert in the space where that money goes on. How it's spent gives us zero chance to figure this up.

Yeah I mean, I was like it's like things like, oh, each state must create our supply chain readiness report about is like what are you talking about like singapore put twenty billion dollars to build a bad as automated poor like that's like a reasonable thing to do like let's spend to twenty million dollars, make the most automated amazing import in the world, be a good use of government money. Then the studies I T, I don't know that any to hit the ground is the right.

So you're you're saying that seventeen billion dollars that goes to, you know, studies and consultants could actually get redirected and we could take a part where there's an amenable city and actually completely modernized IT to set the example of what modern shipping should look like in the united states that at a minimum matches what's happening in the rest of the wall.

Yeah, I didn't have be pretty awesome and doesn't seem to me like scientifically like government wants to build the port.

Who's going to stop the government? That seems too logical and too obvious, right?

Ports compete for who gets to get that twenty billion to be the modernized port .

like position put to put the mayors in competition and see which mayor wants in their back.

Yg, abbot wanted. Does long beach want? IT, does oakland? Who wants to fight .

to be the most modern?

That be I exactly.

i'm sure. Greg abbott, I don't know that california is two incredible ports wanted in those two that are closest to china, by the way. Spoiler alert.

you guys know my google fiber ran that competition, and they got like mayor pitmen like a frozen lake. And I was also bring. So I think I, I, I don't have life, even if that came around, that would take five, six years, right? Even if he was done right, you don't get a pod over the night.

Um there are some very simple solutions like this. Changing the zone law, adopting technology to go with a free metrics out of the poor, puts the metrics in here, like have someone focus on this. A key part of problems solving is make sure the problem doesn't get worse. So let's sign someone to go work with the union and and the and the company terminal Operators, make sure that they don't go on strike, uh, make sure and then someone is to go to look at this I M O U N thing and figure out of the united really going to go through with that because it's pretty crazy.

Will listen, ryan, you've been incredibly generous with your troubles, knowledge and your leadership watching you as a, you know, a CEO and a leader go out there on a boat and go visit and buy the fricking talk s and actually boots on the ground, figure this out like the country oes your debt, the world is your dead to really keep this a, you know, problem down to first principles and figure that out. And our government should be taking notes.

And really the other leaders were importing, whether it's apple or tesla, you know, be great for all of them to be supporting you. I don't know if they have reached out, but maybe you know a half dozen of you can then sit with this administration on the next one and just tell them where a point the money can on. But he doesn't like they know where pointed.

We have a lot of people in washington that listen to the spot. please. Yes, just reach out to run in.

just reach out to run and have one to sit there. And please, right.

let right by your talk of guys.

right, bring your talk a truck to washington.

Big conomo atas about business .

and politics is that leaders have to focus on the right problems. And when they're not, focus on the right problems, like bad things happen. And we know that inflation is a huge problem.

The fed now is raising rates, are projecting raising rates very quickly, which is creating IT was created a huge market downturn is a very blunt instrument. IT could cause a downturn, a recession. So that's the big problem. And yet there are specific solutions and fixes to the inflation problem by updating or modernizing the ports that ryan suggested.

But who's focusing on IT. And now the more x be a more strategic .

sniper shot as opposed to this. And what have they been fox in washington on? Definitely not this. No, absolutely.

And then I see ryo .

sy suggestions on twitter, and then all of these people come in. They are all like fatal tic. Oh, well, the president can do anything first.

The present can emergency war a time?

There was never a time for present leaders to be at. What I worry about is that if you're the union leader and you know that you've got by in the White house, who's always going to take their side, why once you make your demands more unreasonable?

But they should be asking me for triple time to keep IT open overnight.

By midday. Do you really, if you're the clear of the union, if that vidth gna break your strike.

no way, no way. As for quite drupe time, yeah, just make a painful.

You should make .

the most of the crisis.

agree. Just ask possible. I mean that this is your max leverage .

right now. This is your time. Alright, listen. right.

Thanks a lot. great.

I gi APP a continue. exactly. C M, M. Facebook stock has dropped over twenty five percent after reporting negative user growth for the first time. And not only ten billion dollars or maybe even twelve billion dollars last a year are there are A R V R headsets and project, but also a ten billion dollar decrease in projected twenty twenty two revenue, thanks to apple's privacy features. I guess .

we're going to go to twenty five percent two.

Yeah, we have to paint. And then snape chat had a whipsaw that could forth. But chammah, when you see this, you call this, which your spread trade. Maybe you could walk us through what you saw up, you know, whatever was three, four, five months ago and then what you're seeing now. And at this level, with two hundred and fifty billion dollars wiped off the market, what do you think about the future of this as a trade and as a company?

Well, I think the trade did what I was supposed to do, which is in a period of a lot of volatility, I saw an opportunity to, you know, just reduced my risk exposure. Look, i'm generally long, very risky assets, right? I mean, what all of us are in the business of building companies that have huge volatility because all of our companies generate earnings very far in the future.

And so, you know, in november of last year, I was trying to figure out what I could do to shield myself. And the reason I wanted to shield myself was because I saw elan and jeff in part selling, but also I saw that clearly, we were going to go through a period where that high growth tech was going to trade down. So I sold some of that high growth tech.

But then I also wanted to figure out a way where I could be less exposed to some of that volatility by continuing to hold what I had. And the best way that I figured out how to do that was to do this spread, right? And so, you know, what I saw at the time was that there is one business of all others that I think is immune amongst the big tech from any sort of real long term issues.

And that microsoft, and I think David expressed the reason well, is that it's an enterprise business. Now you know, politicians generally don't tend to care about enterprise businesses. They have enormous logit ual growth in front of them. And they're able to do things on the margins, specifically around dominate, to keep building their business with very little oversight. And we saw this because they had the courage to do this activision deal, you know, just a few weeks ago, if you could imagine, again, no other company in big tech could even dare try to do a seventy billion dollar acquisition because of the scrutton and time.

IT was a bold movie.

yes. Yeah, I think it's not a bold move. I actually think IT says the obvious, which is microsoft is beyond the level of regulatory scrutiny that the rest of big tech actually has because they are consumer businesses.

The second safest company is google. And the reason is that google has the best of both worlds. They're both the platform because of android.

But then where they are at risk of being an APP, they have an incredible deal with apple that blends that effect. And so when apple talks about all their pushed to privacy, you still have this very specific relationship. And facebook called that out in the early release. They said, we believe that google has preferential treatment relative to the rest of the internet in that apple deal because they pay apple fifteen or twenty billion dollars year.

And for people who don't know that for search, the default search on your iphone goes to google. Google pays fifteen billion dollars to apple and the uh actually explain the accusation there of why that would give them preferential. In case people do somebody fifteen or twenty .

billion dollars year, they're less likely to do bad things to you. They may do bad things to other people, but they are not going to do as many bad things to you.

Did you believe that? Yeah that allegation from za well, no.

I don't believe the allegation, but I think that general uh character that general thing is true. Like you're not sure screw over your partners, you're going to screw over other people before you screw over your partners. Whether this applies here, it'll have to be born out in some kind of lawsuit or state ages or blob.

But anyways, the I think the point is that every other company has a lot more headwinds than microsoft, google in big tech. And then the third thing is was a market observation from Gavin Baker, which I thought was incredibly brilliant. And what he said was when you see a drawdown, meaning when the markets go down, it'll affect high growth tech.

First, IT ended up touching a bunch of other area. Second, like biotech, but he said the key thing, which is big tech will be the last crack. But when they do, they are gonna get shot.

And so I spent bunch of time just trying to figure out, when big tech gets crack, who's gone to get cracked the hardest. And I just kind of wanted to create a spread between those who were the most inoculated to those that were the most at risk. As I turned out, netflix puked IT up.

Facebook puked IT up. Amazon actually got really crushed even though this past day, they had a pretty decent rally because they're earnings, but they really got crush. So in in any event, the trade is what the trade is.

The bigger thing is what is going on a facebook. And I think what you see are three really important headwinds that facebook called out explicitly. One is that when they talked about usage kind of flattening and starting to decay, what they're really talking about is tiktok.

And I think what we learned is that tiktok is an enormous threat and a huge competitive force now in the consumer social epo system. The second is that facebook is fundamentally an act that sits inside of an ecosystem that is subject to the rules of the platform manner. And that's apple and google.

And so this I D F, A change. So the change in how you can track advertisers, facebook, that is gonna a ten million dollar impact in two thousand and two. And then the third thing, which was more implicit is in order for them to grow, if you can't grow organically, the only other way to grow is inorganic. And unfortunately, as we're seeing the regulatory focus on this company is really enormous. And so IT was a IT was a pretty um watershed moment in I think that companies um discussion of their future and and mark actually kind .

x you look at this uh made interesting observation. Facebook branding itself as met up before meta exists. IT maybe looked at as another sort of sign that maybe they got a little tilted. Maybe what we should take on the sort of changing the name of the company before that business really is that scale exists.

Yeah I mean, it's a bubble move um because look, when you're in an up market and the market is super fossy, we had in hindsight last year was a giant asset bubble funded by all this liquidity coming out of the fed and the federal government. So yeah, in a bubble like that, all investors care about is the grow story.

And so facebook went all in on the story around metaverse, but in the cold light of day, once the, once the punch, yeah once the punch pals been taken away and you're in the hand over and you're in sort of a very vult investors. Go away to second you. This VR division is losing ten billion a year.

They might be twelve, by the way.

because they said IT was a little higher. So the sis are and so in that kind of market, investors are like way to second, do I do I want to invest in a company that um whose future is that unclear? I mean, if you look at this at this market, we've seen that the gross dogs are down sixty.

And update yesterday was a horrible day. So they are bouncing around sixty, seventy percent down off the highs in early november, okay, but the things only down like fourteen percent to me like that. But facebook basically took themselves out of the sort of the market leader bucket and put themselves in the growth bucket.

treated like peloton. We're spect. why?

Why would they want to do that now? Terrible strategic decision.

You're saying.

well, I was was a decision IT was a kind of decision where you look back with twenty twenty hand side. You say, look, that kind decision could only be made in a bubbly fathy market. You would never make that decision in the kind of downmarket you have today. And other decisions look stupid as well. So paypal was just down twenty .

five percent OK.

Why was IT down? Well.

no growth and users IT .

was mostly on the forecast and yeah revise their forecasts down considering. And of course, they try to blame IT on the economy. But other companies know amazon just had a huge beat, a little of expectation. Yeah, there are fifteen percent today. So not everybody is blaming the macedon ic pictures the way that people I did any event.

My point is you go back six months ago and you know what was paypal doing? I wrote a story for bar wise, for her sub stack about how paypal is taking the lead to finial deep at forming. They were working with the ad and the spc to to identify groups to kick off their platform. So that's what management was spending their cycles on, figuring out how not to grow, how to kick people off their platform, trying to figure .

out I get more people on .

IT so familiar, try to the kind of thing you do when you're in a frothy market and your stock is up and you're tram hint, you can waste your manage bycars on stuff like that. Now the stock is down twenty five percent. You have to wonder, g, do we wish we had spend our time? Other things?

okay. So freeburg, I have a question for you about the future. Uh, obviously, facebook has bet the farm on meta.

They're betting on V, R, and I I guess eventually A R or what collectivist called xr. And then we have, uh, news that apple has a seemingly brilliant goggles product coming out. Developers are getting into IT and they are the masters of hardware.

So now zuker berg has decided he will be on a collision course with the company that just took ten billion dollars of revenue from them by doing the non tracking. And that is the masters of hardware. So we have this collision course coming. And then just two weeks ago, google said, member google, who we are not giving up on vrar either. And of course, microsoft, we all know, has their uh, hollow lands. So when we look at that four horse race, if you were to bed and rank who's gonna in apple goggles, google glass, whatever they going to call the new thing hallow and and met is oculus, who's gonna win? And what how do you look at that competition between the big four?

I don't know if that's a race you want to be.

So I like that answer.

race to nowhere. And you guys use the oculus st. device.

absolutely. Have two of them try, oh my.

the move continuously space. When you do that.

it's like you want to throw.

you throw up. I mean, i'm not sure that this notion that that becomes the new computing mobility is like a fair and true notion. And so you know, there may IT may end up becoming kind of A A niche entertainment device, almost like an intend to switch where there's A A, A mode when you're using IT.

But i'm not sure IT replaces traditional static to two dimensional computing in front of you. The jury still out. I don't see like a computer sentiment that says these things will ultimately kind of prevail over the current um mode. So you know who's to do his work.

who would win in your mind, who's got the best chance when let's assume we're all gona use IT every day for two hours as our best top put in, we going to find workout apps to use whatever it's gonna come. Let's to assume you know that .

I think you just answer your own question in in, in all of these things. When you build hardware, I think you can take a lot of parallels from what happened in the P C space. Um if you have uh commodities, PC manufacturers, compact, dell, I B M, right the numeral number, thousands of companies that made p please, the value created to the application layer, to the Operating system and the people that can actually build ecosystems are typically the ones that win. And the people that already have an ecosystem and all all they have to do for somebody from, you know, platform A, A platform b has a meaningful advantage over somebody that has to convince you to come to a new platform altogether. And so you know, if you're a microsoft, you have thousands or hundreds of thousands of developers, or if you're google and you have hundreds of thousands of developers or your apple and you have millions of developers, it's just a smaller bridge across in order to convince them to go for .

one extra point IOS versus android.

versus microsoft.

And by the way, like the obvious transition, where is like facebook is, like you gotta build all this stuff.

An apple made an incredibly important set of a decisions a few years ago, which I didn't think a lot of people talked about us. They had an O S tree that was branching far too widely, right? They had a different Operating system for uh, the phones.

They had a different Operating system um for ipads, uh test top for watches and they started to try to converge. And you warn these things into into a set of basic primitive so that it's more controllable. And I suspect the reason is because that gives them more optionality to go into a car, to go into a headset without having to do an entire developer .

Better than that. This is a great point you bring up because they also started investing in their own chip set. And I think all of that chipset innovation gives them a dramatic uh, advantage in having smaller batteries and more processing power in ahead said if IT does work, which what ships does, what ship asset does facebook have none.

So I don't I don't think we should say that facebook is down or now, but let's just qualify what we think can win. So that's one thing. The other thing to remember is when you look at the P. C industry, how did intel become so dominant?

Part of what intel was able to do to outcompete AMD and everybody else was that program, intel inside, which is effectively these go marketing passed through dollars that they would use to actually give an incentive for dell and for compact and for all these other folks to basically build the spec. And that was the wind tel monopoly, right? Microsoft, intel, if you play that out in V, R, what you really need is just the bag full of cash.

Because if you give developers a subsidized incentive to build for your platform, you'll do IT. So then again, if you rank the companies, you just need to look at how much cash do they have because those with the most cash. So again, I think the best way to think about this is how many developers you have today, how much cash do you have today, how much cash will you have in the future.

And you can probably rank and just do a reasonable expecting value to think about who has the best chance of winning, assuming the platform is roughly equal. Now if the, if the, if the, if the company on that list with the fewest developers in the least money, IT has a superior device. If that device is superior enough, they can overcome those things.

And facebook has the least money. And facebook the least.

I can have rush parity. I think the person with the most money .

and the most developers has the least developers. They have no relationship with developers. In fact, they kind of screw them over with facebook connecting a couple times.

They have the least money, but they do have the largest user base of profiles. So does that give them some advantage here? And how would you rank who's gonna in?

Who's going to lose? Well, I think that gives an advantage to more strain work of porting over their APP onto. The dominant platform s kanna be. But probably it's the Operating system players who are probably to extend the Operating systems of this new vrar world.

Probably what I wonder about is what facebook have been Better off if they are going to run a ten billion dollar a year money losing division. That's highly speculative. They've been Better off gambling that on building their own phone or maybe their own like forked version of an android phone. The reason I .

say that is started.

we've now seen we've .

got that.

Well, they're they're losing ten bin a year now because this one permissions change that apple is made, right, because are completely dependent on apple's Operating system for a big portion of their revenue. So what is their defense against that? I mean, they're really pretty helpless.

If you look just to make a comparison, if you look at the strategic brilliance of google, what was the first all athi came up with this cash cow, the idea of search. And then they combined IT with the sort of keyword auction they got from overture. They said that, listen, the next strategic move is we can't let anybody just immediate us.

So what they do, they started moving upstream. The first, the first sort of upstream player was the portal rates. They start camping against yahoo.

They gave away gmail, then IT was the browser. So IT was marx. Soft explore. So they gave away chrome, then IT was the Operating system. They gave away android. They said we're not to let anybody else be extreme of us if later started replacing all those layers of the stack, giving away free products with .

right ah sorry, in a good free product.

Yeah great. I mean.

billion of users.

A part of the tip in with google then extended into the public is very quickly with the acquisition of assets. And the publishers then allowed google to offer the greatest C. P.

M. That those publishers could have over any other advertising network. And as a result, google built their network and then built their advertiser days, and they effectively, you know, got this huge locking.

The only disruptive threat to google was what facebook did, which is to create demographic profiles, where instead of targeting ads based on keyword or searching intent, you could now target ads based on demographic and facebook at a step further and did, uh retargeting. So basically following you across multiple sites. But facebook new.

And as we just discovered, that was always gonna a weak point for them because they were dependent upon hardware devices that we going to let them do that tracking across apps and across sites. And that's why google always have this kind of key you know lock and advantage that you know will persist and the network is just so big on both sides. You can compete .

to sex is thought bomb. Um if they had invested in a phone, uh, let's say they made a thousand dollar, let's say they made .

a phone with a bomb of eight hundred dollars, please happened with that. And just, you know, despite his extraordinary large user base is committed, loyal users. All these reasons, his magical, talented technical team, he hire the best people.

He also tried to do the same with search, quite the way with a nine. And remember, apple also tried to do the same with search. All these guys tried to kind of compete.

It's not easy to execute. It's not easy to execute. And you you get a in with the network value, but you also get a with the talent. And this was a really hard thing to pull off and you have to get IT. All right.

So let me ask traumatic question based on what sax I could, should they have deployed ten billion into phones? If we go back two years and they did deploy ten thousand and two phones, they take an eight hundred dollar bombs, which is probably what the best iphone cost, I think, across seven hundred for apple to make in this love. For fifty hundred, they could basically give the phone away for half Price, maybe give away five hundred llys. And if they gave away for four hundred years and you had to be a facebook as you buy, they get the credit, or of the person that would be, they get put twenty .

five million phone into the every year. User experience for users. Users got a Better experience with the iphone OK, and then they got a Better .

experience with android. The window of time was in two thousand and nine, ten and eleven when there wasn't locking. And you know I think that talk that's been well discussed about what we were doing .

and what we try to do.

So there's no point isn't IT IT came down to you know uh and ask that I made that we didn't get and we didn't happen. So I didn't happen, believe IT at that.

And i'm not saying that would have been successful either that .

we didn't get to the starting line. So what in fact, I think it's unlikely .

that I would have work is i'm not sure exactly what facebook value property have been. My point is just if you going to lose ten billion dollars a year on a division, when to be Better for to be something strategically vital as opposed to something that feels little bit optional.

even if the majority chances you don't win. The question is if you had a twenty, thirty, thirty five percent chance of being a player in smart phones, would you take that chance? And I think you have no choice but to take that chance. And I would be worth at the expecting value.

Yeah, one thing i'll see in defensive facebook because I think that all of this like anti trust scrutton is a little bit ridiculous today um and IT looks pretty ridiculous. And let me just explain why like ah IT seems that capitalism is pretty much working as intended because if you looked at google results, if you looked at snap results at pinches results, at amazon's results, there is a viBrant and growing advertising ecosystem.

By no means could you claim that facebook has any real monopoly on that number one. And and when you fold in tiktok, it's absolutely true. And then if you think about the usage curve of tiktok, there's a check and baLance there on usage. And so anybody that thinks that facebook is a monopoly today, I think, is a little misguided. So really, I think what politicians need to do to today, you know, february fourth, is be a little bit more honest about what they really care about, which is really around section to thirty and the misinformation, disinformation, fears that they have related to facebook and distribution power. Because now if you're gonna try to legislative company, it's really unfair, like especially going back ten years to letiko an acquisition, you'd never do that to any other company that you know is sort of maybe .

on the back half of their .

grow cycle. IT just doesn't make any s there is a viBrant, diverse advertising ecosystem. Facebook is not in control of that ecosystem. And so trying to legislate them as a monopoly that ecosystem is insane today.

What do you think that you think this regulation is um based on the fact that facebook kicked off trump and is scaring politicians over actual competitive reality.

I think that politicians are using the threat of regulation to try and drive the the speech policies they want on the social network that that was really going on. I mean, the merit you agree with me.

you to do with the business.

yeah, look who should get regulated on each trust grounds. Apple, apple is maybe google. I know what they are, the big man ops. I mean, they control the .

Operating system.

I mean, those guys are amazon with respect, their competing with own with the best. exactly. So in other words, when you control an Operating system and then there's developers or other down changes on that ecosystem, you have to treat them fairly.

You can't privilege polls to then dominate vertical after vertical. So there are real anti trust concerns with those three companies. The facebook, way less so.

And yet they get the brunt of the attacks. why? Because the people, washington, a truce into controlling what they call information, which is really just speech they don't like. And then that is .

highly inappropriate. Perfect segway. Last week we didn't shop into the rogan spotify debate. Maybe we should have, but we'll talk about IT now with a lot more a context.

Obviously, neil Young and some other folks that we're polling are music of june metro, whatever. Some actual high profile h blogger said they don't want to be on there. And then joe rogan and Daniel ek both decided to talk about this.

Georgina said, listen, i'm a comedian. I don't prepare for these are reviews, uh, and I just see where they go. But this show has gotten very influential in the one pocket, and the world's got a ridiculous lesson's ship. So maybe I should writ right now, maybe I should have IT labelled a and and maybe I should have people on efforts, and maybe I do some extra fact checking.

I thought I was the best non pology, you know, explain ology of an apology because if I am sorry, if you don't like IT but he did kind of a say that he would do Better and then Daniel x said, ah and then i'll let you guys comment h Daniel x said, listen, we produce shows and we approve gas for the ringer and for gim lott which we all know studios we d license joe rogan. We don't uh do any editing on his show and we will remove ones after the fact. But it's a licensing there. Therefore, we're not a publisher. I'm curious what you thought, friedberg on the non pology and capability for something like jo and having guest on who are anti vx, you know maybe are debated in terms of science because yeah he is a comedian but as he says, like the shows kind of big now so maybe I should do a little check and what do you think he should do when he has scientists and are people and people on?

I make two points. One is I don't think that uh, journalism is regulated uh in the sense that you know we have freedom of speech so anyone can stand up and they can say I have this belief or I have discovered this fact and um you may not actually hold that belief and that fact may not be true but you're still allowed to stand up and say IT you're still allowed to have someone come on and say IT um and so I don't think that there's any disclosure obligation he's putting on a show the same as any new show, entertainment and show.

I don't think that there's a clear a line or boundary, amy. What they have do we do here? We've all got opinions.

We try and talk about the news. We talk about our our perspectives, the future. sure. You know what the heck is, is that, that we're doing here? You know there's no kind of clear line there.

So I don't think that he has any obligations, do anything he doesn't want to do, except if and when his audience tells him or the listeners that he cares about, tell him his customers, tell him. This is what we expect and wants from you. And then he responds, customers, that's the way the market works and that's the way the enterprise system should work.

I think the separate, bigger question here that's really important than worth noting, you know, and I just wanted speak about this for one second. All of the great internet company started with this notion that they were creating democratization, that they were creating access to information that didn't exist, whether it's access to media or access to search results or access to to content or whatever, that that may not have been available here. And that was a driving force for the entrepreneurs, the founders, that started all these businesses.

And all of them had these very idealistic points of view that we're not in a sensor. We're not going to take a point of view. We're not going to put our foot down and say what isn't isn't going to be displayed or shown or made available to our users.

We're going to let users choose what they want to get access to and what they want to hear. And and in all these cases, from google to youtube to twitter and now to spotify, the idea of being um just at up an access a platform for access is proving to be wrong. All of them are defected publishers.

They ultimately have to make decisions about what they do and don't let on the platform. And the fact that if you let something on the platform, you're giving IT permission, you're giving IT a voice, you're giving A A amplification and you're giving IT access. Um and so all of them are now getting caught up in this problem that I don't make anyone from Larry or sergey or um jack dosy or Daniel x ever wanted to be in.

They all wanted to be this democratization platform. And now they're finding that there is no way to avoid being treated like a publisher and a publisher. How someone that's called an editor and an editor decide what is and isn't on that publishing platform.

As has always been the case in old media and now in new media, they're all kind of stumbling into this problem and they're not set up for IT. And it's creating issues where people on the right are saying you're censoring us and people are in the left saying you're not giving us access to information we want. And it's you know, it's just kind of the I think the transition that one of them expected, but we're all seeing happen chmagh.

If Daniella is giving a hundred million dollars to joe rogan, can he claim listen, it's just we're a platform when you know listen that we're on spotify as well, but they don't pay us doesn't IT change the relationship when they give him one hundred million or can down you'll say, you know intellection honestly like hylan, we're not responsible for this. I mean the backing of the brain truck and they're promoting IT like heck are they a public?

Sure not in your mind. I read um yesterday that uh broke and Michelle obama's uh deal what spotify just inspired and they're going to shop IT. I suspect that somebody will pay them tens of millions of dollars to to produce content.

That's not illegal and it's a sign of a free market that's working. Spotify has a business to run and that business is to get content in front of the users that are paying them a lot of money on a monthly basis to get access to that stuff. And so who are we to say how spotify, I should run their business? I think you have a choice.

Neil Young expressed his choice. There was a person in the new york times SHE took her podcast off of spotify. Yep, there are subscribers that probably left, but then there also subscribers that probably joined.

Yep, and paid. Yeah, and paid. And so the reality is that the free market being allowed to choose and being allowed to vote with their feet, and I think that all sides of that are in the right. So I think spotify should be allowed to run their business. I think joe rogan should be allowed to say what he wants.

If spotify chooses to put a discounted imer in front of that podcast, that's there, right? That's good to and if joe rogan decides that he wants to have, you know point counterpoint across pod caster within a podcast, that's loadable as well. And that should be his decision. But I don't think people should be forced to make these decisions by law because I think we get into a very slippery slope because you don't totally .

understand the incentives of the lawmaker there. And we have a free market, as you're pointing out.

to mop the free king .

and more important, have a founding document. Suppose that we .

all agree to .

and to our .

constitutional atterley councillor. Take us there. If you're .

talking about the principle of free speeches is a lot people who don't believe in IT, that's the problem. First of all, you have this geriatric hip ow. jury. Can I finish the fish? My.

you can get so you got this jury.

I love .

new Young. You know what happened .

just there that was. J, L, seeing, oh, IT, he's gna get a bell class .

ter .

clip and he had to erupt you there.

That's .

really brutal. J.

can I say to explain what happens? I think Frankly, guys are completely missing IT. The wheel of censorship broke on joe rogan this week.

They try to alex Jones him when he failed. Okay, first you have this geriatric hippy deal. Young somehow has turned into a knock, and he plans a flag, and he tries, again, all these people behind him.

And the very online crowd says, yes, we got a cancel, rogan. And then you got juma oci from the White house wing in bringing the coercive power of the administration on the side of censorship. okay.

And what happens? Roman comes out with his non pology, like he said, and he seems so reasonable. He's a guy who's inquisitive. He's on the side of just asking questions.

He's on the side of baLance he says, yeah, look, I want to present both sides of the issue and everybody was like, there is no reason to be censoring the sky. Rogan is in every man. And if they would sensor him, they would sensor every man.

And that knows why there was enormous backlash to IT, and everybody has opposed this. And so I think this is the week that this ridiculous idea of censorship has broke. Now IT would be nice if everybody is a mos point, disagree with this principle, but they don't.

The fact the matter is J L. That censorship is now the official position of the democrats party. And you see IT in the poll numbers. There was a great tweet .

that the Green wall.

Green wall posted where he showed the polling numbers on this. So okay, you go back to the days of the obama administration. Both democrat and republicans agreed that the U.

S. Government anted companies should not get involved in this type censorship. But today there's been a by vacation. Democrats or lean democrats, VS republicans, lean republicans at sixty five, twenty eight in favor of government taking steps to restrict in fall online.

And at seventy six, thirty seven democrats or republicans on tech company is so the first moment is no longer a consensus. And that is familiar the issue, but I gotta tell you, I think there is a backlash against this. And I think that most of the country now, and I I think this is where they went too far, is that rogan is not alex ones.

He's not trump. He's not millian oppos. He seems like a really small guy. He is the biggest figure in independent journalism. He gets eleven million viewers every week.

And I think there's a lot of people, especially Young people, who are going this is gone too far. And by the way, I do not think obama never would have made this political blender of effectively denouncing rogan because obama tried to appeal to Young voters. And I think the pooh I by print administration on the side of the censorship, they've made a huge mistake. And the same week we saw that tucker carlson now gets more Young democrats listening to his show than CNN and and tell you, this is the reason why OK Henry.

you can put in the ring crowd .

why at this point.

best the independent. There are now more tucker democrats. okay. And among .

the key Young .

demographic.

remember, I think what's happening is that I mean, and china, you've said this over and over again chmagh i'm sorry chmagh 来不及 you had on one side， you know the the right went, lost their mind. And you all right now they've come a little bit more center. And then you may have the the democrats have lost their minds, the fact that anybody can look at joe rogan and say he's a comedian. He worked on a show where they fed people's kes of blended insects, fear factor, and he taking .

mushrooms. And he's like, why you taking me? He, as sax said, a pretty reasonable, curious person. And then, yeah, he does the stuff.

everybody else for the and in fact, checks in real time. So you have to keep your expectation at a certain level with georgina.

I I I think that that's in dig. I think that that's implausible to believe. I know that that's what he said.

No, eleven million people a week, one hundred million dollar deal. I do suspect that he does some sort of preparation. I don't think he he's completely winging IT OK.

That said, he was okay. I understand that.

but I think that's not the point OK. okay. The point is whether he prepares or not, the excuses inside the dog ate my homework.

It's, hey, listen, I have a right to have this guy on my show, just like I have the right to have the other guy on my show. You can listen to both, and then you can decide for yourself. You can change the change OK.

That's the important point to this. I would not like try make them so arguing about whether he was prepared or unprepared as the excuse. It's whether you believe there's a fundamental right to free speech or whether you believe that .

people who disagree can disavow people and get them .

cancel and get them can using him of putting out misinformation are far more guilty of themselves. And I think one of the best points and rogan, uh, non pology is he called IT is he said, listen, a lot of the things that we used to consider this information are now the truth for we talked .

about IT on the show.

yeah, well, we've been ahead of the current calling, all this stuff out now we could have been accused of misinformation. So at examples, the lability theory used to come some misinformation. The class mass, not doing anything list dam bon gino was kicked off youtube two weeks before the cds for saying that close damon, a pretty big conservative commentator.

Okay, he's got an audience of millions. You can be dismissive, but a lot of people like him a jack out. But look, my point is he was kicked off youtube for saying cosmetic don't work. Then the cdc comes out two weeks later and this is the same thing, right?

I think that's velocity point.

Well, is the key point.

I personally like you know, for example, we've talked about the thing we're like if you look at like the top distributed links on facebook, could you see bench pio, dan bond, you know, you know, right.

right, right. yeah.

Might take away with all of these things as there are people of those things. If I listen to, i'd probably find a porn. But there are people there that are probably, I would be, you know, I, I, I would, they would appeal to me. In all cases, they should all exist. Because the whole point is, let me spider my way through this stuff and figure out for myself what work and what doesn't work.

And more speeches. The best counter the .

summary of this that makes the most sense um ill on tweed this out nick, you can put this because I gave you the image but it's it's a mean of neil Young. Word says if you won't sensor the guy I don't like, I won't let you listen to keep on rocking in a free world. And it's and it's just so true, which is like, on the one hand, you know, you are A A standard bear.

Now maybe what we should really do is talk about what has happened to this boomer generation over the last fifty years where they were, you know, a sex, drugs, rock and roll. No, warn vietnam. Let's fight for our rights. That's fight for our quality. then. I'm talking about just those those those folks back then who are now, fifty years later, you know, sitting on seventy trillion dollars of wealth and you are basically like, you can say this, you can say that, don't do this.

don't do that. Wear masks, don't leave your house.

You know 2 3i mean that generation.

I think we all .

have some soul searching to do about what happened to that generation .

think or is IT the fact that every .

generation rebels against the prior and ultimately becomes conservative and .

you know that the the authority, an, what time is there now? power. The bombers are in power. They've been making the decisions last twenty years.

I think there is enormous popular discontent with the way the country's been run over the last two decades, the futile, pointless wars in the midst east, the debt, the economy, the unfairness that he goes on and on and and especially with covet. I mean, this coffee policy of last two years has been a fisco. And the point of this censorship of misinformation is to suppress the debate.

I mean, what ultimately is the point on? Take, for example, covert of saying that people cannot take a point of view IT is to stifle the debate, that to prevent an honest debate on these issues and that people have an interest in doing that are the people who are in charge and are fAiling. And if you gave people the information, they would be voted out of office.

If you look, when I asked, what are the specific claims that either joe rogan nor guess made that people are objecting to? A lot of the people who are objecting and wanted him really didn't know. And one of them was, he said early on, I don't know for a Young person whose in shape if I would advise them to take the vaccine. I know a lot of people who have that position, which is like if you're Young, and I think actually free argument, have said M R N A early on in this podcast is a very new technology and I could see people wanting to wait and see. Did you not say that I don't want to get to cancel here.

but I I think we did have that discussion conversation.

That's a valid conversation. R, N, S, A new technology refereed. You should think about IT and we should be cautious.

Don't draw me into your cancel. I'm not sure that's why I said I just changed that to we. We're talking about that.

Don't you remember that discussion we had? Like and I ask you, I think, mr. A, what do you think of this versus the .

regular on the j and J? I think generally we've seen science are being used as a way as a term a uh discredit what I think would arguably typically be scientific principles, which is inquiry, chAllenging hypotheses um and having you know vigorous ous debate uh to resolve to some sort of objective truth. Others SE you're having some sort of subjective belief and more often than not we've seen politicians and others grab onto the term science and saying this is science IT says this when in fact the process of science is inquiry and IT is to chAllenge you know again, a hypotheses and what might be kind of A A A pieces so um so yeah I think generally this has been uh a pretty scary time to watch because it's almost like gasoline living. You know it's like, k, you're using the term science to discredit the notion science.

H, it's been pretty version. I think you guys this this, uh, co learn left. It's a wag with a bunch of hip dip flowers.

And IT says, free speech, free love, one thousand hundred and seventy one no CIA. Screw the establishment, resist authority. And then IT shows like a modern S.

U. V with twenty twenty one. IT says, masks up by heart, the cdc or baby establishment.

No free speech. Do what you're told. obey. Basically, you have another .

poll you want to share sex. Ah this is a really interesting one. IT says a major voters, five percent treated the dies a majority. And then there was a similar poll.

The moneth poll just came out where eighty nine percent of republican, seventy one percent of independence say that is time we expect, we accept cover is here to say we need to get on with our lives. Only forty shops in the democrats. So the reality is that the rest the country, I think, has moved on, is ready to move on. The split is not between democrat republicans, is within the democratic party. The democratic party is now divided on this question of whether we should move on as a country past covet, half of the democrat party still believes that covet should be treated as this emergency.

The were cut by age. Do you think there's a bias by sure for sure?

I think yes, absolutely.

people are more scare.

But I think I think the media and the party they program their soldiers to be to treat covers emerging. They can't deep program them. And this is why I think we're seeing tucker's talker is now the biggest demographic .

among Young demographic. The the the idea is the same.

This is not bode well for on top of everything else is happening in the country. This is not bode well for the democrats. november. And then you had this crazy thing at the, you know, the magic Johnson party. At that .

my breath, I took a picture image and I have my breath.

I wouldn't you get it's the new.

I didn't in hell.

Yeah, exactly. And the nurse says that he was only photographed at the exact moment where he took off his mass for two seconds.

If you go to the ski slopes, there is nobody with a mask gone and nobody's enforcing IT and no restaurants. And this is in democratic country. Everybody has moved on at this point.

everybody. He's willing to be the media politicians.

because the verse were signing and they want to .

keep power to know. You tell me, I think they're dumb.

They should take the position that we reopen. Yes, they should just take the area, but wouldn't take the reopening position. Get you more voters at this point. People are tired of they want to move on, doesn't make any sense, they are making a bad political this.

I think they hold into their base. That's the point is I I think the whole countries have moved on, even most democrats have moved on, but the democratic base is not moved on. And that is why you know newsome and and our city have to pay up service to this what I mean .

and these guys have been telling everybody got to wear wear and they're not wearing mask and blood face that they weren't wearing masks at uh, the french of laundry. They have never warn mask. They're been throwing their own parties with no mask of a great thought. A lot of them are right.

In other news, jigg paying and putin got together and they apparently best is, here's the quote, some actors representing but the minority on the international scale, and if that's us, continue to advocate, unnerve approaches to addressing international issues and resort to force they interfere in the internal affairs of other states in fringing their legitimate rights and interest and insight contradictions, differences in confrontation. Uh, the statement said, I am willing to work with president flattery, a putin, to plan a blueprint and guide the direction of seno russian relations under new historical conditions, mister SHE said. He added that china and russia should act like big countries as a intensify coordination on fighting the corona. Our panda. Ada, any feedback from our squad?

I mean, you could have rewritten that press release. As you know, we will um we want to try to destroy U S. Hegemony and replace IT with ourselves.

This is the beginning of the end of U. S. Cultural and economic influence globally or dominance rather influence, uh, globally. And I think that it's you know something that we've talked about quite a lot. And I mentioned in the prediction episode that I thought that putin was going to play a major role this year and um uh and you know he's clearly uh not just you know out for his own interest, but he's gonna play a really important role in china's rise to the economic and cultural dominance.

You agree your math. Is this the sign that they're going to be running the show? Or does this look like something going to? No, no.

I don't think that there's a showed to run. I think the point is that there was um the first among equals for the last many decades in the world order where you know amErica was. Was that first among equals? And I think what they're saying is that it's time for that to change. And and and they're gonna tie that to their ability to influence uh, foreign policy in countries the way that we have historically. So you know this is sort of basically putting a marker on the table that says this is gna be about um you know um a different cohort of people that are also going having equal say.

And if you think about where this all plays out, it's always in economics, right? And this is where again, you have to think about what china has done, which is they have while we were fighting wars, you know, putting trillions of dollars into the middle ast, they took their trillion dollars and bought resources all through africa. Yeah, right? They build instruction cure.

They put infrastructure all through south america. They put infrastructure all through southeast asia. You know that they call IT fifteen trillion dollars that we spent in one direction they spent another. That's a thirty trillion dollar gap that's going to create, uh, a resource in baLance that they will use to create even more influence in the future. And we have to figure a way to contact that sex.

What you think is this a changing moment in the world? Daughter should be worried that these two a dictators are going to act in unison and that maybe one gets the ukraine, one gets taiwan. Is this like really earth shattering ing, uh, news? Or do you think it's saber rattling and not that big video?

Well, I think it's a dramatic statement and photo that was was put out IT was a continuation of what we've seen where the g pun of being in and bush in china, they've been friendly and friendly. What saddens me and sort of sickens me as really in american patria, who would like to see the american world in order continue, is the way that we have blundered and created this, this type of situation.

So twitch, moss point, first of all, we wasted twenty years trying to do nation building in middle east. Six, but wasted six trillion dollars on that. How did china lose by not being part of that? They benefit.

They were building building road while we were you know engaged in this foolish interventions in the midst east. And now more recently with putin, we've really drew in putting into she's arms because we keep threats to add ukraine tonnato, which is not something that's in america's interest. If we would just give up on that position or just reaffirm.

That ukraine ine should not be in a tanada IT enormously helped to fuse tensions with russia. And by the way, your point that these are dictators are natural alias is not that's not historically been true. So during the days of the soviet union, you know, you had nixon and kissinger make the great opening tomo in china.

And we are able to cultivate a relationship there is because china, russia were natural tag ones. And IT was a major move in the cold war that we were able to cultivate now. And we did so even though he was a dictator with blood on his hands.

So russia in china are not natural allies. We should be doing a Better job of not so. Thirdly, alienating putin that he is rushing into ez arms. That's the blunder I see here.

By the way, after this um summit they're going to meet with a run. There's a try part time, think access of dictators. This is like the legion of doom.

We you playing our .

cars are in a much smarter .

way american order to continue. But we got to be much more selective about picking and choosing our battles. Yeah, iraq, afghanistan, syria, libya.

they were huge mistakes.

And on top of looking ford.

looking forward like a heating. But what's all look forward strategy.

your mind. But look for strategy, think is to defuse the situation, ukraine, exactly the way obama did IT, which is to recognize that amErica does not have a vital national interest way that russia does, to have to rem that the nations of the caucus's that have bred speech with russia, ukraine, moldova, georgia, they are not eligible candidates for nato at the present time. Kick that can down the road by ten years OK.

I want a much more come kid situation.

I do think we have a vital national interest there.

Got IT. okay. So two very different situations are you yeah ah I think tii, we have to hold the line now. We have a responsibility .

in the united states, and I think we're starting to do IT. So I think there is good news where you know part of the strategic vital interest for taiwan is because they have critical resources that we need and we depend on. And specifically, those are semi doctors.

You know we've now, I think, allocated, we know, fifty one hundred billion dollars of capital of cap acs across a bunch of companies that have committed to building domestic capability. And so we have to make sure we follow through on that, that successful. And the reason is that IT gives us optionality.

IT allows us to breathe. IT allows us to actually make rational decisions and be patient in our decision make. And I think that's gonna really important over the next ten or twenty years. And so we have to invest in the united states. So the solution to all of these things as we cannot be overly dependent on any one country, anyone shipping lane, any one product, any one natural resource, you just can't do that anymore.

We have to be strong at home and we have to build strong relationships with other country. Is, and I think I think we have an philosophy or I listen, let's rp there we'll see everybody on the next episode for the dictator from off Polly hopeth a the sultans of science, David freeburg and the rain man himself triumphant versus Peter til in that paper match. Great moment, David. I love you.

Rainman here.

We open sources to the fans and they .

just got crazy with.

You should all just get a room and just have one big, huge orgy because it's like like sexual attention. 我。

一定 会。

给你。