War With Iran: Why Oil Didn’t Spike As Expected

Support for the show comes from public.com.

You've got your core holdings, some high conviction picks, maybe even a few strategic

options at play.

So why not switch the investment platform built for those who take it seriously?

Go to public.com slash ProvG and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio.

That's public.com slash ProvG, paid for by public investing, all investing involves

the risk of loss, including loss of principal broker services for US listed registered securities.

Business and bonds in a self-directed account are offered by public investing ink, member

FINRA, and SIPC, complete disclosures available at public.com slash Disclosures.

New mark downs up to 70% off are at Nordstrom Rack stores now.

And that means so many new reasons to Rack, because I always find something amazing.

There's so many good brands, because there's always something new.

Join the Nordy Club to unlock exclusive discounts, shop new arrivals first, and more.

Plus, buy online and pick up at your favorite Rack store for free.

Great brands, great prices.

That's why you Rack.

This episode is brought to you by Nespresso.

Introducing Virtuo Up, the latest and a long line of innovation from Nespresso.

It's innovation you can touch, sense, and taste in every single cup.

With a three-second start, easy open lever, and dedicated brew over ice button,

it's even easier to enjoy your coffee your way.

SIP for yourself.

Shop Virtuo Up exclusively at nespresso.com.

Today's number six.

That's how many Olympic medals Eileen Goo has won, making her the most decorated free

skier of all time.

The 22-year-old achieved this while also balancing full-time studies at Stanford,

as well as a successful modeling career.

Today's other number is 99.

That is the percentage of parents who wish their kid was Eileen Goo.

Welcome to Profty Markets.

I'm Ed Elson.

It is March 3rd.

Let's check in on yesterday's market vitals.

The major indices rode out a volatile session after the US-Israel strikes on Iran more

on that in a moment.

Still, the indices ended the day in the green.

Meanwhile, the yield on 10-year treasury surged the most since April, oil spiked the

dollar rose, and gold climbed above $5,300.

Okay.

What else is happening?

The United States is at war with Iran.

The US and Israel struck the country on Saturday killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah

Hameini.

Iran responded with retaliatory strikes across the region, including attacks on US military

bases.

The President said the military operation will last around four to five weeks, but could

continue for quote as long as it takes.

Markets opened in the red on Monday, but by mid-day, the major indices had recovered.

Meanwhile, Brent crude, the global price gauge for oil jumped 7 percent to just over $77

per barrel.

Oil prices were already up 17 percent this year in anticipation of a possible attack.

Joining us to discuss what this war means for us, what it means for markets, we're speaking

with Matt Smith, oil analyst at Energy Consulting firm Kepler.

Matt, welcome to the show.

Let's get right into it.

Obviously, quite rattling news for all of us for many reasons.

When you look at what's happened in the markets here, what is jumping out to you?

What are the markets telling us about what is unfolding in Iran right now?

Sure.

There's been some undulations, I would say, across the various different commodities.

Everyone has been focused on crude and breathing a bit of a sigh of relief, to be honest, because

there was the expectation we could open up 15-20 percent and when it opened up 12 percent,

as you just mentioned, we closed up about seven, something like that, so not the worst

case scenario.

The reason there's such a concern about crude is because you had that reflected straight

through enterprises at the pump, so in the US, even though it's very much insulated

from the supply shocks, you still get affected because crude is a global benchmark.

That's the input price to refine for that gasoline.

Some other things that we saw across the energy complex was with natural gas, so we've

seen a difference this time around to the 12-day war of last year where Iran just retaliated

against Israel.

This time, it's sending missiles, drone strikes to many different countries and attacking

energy infrastructure.

While everyone has been watching that crude price, you've actually seen diesel prices

up 15 percent, because you saw the rest of Iran refinery in Saudi Arabia get hit, and

then with natural gas prices in Europe, they're actually up as netty as much as 50 percent

today, because we saw Qatar, an LNG terminal struck there as well, and so there's ripple

impacts across all of these various different energy commodities, and actually beyond that

as well, in terms of fertilizer, a third of fertilizer in the world exported on seaball

and basis comes out of the Middle East, so lots of ramifications here.

Why is it that oil didn't rise as much as everyone thought it would?

I mean, I remember a week ago, perhaps for a few days ago, and the consensus was, if

this happens, oil is going to absolutely rip.

It went up, but it didn't go up nearly as much as people seems to think.

Why is that?

It's interesting, actually, because we've kind of got the worst case scenario in terms

of the straightforward moves here, so there's a rumor hitting right now that Iran has

closed the straight-of-all moves, regardless of if that's true or not, the threat of them

hitting a tanker with a missile or a drone strike has stopped that flow of crude and products

in every other tanker going through there, and so we are kind of hitting that worst-case

scenario here now.

And so you would perhaps expect prices to rally more.

Maybe it's just because with President Trump, he's saying that the strikes are going to

be persistent.

We've just had Marco Rubio talking about how the strikes on Iran are going to get even

worse, and so there's going to be this absolute pummeling of Iran in the near term here.

And so perhaps people are thinking this is going to be a short-term event, and we're going

to get over this in a few days.

That is interesting, because we're going to be, it is presumed that we will be harsher

perhaps on Iran, hit them harder than most analysts thought, that that will mean that there

will be more oil flow, essentially, that oil will continue to move freely through the

straight-of-all moves, which in term I'm sure we're going to be hearing a lot of the

next few weeks and months.

Why is that exactly?

And I know that I'm now asking you to basically play military analysts, but it's interesting,

as an energy analyst, you kind of have to.

Why does hitting Iran hard necessarily mean for the analysts that oil will be good, and

that oil will make its way out of the region?

Yeah, sure.

And so whether it's that the US is going after a regime change, which there's some doubt

whether that's the case, or whether it's just simply they're trying to obliterate any

nuclear ambitions in Iran there, or whether it's just attacking the military side.

If things wiping them out there, once you get past that, then there is the situation

where the uncertainty is lifted and the likes of Iranian barrels could even flow stronger.

So it's really important to bear in mind what happened last year in terms of that 12-day

war.

As soon as those nuclear sites were hit, you had President Trump come out on the press

and he was like, OK, now that this has happened, we've got what we wanted.

Now China start buying that Iranian oil again.

And so he went straight to getting those up all prices down.

And so it's like, once these ambitions and goals are achieved, then the potential

flow of prices afterwards is perhaps a much more likely proposition.

But maybe it's that or maybe it's just the fact that we just didn't get a bunch of tankers

on fire around the strainer hall moves today.

Is there an outcome that energy investors and energy analysts, those who work with oil

and gas?

Is there an outcome that most want, I mean, when an oil firm, a consulting firm, or

even an oil investment firm, sees what's happening in Iran, I mean, obviously this is a political

issue.

Some people support what's happening, some people don't support what's happening.

But say you're an investor in this stuff.

What do you think when America strikes Iran?

Yeah, I think it's a stability thing, right?

So OPEC as a whole, this group of oil producers, they want stability of price.

I think oil investors want stability in terms of the geopolitical backdrop, right?

And so I think if Iran is addressed here in the same ways we've had Venezuela addressed,

it's one more hot potato that the market doesn't have to think about or deal with.

And so that's taken out of it gives way less uncertainty and so that's a positive thing

for investment.

So I think that's perhaps the best way to look at it.

Yeah, certainty, understanding what the path forward is and it sounds like what the analysts

seem to say, what maybe the price is telling us is that people believe that Trump is going

to conclude this.

Yes.

Or at least that this will be far less uncertain now than it was, I suppose a year ago.

Yeah, no, absolutely, absolutely.

And that's the thing here as well, right?

You've got this really interesting situation with sanctioned barrels in the global market

here where you've got, you know, Russia is pushing out three and a half million barrels

a day.

That is a massive discount.

That isn't open to all of the world.

You've got India that is buying that.

You've got China that is buying that.

So you've essentially got a two tier market here.

It's the same thing for Iranian crude where all of that crude is basically going to China

because nobody else will buy it.

And it's the same thing with Venezuela or it was until there was the incursion there.

Now that Venezuela and crude is not at a steep discount and only going to China.

It's now going to the broader market at a more fair market price.

So you're essentially going to be doing the same thing in theory with Iranian crude.

If that situation, the situation gets resolved there, sanctions are eased.

Those barrels that were only previously going to China at a big discount could be making

its way into the market at a market price, which would bring all sizes down essentially.

So that's maybe the path we see from here.

And then you've only got Ukraine Russia to deal with.

Right.

Just final question before we let you go.

Are there any blind spots that you think that energy investors perhaps are displaying

here, something that they're missing?

And what I'm getting at with this question is it seems that there is a sense, not necessarily

of certainty among the investment community, but maybe less uncertainty than we thought.

I mean, prices have gone up, but not as much as we thought, which reflects that maybe

they're feeling a little less anxious about this situation than perhaps one would have predicted.

Is there anything that maybe they are missing?

I as an observer, I'm looking at what's happening in Iran, I feel anxious, I feel concerned.

Is there perhaps too much certainty or not enough uncertainty?

I think we just don't know how this is going to play out right because it could play out

just over the next couple of days, as we talked about with an absolute pummeling of Iran.

Right.

Or it could be the one to four weeks as Trump has talked about.

But I think that the one concern from an oil investor perspective is that if this issue

gets cleared away, then you essentially have one less uncertainty in the market.

And the broader fundamentals for the oil market have been fairly soft.

We've had this kind of excess in the market in terms of supply.

So you could really have this geopolitical premium unwounds in prices here.

We could really had considerably lower from where we are.

So that's positive for prices that the pump is positive for consumers, not necessarily

positive for oil investors.

And it's just the flip side of this is that if this does continue on for weeks and potentially

into a month or two, you have the Midi's Gulf here where even we're seeing now, tankers

are building up there.

They're loading crude.

They're loading products, but they're sat there and they can't get out.

Eventually, that gets bottled next up, right?

And you have to see these Midi's Gulf producers starting to shut in production because they

simply can't export the stuff.

And so that's a consideration to think about too.

Lots of interesting stuff here.

Matt Smith, oil analyst at Energy Consulting Fund, Kaplan Mat.

Thank you.

We really appreciate your time.

Thank you.

After the break, open AI's record funding round and anthropic gets into a fight with

Trump.

And for even more markets insights, you can subscribe to my weekly newsletter Simply Putt at edwardelson.substac.com.

Report for the show comes from LinkedIn.

It's a shame when the best B2B marketing gets wasted on the wrong audience.

Like imagine running an ad for cataract surgery on Saturday morning cartoons or running

a promo for this show on a video about roadblocks or something.

No offense to our gen alpha listeners, but that would be a waste of anyone's ad budget.

So when you want to reach the right professionals, you can use LinkedIn ads.

LinkedIn is ground to a network of over 1 billion professionals and 130 million decision

makers according to their data.

That's where it stands apart from other ad buys.

You can target buyers by job title industry company, rural seniority skills, company revenue,

all suit and stop wasting budget on the wrong audience.

That's why LinkedIn ads boast one of the highest B2B return on ad spend of all online ad

networks.

Seriously, all of them.

It's been $250 on your first campaign on LinkedIn ads and get a free $250 credit for the

next one.

Just go to LinkedIn.com slash Scott.

That's LinkedIn.com slash Scott, terms and conditions apply.

The all new 2026 Toyota RAV4 is here, building on everything drivers know and love about Toyota.

With a redesigned look and modern tech that makes life behind the wheel easier than ever,

the new RAV4 comes standard as a hybrid, providing smooth, efficient performance for both

city streets and longer journeys.

Enjoy the legendary reliability Toyota is known for in the all new 2026 RAV4.

Learn and shop more at toyota.com Toyota.

America leads the world in medicine development.

It matters.

We get new medicines first, nearly three years faster, five million Americans go to work

because we make medicines here at home and not relying on other countries keeps us safe.

But China is racing to overtake us.

Will we let them or will we choose to stay ahead?

When America leads, America cures.

Let's tell Washington to keep us in the lead.

Learn how at americacures.com, paid for by Farma.

We're back with Profty Markets.

Open AI just closed the largest private fundraising round in history.

The company set on Friday that it raised $110 billion.

That is more than double its record breaking raise from a year ago.

Around boosts open AI to a $730 billion pre-money valuation, nearly double the valuation

of its closest rival andthropic.

It's back as include Amazon who put in 50 billion in new video and soft bank

who each contributed 30 billion meanwhile.

The ongoing anthropic pentagon dispute came to a head on Friday.

Trump blacklisted the company and directed every federal agency to immediately stop using anthropics products.

That order came after anthropic refused to loosen its AI guardrails for surveillance and lethal strikes.

Within 24 hours, open AI swooped in and signed its own deal with the pentagon.

Users then called for a boycott of open AI which sent Claude andthropic's chatbot to number one on the US App Store.

Tons of drama, tons of developments here in the AI race here to unpack.

All of it was speaking with Alex Heath, author of the sources newsletter and co-host of the Access Podcast.

Alex, good to see you.

I'm going to jump right into it.

First, let's just start with what I think is the more boring news, which is open AI raising $110 billion.

A month ago, that would have been incredible, but now that Trump is fighting with anthropic,

it sort of disappears into the background.

Initial reactions to open AI's fundraising round.

We knew this round was happening for a while.

They've been putting it together.

The thing that jumped out to me was that it was, I think, about $10 billion over-subscribed, right?

I think they were shooting for $100 and it sounds like there's going to be billions more

still contributed by sovereigns and other large firms in the coming weeks and months.

The Amazon partnership is a big one.

My read of that is that Open AI knows that it has essentially lost the Apple partnership to Google,

which, as we know, just did that recent German ideal.

Open AI for how well chat LGBT is doing.

They still need more distribution.

They need hardware, touch points, voice assistant, touch points.

Amazon provides a lot of that in addition to the AWS and training and benefits that they have.

So this seems to be like a reshuffling of the strategic alliances, I guess, between the

Mag 7 and Open AI, where if you would have thought maybe two years ago, Open AI is going

to be getting closer to Apple.

I think they're hardware work with Johnny Ive and just how that initial Siri partnership

went has shown that maybe those two are not meant to be together long-term.

So I think this is Open AI deciding that Amazon is the new horse.

It's going to attach itself to which also seems interesting because Amazon is a very large investor

and shareholder and anthropic too.

Everyone's invested in everyone at this point.

Right.

These two companies need distinction.

Yeah, their capital and generators.

And at this point, I was talking to an investor in both last week.

And they're just like, yeah, I mean, they just want money.

They just need money.

And there's there's finite pools of it left for these size of rounds.

It's also interesting that you say it was $10 billion over subscribed, suggesting that

maybe the price should be even higher than what it is.

That seems to stand out as well, no?

I guess there's just so much FOMO and I think because Open AI is not public and optimistically

may be public by the end of this year, I think there's just tremendous investor appetite

to get into the name before it's opened up to retail.

I mean, had this round been instead an IPO, you know, maybe Open AI would have raised

more.

Maybe you would have a two trillion market cap right now.

We're kind of in peak bubble froth, mania.

So in the same way that people in San Francisco talk about escaping the permanent underclass,

maybe that's how investors are thinking about getting into Open AI right now and getting

why you can.

Right.

So I feel, let's talk about anthropic and the Pentagon Trump has called anthropic a quote

radical left AI company.

Anthropic has been blacklisted as a supply chain risk.

Federal contracts have been cut.

He's saying that anyone who the government won't do any business with anyone who does

any business with anthropic, which that pot seems really crazy.

We talked about this a few weeks ago.

It's amazing how it has developed.

What does this say about the AI risk right now?

I think it shows how powerful these companies are.

It was surprising to me actually.

I mean, I knew about anthropics government work, but that they were the most fully integrated

model in the government behind classified walls up until this point.

I wasn't quite fully aware of until this whole blow up.

And it's interesting that that has been the case given that anthropic has historically

been the, I guess you could say more doomer of the other AI labs, right?

The one that is always talking about the potential pitfalls and safety risks happen to be the

AI lab that was the closest, most closely integrated with the US government before this.

It's interesting.

It's interesting that open AI swooped in and got a deal that is effectively what anthropic

said that it wanted.

And to me, that suggests, based on what we know about this administration, egos can run

hot and heavy, especially looking at some of the players involved specifically in this.

You've got Emil Michael, the very strong, alarmed head of growth and business for Uber back

in the day, for Travis Kalnik.

You could argue the Sam Alman before Sam Alman in terms of the amount of capital he raised

for Uber at the time, which then was record setting.

Who understands tech and goes back with all these players is an Elon loyalist.

And then he heads up death and all the other players involved.

I mean, it really, I think it just speaks to the ego, you know, I don't really know if

there's much more.

I don't know if like, you know, you see some of the reports about, you know, they were

arguing about like theoretical missile strikes and Dario saying, on a day, the CEO of Anthropics

saying, oh, you'd have to call us first if you wanted to use Claude to like defend against

a missile strike.

And that just suggests a level of like bravado and chess pumping in these negotiations

that I imagine given all the personalities involved did not work out well.

And you know, this could end up to be catastrophic for Anthropic.

My gut says it won't be.

There's too much money at stake.

There's too many investors in Anthropic who have ties to the White House.

I'm sure that, yeah, Anthropic loses this $200 million contract.

That's not really a factor for them financially.

But certainly shows that open air can be shrewd as Sam Alman has been known to be and

swoop in here and get closer as Anthropic pulls apart from the government.

Yeah.

It's striking how relevant the politics are becoming in these tech stories and these AI

stories.

And you mentioned the bravado there, which I think is probably true, but then I think

there's another reading of it, which is, you know, maybe Dario Amade and Anthropic,

they just have values and their values are, we're not going to be used in massive

aliens on Americans, we're not going to be used for autonomous weapons.

That's our line.

And then they get pushed by the government and then he just holds the line, which I agree

takes a level of confidence and maybe bravado, but also I kind of respect it as, okay,

you're just sticking to your values.

And then I think what is striking is that we're now seeing this play out in the consumer

economy where people are saying we're done with chat GBT because chat GBT sold out to

the administration and then people are saying we're going to embrace Claude now.

It becomes the number one downloaded app in the country and it seems as though the politics

of this all is actually shaping and shifting the trajectories of the businesses themselves.

And what I can't quite figure out is did he make the right business decision by standing

up to Trump?

And if you look at the app store and the rankings, the app store would tell you, yes, he did.

But maybe over the long run, if they're losing these contracts to the government, open

a eyes taking them and said, maybe it's not the right business decision.

What do you think from a business viewpoint?

Who won here?

I think it's too early to tell.

I mean, on the consumer side, who knows how many people are paying for those chat GBT

subscriptions for the app they're downloading, but certainly seems to be a near term when,

you know, hearing you talk, I'm reminded of the delete Uber campaign.

And I think it was in around 2017.

There was a similar thing where it was like, Oh, Uber is caving in and is morally bankrupt.

And there was mass protests and delete campaigns.

And guess what?

Uber is a much, much larger company now than it was then.

These moments in time, I think, tend to get a lot of attention and then they are looked

back at as blips.

Whether that's the case here, we're in the middle of it.

We can't say.

I do think the reality is often more nuanced than what you're saying in terms of like,

Oh, he just held the line and he's more moral and therefore open AI is not.

There's a lot of nuance here, but if you read the way that the Department of War has responded,

if you read how open AI has talked about their deal, it seems to me like anthropic has,

in their view, legitimate concerns that extend beyond how the law currently operates today.

And maybe that's the difference is that open AI was willing to operate in the constraints

of how the law in the United States works today and anthropic was not.

And that's anthropics right as a private company and they should exercise that right and

people should want to support that and if they feel aligned with that.

But I think suggesting that it's anything more than that at this point feels pretty

mature.

I don't know.

That's just my read of the situation at this moment.

But again, we're getting things in real time every minute here.

What do you think?

How will the public view this ultimately?

Because I mean, I agree there's probably some nuance, but I still think that he probably

stuck with his values and they didn't like that because they told him do this and he

said, no, and they got upset.

But I agree.

I'm sure there's some nuance and I don't think this means that chat GBT and open AI are

evil.

That's not my assumption here.

But it does seem that the public opinion will shape things quite significantly here.

And it's interesting you bring up to the Uber.

It's possible that maybe the public forgets and they decide actually we don't care about

this.

And I can see that happening too.

But how the public views this is quite essential if they want to be consumer apps, if they

want to be consumer facing companies, which they do both want to be.

Yes.

And so I guess my question for you would be, how will the crowd see this at this point?

Well, the headlines have been written and anthropics done a really good job of coming

out and stating how it feels this whole saga went down and what it stands for.

And those are admirable virtues, right?

Not surveilling Americans, not using AI for autonomous weapons.

I think they're winning on that front, right?

I mean, we talked about cloud being at the top of the app store.

They've shipped a feature where you can quickly import your chat GPT memory into cloud,

which is really smart.

I think they're going to push full, full, you know, full hog on this, like, you know,

some version of the Super Bowl ad, you know, I've seen some jokes of like replacing ads

with like autonomous weapons and that banner on the Super Bowl ad, right?

It's kind of like autonomous.

Yeah, it's coming to autonomous weapons or not, not cloud or something.

So I can imagine they'll lean into it and they should, right?

They should take advantage of the moment.

What that does to their long-term, you know, relationships with other governments who

see this and go, hey, like, can we actually rely on you as a partner?

Are you going to decide that your interpretation of the law is better than ours?

Who knows?

It'll probably be a blip in time, but for now, you're right.

I mean, people are looking for ways to advocate for what they feel are infringements of civil

liberties in the United States and a government that they don't see eye to eye with.

You're seeing that with, you know, your partner Scots, you know, delete and unsubscribe

movement, right?

And so I kind of see that as in the same vein here where this is something people can latch

on to to express the beliefs they have and that's American and that's awesome.

And then the day, like, it's good that this can happen, you know, one of the most positive

reads of this that I've seen is like, at the very least, what Amadea has done is shine

a light on how we should be thinking about AI used in these contexts, right?

What happens when clawed code can be used inside the NSA and not just to help you get your

taxes done faster?

And so I think that's a good thing that we're thinking about that and that Dario thrusts

that into the spotlight, whether it's good for anthropic or not.

All right.

Alex Heath, author of the sources Newsletter, co-host of the Access Podcast.

Alex, thank you.

We really appreciate you, Tom.

Thanks, Ed.

So the airstrikes have begun from said they will continue and it appears, although the

language has been confusing, that we are at war with Iran.

Now there are plenty of implications that we could spend hours, even days discussing and

the idea of asking how this will affect markets seems a little bit of a ridiculous question

because there are some things like war that are just bigger than markets.

Having said that, we will end here with a few thoughts, not just on what this will do

to markets, but also what this will do to your life, what being at war with Iran actually

means for our daily experience as Americans.

Now there is the fact that we will be reading about this pretty much every day and that

is significant, but there will also be some more material implications with this war as

well.

For example, gas prices.

As we discussed, oil prices are currently rising and it's possible they will rise even

more and that will affect prices at the pump for you to be more specific.

A five dollar increase in the price of the barrel of oil translates to a roughly ten

cent increase in the cost per gallon of gas at the pump.

So a ten or fifteen dollar increase in the price of oil isn't that bad, that's kind of

what we're seeing, but the question will be if it goes even higher than that.

If oil hits say a hundred dollars a barrel, then that will have a real impact on the pump,

it will have a real impact on the cost of living at home.

Anything else that will be impacted is the price of liquid natural gas or LNG.

This is the fuel we use for heating and electrical power and energy storage etc.

And also a fifth of the world's liquid natural gas flows through the strait of humus.

So that means that global LNG supply is now going to be significantly constrained and

while America does have its own liquid natural gas supply, we will likely be exporting

more of that over to Europe who will be in desperate need for LNG, thus reducing the

supply and raising prices here at home.

This is exactly what happened during the Russia Ukraine invasion and it's why your heating

and electric bills started to go up back then.

A similar scenario could easily play out today.

And finally, for the investors who listen to the podcast, I think you can safely assume

that because of this war, your stock portfolio is about to become even more volatile than

it already was.

There are currently around 60 military conflicts ongoing around the world right now.

That is the highest level of global violence that we've seen since World War II.

Geopolitical uncertainty is rising.

AI uncertainty is also rising as we've discussed, which means that investors now have more

reasons to panic today than at any time in recent memory.

And that means they are going to be making some very rash decisions.

They might start panic selling.

They also might start panic buying either way.

It will translate to a highly erratic market, which will make all of us even more anxious

than we already were.

In other words, the days of metaverse projects and NFTs and speculative investments such

as those are firmly over.

Investors are now looking for one thing and one thing alone, and that is safety.

Physical safety, technological safety, personal safety, financial safety, all kinds of safety.

As the world becomes more and more dangerous, the demand for safety is only going to go

up.

And if we were safe last year or even the year before that, well now the consensus on Wall

Street is pretty clear, we're not so safe anymore.

OK, that's it for today.

This episode was produced by Claire Miller, Annalyze and Weiss, edited by Joel Pasin and

engineered by Benjamin Spencer.

Our video editor is Brad Williams.

Our research team is Dan Jelan, Isabella Kinsel, Chris Snowdonahue, and Measel Vario.

Our social producer is Jake McPherson.

Thank you for listening to Prof. Markets from Prof. Media.

If you liked what you heard, give us a follow, I'm Ed Elson, I will see you tomorrow.