Jason Kuhn

Do you have a bottle? That was a 2019 Cadal Bosco. Really, really good.

Do you have a bottle? That was a 2019 Cadal Bosco. Really, really good.

Not could, not could. They must in order to capture the maximum economic value.

Not could, not could. They must in order to capture the maximum economic value.

There was some plum. There's a little truffle there. Some boysenberries. Little Poisonberry, fantastic. A little moss.

There was some plum. There's a little truffle there. Some boysenberries. Little Poisonberry, fantastic. A little moss.

No. And the reason I say no is that I think that people's reaction to these things become more sophisticated in time because folks go back and actually study what happened in the Ma Bell situation, AT&T and the R box, what happened in Microsoft. And so I suspect that they know how to shield the rank and file employee from whatever's going to happen. So I think that that's less likely.

No. And the reason I say no is that I think that people's reaction to these things become more sophisticated in time because folks go back and actually study what happened in the Ma Bell situation, AT&T and the R box, what happened in Microsoft. And so I suspect that they know how to shield the rank and file employee from whatever's going to happen. So I think that that's less likely.

I don't think so either, because I think that these things get put into a very... type group of people, mostly lawyers, who then go and deal with this issue. I think that there's an acute moment where if they think that they're going to lose an appeal or that appeal is not going to get heard, then yeah, I do think management and the board are brought together.

I don't think so either, because I think that these things get put into a very... type group of people, mostly lawyers, who then go and deal with this issue. I think that there's an acute moment where if they think that they're going to lose an appeal or that appeal is not going to get heard, then yeah, I do think management and the board are brought together.

And again, if history is a guide, they should want to propose the terms on which they break their own company up. Because I think if the government tries to decide, there's going to be so much imprecision that they'll break the company. And I think that would be a shame because I mean, look, take a step back The breaking up of Google is great for competition and for startups.

And again, if history is a guide, they should want to propose the terms on which they break their own company up. Because I think if the government tries to decide, there's going to be so much imprecision that they'll break the company. And I think that would be a shame because I mean, look, take a step back The breaking up of Google is great for competition and for startups.

But let's not forget, Google is an incredible company that has created enormous amounts of good. They have done way more good than bad, way more, like three, four, five orders of magnitude more good than bad. And to break a company like that, I think would be a really bad outcome. From a competitive dynamics perspective and game theory, it's pretty reasonable to hobble them.

But let's not forget, Google is an incredible company that has created enormous amounts of good. They have done way more good than bad, way more, like three, four, five orders of magnitude more good than bad. And to break a company like that, I think would be a really bad outcome. From a competitive dynamics perspective and game theory, it's pretty reasonable to hobble them.

That's why I think the small O outcome is much more palatable and seems more fair to me. A breakup is a really draconian action. And I'm not sure that when you look at Google versus AT&T and the baby bells, I don't think it's anywhere near the same. But if there's the political will... They'll be able to craft and change some of the laws that allow these folks to just keep going after them.

That's why I think the small O outcome is much more palatable and seems more fair to me. A breakup is a really draconian action. And I'm not sure that when you look at Google versus AT&T and the baby bells, I don't think it's anywhere near the same. But if there's the political will... They'll be able to craft and change some of the laws that allow these folks to just keep going after them.

And if that happens, I think it's going to be really important for Google to define the terms of their own breakup.

And if that happens, I think it's going to be really important for Google to define the terms of their own breakup.

Yeah, I went once and I've never been back since. Okay.

Yeah, I went once and I've never been back since. Okay.

That's causing a massive- Why do you keep saying Starbees? It's what the kids call it. It's what the kids call it. Starbies. Oh, that's part of the problem.

That's causing a massive- Why do you keep saying Starbees? It's what the kids call it. It's what the kids call it. Starbies. Oh, that's part of the problem.

Sorry, what did you call it? It's called Chipotle. Normal people call it Chipotle.

Sorry, what did you call it? It's called Chipotle. Normal people call it Chipotle.

That was JTAL's nickname in college.

That was JTAL's nickname in college.

Come up here, that's I have a couple. The first is that I think Starbucks is actually an incredible brand and it's actually a really good business. And the mistakes here have nothing to do with the product per se, meaning Chipotle, if you remember, someone got poisoned there. There was like botulism, the chicken was bad. So there was a core product problem, but that's not the case here.

Come up here, that's I have a couple. The first is that I think Starbucks is actually an incredible brand and it's actually a really good business. And the mistakes here have nothing to do with the product per se, meaning Chipotle, if you remember, someone got poisoned there. There was like botulism, the chicken was bad. So there was a core product problem, but that's not the case here.

If you unpack what Starbucks is, I think that they are a premium product and that's reinforced by what Saks said, which is they price in such a way because they believe that they are a premium product. The problem is they are not a premium brand. And the difference is Hermes as an example is a premium brand. They can charge whatever they want under all weather conditions. They have pricing power.

If you unpack what Starbucks is, I think that they are a premium product and that's reinforced by what Saks said, which is they price in such a way because they believe that they are a premium product. The problem is they are not a premium brand. And the difference is Hermes as an example is a premium brand. They can charge whatever they want under all weather conditions. They have pricing power.

So if their inputs go up, they can make sure they maintain margin by changing the final price that the customer paid. Starbucks doesn't have that power. So they charge like a premium product But they're not a premium brand that has pricing power. And that's why you've seen this compression.

So if their inputs go up, they can make sure they maintain margin by changing the final price that the customer paid. Starbucks doesn't have that power. So they charge like a premium product But they're not a premium brand that has pricing power. And that's why you've seen this compression.

So very specifically, when the new CEO came in, he, I think, made one important mistake, which is he came in on the heels of a very rosy set of projections that Howard Schultz and the board put out to the street. And I think that he had an opportunity then and there to just cut it because they saw inflation, they saw what it was doing.

So very specifically, when the new CEO came in, he, I think, made one important mistake, which is he came in on the heels of a very rosy set of projections that Howard Schultz and the board put out to the street. And I think that he had an opportunity then and there to just cut it because they saw inflation, they saw what it was doing.

And if you just looked around the corner, you would have seen that there would have been this compression in the product. And I think what he should have done is just cut the analyst projections and the forecast to give him room and time. He didn't do that. And by the way, when you bring in somebody who ran Taco Bell,

And if you just looked around the corner, you would have seen that there would have been this compression in the product. And I think what he should have done is just cut the analyst projections and the forecast to give him room and time. He didn't do that. And by the way, when you bring in somebody who ran Taco Bell,

That is proving that this is neither a premium product nor a premium brand anymore. It is a mass market product that will ebb and flow cyclically with the vicissitudes of inflation. That doesn't mean it's a bad business. I'm just saying it's just an observation. I expect that Brian Nicol, if he is smart, will look at this forecast and shred it to give himself time.

That is proving that this is neither a premium product nor a premium brand anymore. It is a mass market product that will ebb and flow cyclically with the vicissitudes of inflation. That doesn't mean it's a bad business. I'm just saying it's just an observation. I expect that Brian Nicol, if he is smart, will look at this forecast and shred it to give himself time.

So that's the sort of the short-term thing. The long-term thing, though, is in the following image, which I just sent to Nick. I think there's a real question mark on this company over the medium to long-term. And I think it's best represented in this graphic. Starbucks is a sugar company. So, for example, a caramel macchiato, 32 grams of sugar. A mocha frappuccino, 60 grams of sugar.

So that's the sort of the short-term thing. The long-term thing, though, is in the following image, which I just sent to Nick. I think there's a real question mark on this company over the medium to long-term. And I think it's best represented in this graphic. Starbucks is a sugar company. So, for example, a caramel macchiato, 32 grams of sugar. A mocha frappuccino, 60 grams of sugar.

This is three times what you're supposed to have as a human in a day. A frappuccino, 53 grams of sugar. A caramel ribbon crunch frappuccino, 62 grams of sugar. And these products also average 400 to 500 calories per drink. So the real issue is that more consumers, as they question the repercussions of consuming a lot of sugar, what will they do? As more consumers get on GLP-1s, what will they do?

This is three times what you're supposed to have as a human in a day. A frappuccino, 53 grams of sugar. A caramel ribbon crunch frappuccino, 62 grams of sugar. And these products also average 400 to 500 calories per drink. So the real issue is that more consumers, as they question the repercussions of consuming a lot of sugar, what will they do? As more consumers get on GLP-1s, what will they do?

As more people think about the fact that Fat was never an enemy. In fact, fats are actually really good for you. The problem was that the sugar lobby convinced us that fat was bad and sugar was okay. What will consumers do? And I think that's a really big strategic question mark because the company has to embrace where the world is going. The world is going away from sugar.

As more people think about the fact that Fat was never an enemy. In fact, fats are actually really good for you. The problem was that the sugar lobby convinced us that fat was bad and sugar was okay. What will consumers do? And I think that's a really big strategic question mark because the company has to embrace where the world is going. The world is going away from sugar.

And I think as consumers become smarter, they're going to have to really figure out what to do.

And I think as consumers become smarter, they're going to have to really figure out what to do.

To your point, he'll be able to plug the leaks. My question is just more, what does a company that's selling a product that people are learning is worse and worse for them? What do they do? They have to embrace a different alternative, but I think it can be very hard because it may be so disruptive to the core product that they sell. Yeah.

To your point, he'll be able to plug the leaks. My question is just more, what does a company that's selling a product that people are learning is worse and worse for them? What do they do? They have to embrace a different alternative, but I think it can be very hard because it may be so disruptive to the core product that they sell. Yeah.

Can I just say, while we're on sandwiches, Sure. You know what I love? What do you love? A Reuben made with turkey breast instead of pastrami. Have you guys ever had a turkey Reuben? Wonderful.

Can I just say, while we're on sandwiches, Sure. You know what I love? What do you love? A Reuben made with turkey breast instead of pastrami. Have you guys ever had a turkey Reuben? Wonderful.

All of these are really good points. I just think that the CEO would not have gotten fired had he just moved the forecast down by 20% when he came in as CEO.

All of these are really good points. I just think that the CEO would not have gotten fired had he just moved the forecast down by 20% when he came in as CEO.

haven't oh it's incredible because i think a pastrami reuben is a little too much it just feels too sclerotic too fat like your arteries are yeah it's terrible but like you get a good thousand island sauce and like some sauerkraut and some cheese it's amazing i took my i took when i was in new york a couple weeks ago i took my daughter to cats's deli i took her on a little tour of the lower east side and we made a stop at cats's what's your favorite sammy there max's deli by the way has a turkey with a max's deli

haven't oh it's incredible because i think a pastrami reuben is a little too much it just feels too sclerotic too fat like your arteries are yeah it's terrible but like you get a good thousand island sauce and like some sauerkraut and some cheese it's amazing i took my i took when i was in new york a couple weeks ago i took my daughter to cats's deli i took her on a little tour of the lower east side and we made a stop at cats's what's your favorite sammy there max's deli by the way has a turkey with a max's deli

I think you guys are putting a lot of things together. The problem is that I don't think that that's his truth, actually. I think that this guy's clip sounds very inauthentic. I think what probably happened is the PR and policy group of Starbucks says, hey, listen, here's the average age of your employee, and here's what they value.

I think you guys are putting a lot of things together. The problem is that I don't think that that's his truth, actually. I think that this guy's clip sounds very inauthentic. I think what probably happened is the PR and policy group of Starbucks says, hey, listen, here's the average age of your employee, and here's what they value.

And he probably spouted some politically correct nonsense to try to inspire the troops. I think a lot of CEOs do this. I think we're seeing... in modern media today that a lot of CEOs have actually become the least version of their authentic self. They are being packaged by people to dress and act and say things in a certain way.

And he probably spouted some politically correct nonsense to try to inspire the troops. I think a lot of CEOs do this. I think we're seeing... in modern media today that a lot of CEOs have actually become the least version of their authentic self. They are being packaged by people to dress and act and say things in a certain way.

And I think what happens as a result of that is that you have a wayward culture where nobody knows what people stand for. That's when the corrosiveness of folks not working at all or having jobs at two different companies comes in, that's a total moral and ethical breach that happens because people think it's acceptable.

And I think what happens as a result of that is that you have a wayward culture where nobody knows what people stand for. That's when the corrosiveness of folks not working at all or having jobs at two different companies comes in, that's a total moral and ethical breach that happens because people think it's acceptable.

And I think people think it's acceptable because it's not in the talking points of how the CEOs are trying to package themselves to tens of thousands of employees.

And I think people think it's acceptable because it's not in the talking points of how the CEOs are trying to package themselves to tens of thousands of employees.

Even then, though, I struggle to understand why anybody... who has any ambition would think that they're going to achieve the same amount of stuff working by themselves than they will by working with a group of colleagues that you respect in a physical space together.

Even then, though, I struggle to understand why anybody... who has any ambition would think that they're going to achieve the same amount of stuff working by themselves than they will by working with a group of colleagues that you respect in a physical space together.

I don't know, but I'm saying like, when you look at the great thing that the world needs, that we are building and should be building, I don't see many good examples where those things are done in a remote way.

I don't know, but I'm saying like, when you look at the great thing that the world needs, that we are building and should be building, I don't see many good examples where those things are done in a remote way.

I see a necessity of people to be together, whether it's to design something together, to talk about something together, to debate something together, to learn from each other, to grow as a person. And you're robbing yourself of all of that.

I see a necessity of people to be together, whether it's to design something together, to talk about something together, to debate something together, to learn from each other, to grow as a person. And you're robbing yourself of all of that.

And so I just think that it is a short-term optimization that a lot of people will regret, not necessarily in the moment, but when their career doesn't go where they want to, or the company they work at doesn't go where it should go to or is capable of going to, they'll start to look for a scapegoat. But the real reason is that they've abandoned the idea that they need to be together.

And so I just think that it is a short-term optimization that a lot of people will regret, not necessarily in the moment, but when their career doesn't go where they want to, or the company they work at doesn't go where it should go to or is capable of going to, they'll start to look for a scapegoat. But the real reason is that they've abandoned the idea that they need to be together.

And I just think that that's a tragedy. And as it turns out, the best of our companies, like when I rank my portfolio, the ones that are doing the best are in total different industries. But the single consistent theme is we are all back together in person. Isn't that interesting? Makes total sense.

And I just think that that's a tragedy. And as it turns out, the best of our companies, like when I rank my portfolio, the ones that are doing the best are in total different industries. But the single consistent theme is we are all back together in person. Isn't that interesting? Makes total sense.

Or even just a senior executive.

Or even just a senior executive.

Can I just say something about mentoring? I also think mentoring can be described as capital M mentoring and small m mentoring. Capital M is where some person is assigned to you and they're going to imbue some magical phrase or saying or thing and all of a sudden everything is going to work out for you.

Can I just say something about mentoring? I also think mentoring can be described as capital M mentoring and small m mentoring. Capital M is where some person is assigned to you and they're going to imbue some magical phrase or saying or thing and all of a sudden everything is going to work out for you.

That form of capital M mentoring doesn't exist and has never worked for those that have tried it. The thing that's really productive is small M mentoring. And that happens when you model behaviors of really smart people and really capable people, really ethical people.

That form of capital M mentoring doesn't exist and has never worked for those that have tried it. The thing that's really productive is small M mentoring. And that happens when you model behaviors of really smart people and really capable people, really ethical people.

And again, that happens because you're seeing them on a day-to-day basis, not just in a meeting, but in the gaps between meetings. And they'll include you in certain things, or you'll have lunch with them.

And again, that happens because you're seeing them on a day-to-day basis, not just in a meeting, but in the gaps between meetings. And they'll include you in certain things, or you'll have lunch with them.

And this is what I mean by all of these people that are looking for an accelerant in their career, they've robbed themselves of the most powerful accelerant possible, which is capable people to surround themselves with. Yeah. I think it's so well said. They are going to look back on these decisions and they're going to regret them.

And this is what I mean by all of these people that are looking for an accelerant in their career, they've robbed themselves of the most powerful accelerant possible, which is capable people to surround themselves with. Yeah. I think it's so well said. They are going to look back on these decisions and they're going to regret them.

I was a certified Novell engineer as well. I did it when I was like 16. Shout out Eric Schmidt. Yeah.

I was a certified Novell engineer as well. I did it when I was like 16. Shout out Eric Schmidt. Yeah.

Well, the person that helped me little and mentored me. He's like, listen, man, I'm not going to, tell you how to do pitches or whatever, but I'm going to teach you how to install this. I'm going to teach you how to manage it. And that was mentoring. And that was really valuable. And I sat beside this guy made a huge difference in my career.

Well, the person that helped me little and mentored me. He's like, listen, man, I'm not going to, tell you how to do pitches or whatever, but I'm going to teach you how to install this. I'm going to teach you how to manage it. And that was mentoring. And that was really valuable. And I sat beside this guy made a huge difference in my career.

There is no sustainable solution to inflation if you... cap what a company can charge. Because what they'll do is they'll just stop producing. They'll manage to the margin that they'll just stop. And the reason they can stop is that they would rather contract and maintain their profitability than lose money. And then what happens is there's less products in the market. And so the prices go up.

There is no sustainable solution to inflation if you... cap what a company can charge. Because what they'll do is they'll just stop producing. They'll manage to the margin that they'll just stop. And the reason they can stop is that they would rather contract and maintain their profitability than lose money. And then what happens is there's less products in the market. And so the prices go up.

So I think it stands to reason that the Harris campaign has access to some reasonably smart people. They also have access to really smart people like Larry Summers. And so I think if they just make a few phone calls, they'll figure out that this is a really terrible idea.

So I think it stands to reason that the Harris campaign has access to some reasonably smart people. They also have access to really smart people like Larry Summers. And so I think if they just make a few phone calls, they'll figure out that this is a really terrible idea.

We're in the middle of the relief rally that Biden isn't in the race. I think that we had a different version of a relief rally when everybody realized that President Trump hadn't been assassinated. So... These are the pendulum swings, I think, of an electorate that still hasn't been given a clear definition of A or B.

We're in the middle of the relief rally that Biden isn't in the race. I think that we had a different version of a relief rally when everybody realized that President Trump hadn't been assassinated. So... These are the pendulum swings, I think, of an electorate that still hasn't been given a clear definition of A or B.

In this case, I think what's happening is there's a lot of testing of language and ideas and concepts that both sides are doing. And I think we will not know where this election is going to go until after September the 10th and that first presidential debate, because I think that these big issues will be put to the test. The journalists asking the questions will corner both candidates.

In this case, I think what's happening is there's a lot of testing of language and ideas and concepts that both sides are doing. And I think we will not know where this election is going to go until after September the 10th and that first presidential debate, because I think that these big issues will be put to the test. The journalists asking the questions will corner both candidates.

Both of them will have points of view. And then I think they'll have to go into these five states that matter on these five issues that matter. And I do think that this will be one of those issues because this is a very aggressive proposal that has a lot of implications. And that has a lot of historical context of never having worked, literally never.

Both of them will have points of view. And then I think they'll have to go into these five states that matter on these five issues that matter. And I do think that this will be one of those issues because this is a very aggressive proposal that has a lot of implications. And that has a lot of historical context of never having worked, literally never.

Unbelievable.

Unbelievable.

My gosh, I mean, where do I begin? Look, Boeing is these three very complicated businesses that try to live as one. So you have a commercial airline business, you have a defense business, and you have the space business. I'll be the first one to say that I think it's extremely difficult to be good at any one of those three things.

My gosh, I mean, where do I begin? Look, Boeing is these three very complicated businesses that try to live as one. So you have a commercial airline business, you have a defense business, and you have the space business. I'll be the first one to say that I think it's extremely difficult to be good at any one of those three things.

And the probability of getting all of those three things right is basically next to impossible. That's just a general comment. And I think that specialization is better. The second thing that I'll say is that I observed this company about five years ago, and I wrote about it in my annual letter. And part of the reason why I wrote about it was there was a quote.

And the probability of getting all of those three things right is basically next to impossible. That's just a general comment. And I think that specialization is better. The second thing that I'll say is that I observed this company about five years ago, and I wrote about it in my annual letter. And part of the reason why I wrote about it was there was a quote.

I'll never be able to judge what motivated Dennis Mullenberger, whether it was a stock price that was going to continue to go up and up, or whether it was just beating the other guy to the next rate increase, he said. He added later, if anybody ran over the rainbow for a pot of gold on stock, it would have been him. Who do you think said this? It was the incoming CEO of Boeing.

I'll never be able to judge what motivated Dennis Mullenberger, whether it was a stock price that was going to continue to go up and up, or whether it was just beating the other guy to the next rate increase, he said. He added later, if anybody ran over the rainbow for a pot of gold on stock, it would have been him. Who do you think said this? It was the incoming CEO of Boeing.

And I was so flabbergasted because I'd never seen something like this. So in a company where safety has to be the number one priority, To have an individual that's characterized by the incoming CEO as solely focused on their compensation plan sort of explains why there's all these fissures in this company.

And I was so flabbergasted because I'd never seen something like this. So in a company where safety has to be the number one priority, To have an individual that's characterized by the incoming CEO as solely focused on their compensation plan sort of explains why there's all these fissures in this company.

Because again, back to that famous Charlie Munger quote, show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome. If the incentive is safety and world-class engineering, that's what you'll get. But if the incentive is earnings per share growth, then that's what you will also get. And Boeing was a darling of the stock market for a very long time.

Because again, back to that famous Charlie Munger quote, show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome. If the incentive is safety and world-class engineering, that's what you'll get. But if the incentive is earnings per share growth, then that's what you will also get. And Boeing was a darling of the stock market for a very long time.

And now what happens is underneath, the other things that actually should matter, i.e. safety, are slightly deprioritized, and then you have these issues. I really hope these two people get back safe. It seems like they're doing a lot of experiments and they love being up there, but it's a little bit unacceptable that they have to be there until February.

And now what happens is underneath, the other things that actually should matter, i.e. safety, are slightly deprioritized, and then you have these issues. I really hope these two people get back safe. It seems like they're doing a lot of experiments and they love being up there, but it's a little bit unacceptable that they have to be there until February.

But I do trust that if Elon has to go and get them, SpaceX will do a great job and they'll be home sooner.

But I do trust that if Elon has to go and get them, SpaceX will do a great job and they'll be home sooner.

Oh my God, could you imagine if that was lobbied?

Oh my God, could you imagine if that was lobbied?

But by the way, just back to what Friedberg said before, sorry to interrupt you before you go, Sox, but Why is this even possible? It's exactly as you said, J. Cal, we have competition. But why is competition possible? It's because of what Friberg talked about before. We didn't have a set price. The government didn't come and say, you will build it for X and I'm only doing it one time.

But by the way, just back to what Friedberg said before, sorry to interrupt you before you go, Sox, but Why is this even possible? It's exactly as you said, J. Cal, we have competition. But why is competition possible? It's because of what Friberg talked about before. We didn't have a set price. The government didn't come and say, you will build it for X and I'm only doing it one time.

The free market was able to solve this problem. And it turned out the more capable solution was 40% cheaper than the one that they thought was going to work. And the one that was 40% cheaper was also on time. And the other one was unreliable. And this other one, seven, eight, nine, 10 years delayed.

The free market was able to solve this problem. And it turned out the more capable solution was 40% cheaper than the one that they thought was going to work. And the one that was 40% cheaper was also on time. And the other one was unreliable. And this other one, seven, eight, nine, 10 years delayed.

Every day of the fact that these other ideas just don't work.

Every day of the fact that these other ideas just don't work.

Happy 39th, Chase Kuhn.

Happy 39th, Chase Kuhn.

He's called me from the bath. I know he's in the bath because you hear this kind of like echoey kind of, you know, so it does. And it's like, oh my God, you're in the bathtub. Yeah. It's clear that he's in the bathroom.

He's called me from the bath. I know he's in the bath because you hear this kind of like echoey kind of, you know, so it does. And it's like, oh my God, you're in the bathtub. Yeah. It's clear that he's in the bathroom.

It's so disturbing.

It's so disturbing.

But how do you think an article this detailed that points to the Dutch... intelligence community, the German intelligence community, American intelligence, how does an article like this with this much detail then get written and put into the Wall Street Journal? How does that happen?

But how do you think an article this detailed that points to the Dutch... intelligence community, the German intelligence community, American intelligence, how does an article like this with this much detail then get written and put into the Wall Street Journal? How does that happen?

It's hysterical to hear him frame it. Jason, what you just said was, here are the facts. It's 260 feet down. I've gone to half that. So it's possible. So they did it.

It's hysterical to hear him frame it. Jason, what you just said was, here are the facts. It's 260 feet down. I've gone to half that. So it's possible. So they did it.

No, no, no. He wants to buy some firecrackers, so he knows what he's talking about there as well.

No, no, no. He wants to buy some firecrackers, so he knows what he's talking about there as well.

I have something for around 80, 90 that I'll be able to talk about hopefully soon.

I have something for around 80, 90 that I'll be able to talk about hopefully soon.

Well, when I... painted that series of outcomes, just kind of like looking forward, I really didn't think that this big O outcomes was a very large probability. I was like, you know, I would have handicapped that at single digit percentages. And I think the reason why

Well, when I... painted that series of outcomes, just kind of like looking forward, I really didn't think that this big O outcomes was a very large probability. I was like, you know, I would have handicapped that at single digit percentages. And I think the reason why

the DOJ leaked this thing and floated this trial balloon, essentially, is in part, I didn't weigh enough what Sachs was talking about, which is that there really is a massive bipartisan amount of support against Google. Now, it cuts on two different dimensions. I think that

the DOJ leaked this thing and floated this trial balloon, essentially, is in part, I didn't weigh enough what Sachs was talking about, which is that there really is a massive bipartisan amount of support against Google. Now, it cuts on two different dimensions. I think that

There is one dimension, which is more Republican-oriented, which is just about freedom of speech and putting your thumb on the scale. But if you take the Democratic point of view, it's more the anti-successful vein that Freeberg just mentioned. The thing is, though, that it'll make strange bedfellows because it unites both sides against pushing for a big outcome.

There is one dimension, which is more Republican-oriented, which is just about freedom of speech and putting your thumb on the scale. But if you take the Democratic point of view, it's more the anti-successful vein that Freeberg just mentioned. The thing is, though, that it'll make strange bedfellows because it unites both sides against pushing for a big outcome.

If you go back to the last big O election, outcome that we had in antitrust law, which was AT&T in the 70s and 80s. That lawsuit was a decade long, right? And essentially what happened was when it looked like AT&T was going to lose the case, they were the ones that proposed splitting itself up.

If you go back to the last big O election, outcome that we had in antitrust law, which was AT&T in the 70s and 80s. That lawsuit was a decade long, right? And essentially what happened was when it looked like AT&T was going to lose the case, they were the ones that proposed splitting itself up.

And so I think that this is going to start this really interesting chess game here, where obviously Google has to appeal and fight this. But if it looks like the political pressure is going to build and the courts aren't going to let them off the hook and have a little-o outcome...

And so I think that this is going to start this really interesting chess game here, where obviously Google has to appeal and fight this. But if it looks like the political pressure is going to build and the courts aren't going to let them off the hook and have a little-o outcome...

probably the best thing to do is for Google to initiate it themselves because they can answer a lot of the questions that Friedberg just raised. And they'll do it in a way where going back to the people that matter along with the customers and the employees are the shareholders. You can do it in a way where the sum of the parts will be greater than the value today of Google.

probably the best thing to do is for Google to initiate it themselves because they can answer a lot of the questions that Friedberg just raised. And they'll do it in a way where going back to the people that matter along with the customers and the employees are the shareholders. You can do it in a way where the sum of the parts will be greater than the value today of Google.

So I think that there's a shareholder win. It needs to be offered by Google and then negotiated. But to be really honest with you, Jason, when I kind of was thinking about it last week, I really thought this was a single digit probability. I still think it's a single digit probability. And if it grows, it's the most meaningful thing that's happened in technology, quite honestly.

So I think that there's a shareholder win. It needs to be offered by Google and then negotiated. But to be really honest with you, Jason, when I kind of was thinking about it last week, I really thought this was a single digit probability. I still think it's a single digit probability. And if it grows, it's the most meaningful thing that's happened in technology, quite honestly.

Zach, your thoughts.

Zach, your thoughts.