Could not fetch news: *** YAHOO! FINANCE IS CURRENTLY DOWN! ***
Could not fetch news: *** YAHOO! FINANCE IS CURRENTLY DOWN! ***
Could not fetch news: *** YAHOO! FINANCE IS CURRENTLY DOWN! ***
Could not fetch news: *** YAHOO! FINANCE IS CURRENTLY DOWN! ***
Could not fetch news: *** YAHOO! FINANCE IS CURRENTLY DOWN! ***
Could not fetch news: *** YAHOO! FINANCE IS CURRENTLY DOWN! ***
Could not fetch news: *** YAHOO! FINANCE IS CURRENTLY DOWN! ***
Could not fetch news: *** YAHOO! FINANCE IS CURRENTLY DOWN! ***
Apple's fourth quarter just crossing the wire. Revenue coming in at 114.48 billion. Analysts were expecting 113.47 billion. So that is a beat. EPS coming in at $210 per share. The estimate was for $2 a share. So that's another beat. In iPhone revenue also topping estimates coming in at 57.58 billion versus estimates of 56.49 billion. We're still here with DA Davidson's Gil Laura with us to dig into these results. Gil, on first blush, the streets not loving this. Stocks trading down by about 1.2%. When you look at these numbers, what's the first thing you're seeing that the quarter was still good, the concern is what's the follow through? What happens next quarter for a variety of reasons? Because this is the last quarter of the upgrade cycle for iPhone, right? This has been the biggest upgrade cycle in 5 years. The iPhone 17 was a big upgrade cycle. The last one was iPhone 12 and therefore this year as we move forward there's going to be pressure on unit growth. Units may actually decline. Now they raised prices to make up for that. Duo which appears to be successful will help with the ASP. But the concern is that somehow that's not going to net out well for next quarter. And that's what we're going to wait for. We're going to wait to see what the guidance is and what the detail is for the guidance is both on can they still achieve revenue growth even after comping a big year and can they hold on to the margins next quarter because as memory prices start filtering through the memory chips they put in over the last couple of quarters were ones they bought at a much lower price than they're buying now. So the gross margins going forward will will also be strained just like revenue growth will be strained. So we're going to be waiting to see what guidance flushes out to. But the quarter itself, the backward-looking view is good. It's the it's the forward-looking view that investors are going to be um sensitive to seeing depending on what the company says. >> Gil, this is a big first test for John Turnis, of course, taking over as CEO. Already during his tenure, we've seen a range of products rolled out, right? We've seen the duo, as you mentioned. We've seen the home line and there's this narrative around Turnis that unlike Tim Cook, Turnis is a hardware guy. He could be really pushing into more product releases, trying to widen out the bench instead of just the uh kind of iterative work that Tim Cook was doing, the services work. How are you thinking about that for Apple going forward and the the impact that a different approach from Turnis might have? >> Yeah, it's very timely and I think this was very orchestrated around the duo. I see the the company knew the Duo would be successful. They they they saw the design. They tested it. They tested with focus groups. They picked a price point that was actually, believe it or not, even at $2,000, probably at the low end of what they had considered. So, they're setting him up for success. That the big the first big hardware launch is going to be successful. What happens after that? What new form factors we see? What iteration of Vision Pro? a new Mac that with a touch screen. We're going to see that when Apple picked John Turners to be the next CEO for the next decade or so. They made a very conscious decision to say that for the next 10 years, hardware is the most important thing. For Tim Cook, it was about operations, phenomenal financial results. Now, they're they had this binary choice. Do we double down on software? Do we gamble that Apple's a big AI company or do we go back to basics and extend our hardware line, add new form factors, and the decision to put John Sternis, John Turnis in the seat, was exactly a reflection of that. And the duo's success, which we should hear about today, is a really good first step for him. Gil, one of the things that might be weighing on the stock here in the the aftermarket trading greater China revenue for the quarter, missing estimates coming in, that revenue coming in at 17.54 billion. The estimate there was 18.75 billion. So about a billion dollar underperformance there. How should we be thinking about that se sector of the business uh that you know that business line for them and what China means for them as a company? It's by far their most challenging geography because it used to be a really big part of revenue. Used to be more than 20% of revenue. It drove growth for several years, but the last few years it's been a source of not only declines, but volatility. That market is so competitive and there's so much intervention in that market that they they have not only volatility, but they've also had a a downward slope in results. So, it's been a headwind to their business. So, a disappointing result there. doesn't reflect well going forward because that may be a competitive situation that's causing them to fall short. That would add a little bit of concern. Gil, stepping back here, uh go go back to maybe call it 9 months ago, a lot of investors looked at Apple and questioned why Tim Cook wasn't plowing a hundred billion or $200 billion into AI capex like we saw an Amazon or Microsoft or Alphabet doing. In the last few months, it seemed that the stock, the company has been a bit rewarded for not plowing a ton of money, for taking on a for not taking on a ton of debt for AI. How should we be thinking about that story going forward and kind of Apple is the differentiator maybe in the classic Mag 7 grouping we always talk about? >> Yeah, Apple, they were definitely vindicated on that decision. For a couple of years, it looked like it was a problematic decision, but since then, they've absolutely been vindicated. And look nowhere else but the multiple where they traded a huge premium on earnings at least to the rest of the uh of the large cap technology stocks. The ones that are plowing hundreds of billions of dollars into the ground to build data centers that are funding these frontier labs with tens of billions of dollars in order to to be at the cutting edge. What Apple's Apple's calculus has always been, we'll let them worry about all that. Consumers are still going to use AI through our devices. we're still gonna take a cut and at some point Siri will mature to being that assistant, that personal assistant, that agentic um uh application that we're seeing previews of with Muse right now. Longer term, we're going to use Siri in the same way. Siri will be sitting on top of another model whether it's open eyes or anthropics or Google's or another model but the consumer will be interacting with Siri in order to accomplish what they want with AI in order to make those agentic requests to have that personal assistant and the reason they're so well situated is that they're integrated into their own native applications messaging email contacts calendar those are things that their integration is always going to be better than third party software So longterm they're still situated well. They're going to let everybody else fight it out, incinerate all their cash flow and then some. Well, Apple sits pretty and and ends up picking out the one that they want to work with. >> You know, you you make a point there um kind of indirectly about the fact that Apple has stayed by and large a consumer business. They are not chasing the massive enterprise contracts that an Alphabet or a Microsoft is going after. Is that set to stay a healthy differentiator for Apple as they push forward with the AI story they're trying to tell? >> Very much so. And it's because they have such a big part of that consumer market. They they don't have the majority share. They have a big very big share, but they have a majority of the profits coming from consumer handsets and to a large extent even from uh consumer computers. and they they're happy there and and they're happy in that market. They have some enterprise business selling Max. They have some enterprise business helping iPhones work in an ente ...[Transcript truncated for size]...
This is a machine. If we want to burn this town to the ground- The race for mayor of Los Angeles was unconventional in every way. You can do it, Spencer. Let him in. Former TV reality show star Spencer Pratt versus a city council member and the incumbent mayor in the June primary. I know what the consequences of failed leadership are. That's why I'm running for mayor. AI-generated campaign ads and prediction markets buzzing with activity. In fact, it is the highest-traded mayoral race in 2026, surpassing $47 million in bets, a highly liquid market that theoretically should reflect the will of the people. Raman overtook reality star turned wannabe politician Spencer Pratt. Except it didn't. The prediction markets not only got it wrong leading up to the election, but during the race, there were numerous unusual instances of price spikes on Kalshi and Polymarket International that pushed the odds in Pratt's favor, according to an exclusive analysis for CNBC by the Anti-Corruption Data Collective, or ACDC, a nonprofit that brings together journalists, academics, policy experts and data scientists who work to expose corruption. Michelle Kendler-Kretsch is a researcher at ACDC. I feel extremely worried that we don't have enough information, we don't have enough data in order to truly know what may happen come November. In the L.A. Elections, the discrepancy between the prediction market odds and the actual outcome fueled voter doubt about the integrity of the election itself, a precursor of what could come this November. Polymarket and Kalshi are the two largest prediction market platforms. They let people trade on almost anything, from what team will be the 2027 NBA champion to will the U.S. confirm that aliens exist to who will win the upcoming midterm elections. Users can buy and sell contracts valued between 1 cent and 99 cents. The higher the price, the more likely traders think the event will happen, but the lower the payout. For instance, if a trader buys a contract for 80 cents, that means they think there's an 80% probability the event will happen, but only a 20-cent payout. I'll check the live results on Kalshi. Already on these platforms, the amount wagered on contracts related to the 2026 congressional elections has more than tripled total bets on the 2024 races, and people are increasingly using the platforms as a source of information. For midterm election markets specifically, Kalshi reports viewers outnumber actual traders by a 5-1 ratio. And as election wagers become more and more part of the national discourse, the concerns are growing about the impact the odds can have on voter behavior and whether those odds are vulnerable to manipulation. The stakes are high. Prediction market odds can be fuel for a campaign, a favorable mention in a news article, or even a pitch for a campaign contribution. Jared Demarinis is a state administrator for the Maryland State Board of Elections, which is overseeing dozens of contests on the ballot this Election Day. My job is to make sure the right person was elected. How worried are you that there will be questions about the validity of any of those races because of the prediction markets? I think that the prediction markets will amplify heightened scrutiny as well as apprehension regarding the current election landscape. There's distrust. Right. Can I just get one picture? I'm sorry. I only got into the race because nobody else was going to run. On the eve of the June primary, Kalshi gave Pratt a 78% chance of advancing to November's runoff. Ultimately, he finished third and did not advance. Despite it being a heavily traded liquid market, ACDC found anomalies on Kalshi. Across May, every time the market said, 'Okay, let's drop the price, there's negative news,' there was also part of the market that said, 'Hang on, let's increase this price.' Could it be that Pratt's campaign was just better at countering negative news? Ultimately, all of it's possible. We can't ascribe intent to any trading behavior. All we can say is, overall, for the dips, we saw recoveries and we didn't see that in the other candidates. On Polymarket International and Kalshi, ACDC also found price spikes, temporary but large price jumps that can make outcomes look more likely to happen. Price spikes can happen for a variety of reasons, such as new information, changing trader expectations, or a trader buying a large number of contracts and driving up the prices as cheaper contracts get bought up. In the Pratt race, the group found in one series of trades on Kalshi $56,000 in contracts were purchased at once, ranging from 73 cents to 99 cents, temporarily pushing the price up to 99 cents. With every tick higher, the potential payout on those contracts went lower. All in all, the trader or traders spent $56,000 and lost out on about $8,000 in potential profit. So then there's a question of why would a trader do something like this? We simply don't know. But spiking to 99, losing that profit margin, there's many questions on why someone would do that. So to you that's a red flag. A price spike doesn't have a profit motive. And if the theory is that prediction markets are accurate because of a price motive, it begs the question of what type of goal does someone making a trade like that really have for themselves? A spokesperson for Kalshi told CNBC, 'Mispriced markets represent free money sitting on the table, and traders are financially incentivized to correct that mispricing quickly.' In a statement, the L.A. County Clerk's office wrote that 'During the June primary, we saw how changes in candidate standings generated significant online criticism, speculation, and questions about the integrity of the process. Prediction markets can add to that confusion when people treat their projections as more authoritative than the actual votes being counted.' ACDC says election contracts can be vulnerable to unusual price spikes, similar to those in the Pratt race, and that it identified price spikes happening in midterm races on Polymarket International and Kalshi. In data shared exclusively with CNBC, ACDC found that of 167 congressional markets worth more than $100,000, 38, or about 23%, experienced price spikes, moving the contract price 30 cents or more. One example: Will Juliana Stratton be the Democratic nominee for the Senate in Illinois? On March 3rd, a buyer spent $5,000 on contracts, taking the price from 47 cents to 79 cents. The price normalized after three seconds, going back down to 47 cents. But about one minute later, it shot back up to 99 cents after $3,000 of additional contracts were purchased. The price eventually traded back at 52 cents, 5 cents more than where it started. That means a person or persons spent $8,000, resulting in a push up in price that made a Stratton victory look more likely. Two weeks later, Stratton won the Democratic primary. In a statement to CNBC, a spokesperson for Kalshi wrote, "As is common on Kalshi, the market corrected quickly to a price near fair value." Stratton declined to comment on this story, but a spokesperson from her office pointed to a poll published the same day as this price spike that showed Stratton leading. Data shows moving the odds may be easier and cheaper than you might think, especially when liquidity is thin, meaning not many wagers are placed. Across more than 18,000 active congressional markets on Polymarket International, Polymarket U.S. and Kalshi, 88% could have their prices moved by 10 cents with a single bet under $1,000. In August, Kalshi published a study that analyzed more than 2 million markets. It found deeper participation may sharpen prices rather than distort them, but even markets with as few as 20 traders can be accurate. In a statement to CNBC, a Polymarket spokesperson wrote, "Traders will recognize an opp ...[Transcript truncated for size]...
For a while, people have talked about AI as this new industrial revolution. And, you know, that's okay. But I think we're now seeing the potential of something much better. Um, and the way we've started talking about it, it feels much more like a new renaissance. The ability for someone to sit with. I talk about a broad range of problems and ideas, come up with a sophisticated solution, invent great new stuff. Um, really just hugely lever up what they can do in their understanding of the problem and how they can contribute to society is something that I've never seen before. I certainly didn't think we were going to be here at this moment with I, um, but it's tremendously exciting. For a long time, the eye industry has talked about what it needs from the energy industry. Um, and now I think we can repay the favor. And not only can we repay the favor, not only can I enable the energy industry in an incredible new way. Um, the world is going to need much more energy for my whole career. My two greatest interests have been eye and energy. I never thought they were going to come together in quite this way.
Welcome back everyone. Today on the Joseph Carlson show, we just got through Halloween weekend. Now, if you're like me, the weekend was not the scariest moment. It wasn't Halloween. The scariest part of last week was watching Google stock drop 12% after hours and watching tens of thousands of dollars vanish into thin air. Google lost around $500 billion of market cap. Half a trillion dollars vanishing. And then on top of that, as I was releasing my video going over Google's earnings, doing analysis on everything that happened, Amazon reported its earnings and dropped 7% at the same time. Two of my biggest companies were dropping like a rock. And today, we're going to be looking at them. In today's episode, I'm going to be going over each company, where they sit now with their current price, and what my price target is for them. The price targets are my fair values for these companies, where I believe they're worth today. So, I'll be going over all of these and explaining my reasoning in this episode. Now, of course, we had Amazon report their earnings as well, and I have to take a look at this. So, I have lots of charts and graphs to go over Amazon, as well as commentary, what they said last quarter. There's a lot of interesting things to review with one of my largest positions. So, we'll be looking at that. We also have Anthropic releasing their earnings report for Q3. This was something new, and we have people like Steve Eisman talking about this earnings report. He says it's clear that Anthropic is decelerating and it's becoming less efficient. But is that the whole story? We're going to be looking at Anthropic and what this means for the larger AI story. And then finally for today's fail of the week, we'll be going over the tragic story of this college student missing out on life-changing money only by a couple feet. Now, before we jump in, just a reminder, if you haven't tried out my membership, which is qualum.com, give it a try. It comes with a risk-free trial. And the reason I want you to try it out is because around 70% of the people that do try it out, they stay with it because they figure out that it's awesome. You get access to a ton of data, including all these proprietary KPIs. We gather these ourselves. We have KPIs that help you understand the business at a better level than just the financials. And of course, we have a watch list, portfolio tracker, advanced charting tools. We have transcripts of earnings calls and much more, including exclusive content, an entire library of investment content that you won't find on YouTube. For example, I had a recent episode where we discussed nine different stocks worth looking at today. Another one was an hour-long update on Meta going in-depth on their most recent quarter. And then on top of that, you get access to a Discord community with thousands of investors. And we discuss stocks all the time. So, if you want to try that out, the price is $10 a month where you even get a discount if you commit to an annual plan. Now, we start things off today by looking at my price targets for each stock that I own. This is every company in my portfolio. And the price target in this case is another way of saying the fair value. the fair value, meaning the intrinsic value of the stock. See, there's the trading value. That's what the stock price is today. And that's driven by, in many cases, sentiment and short-term emotions. It's driven by algorithms, a momentum, and there's lots of things that impact the trading value of a company. So, every investor should have the stock and its trading value today, but then you should have your own estimate of the real worth of the company, your fair value assessment, and that's what we'll be looking at. And as just a warning, these aren't perfect. These are judgment calls. Basically, I'm looking at a company trying to evaluate both the moat, the financial future of it, as well as things like the competitive nature, what type of disruption risks the company has. All of that is blended down into my judgment of fair value. So, there is no mathematical formula that explains all of this. Part of it is driven by a DCF, which is mathematically built, but then a part of it is simply my judgments on the moat and growth potential of the company long term. So, we'll start off with my portfolio. We're looking at the stocks largest to smallest and we have Mastercard, which is now my largest position. Mastercard is a $221,000 position. It has a a total gain of 73,000. That includes mostly capital appreciation and then a few thousand worth of dividends. Now, Mastercard is a company that's done exceptionally well this year and over the past couple of years. Today, the stock is up 3.4% surging up to $660 per share. If we look at the company year-to- date, it's up 17%. Outperforming both the QQQ and the S&P 500. If we look at it over the past 5 years, just the same. It's outperformed both indexes by quite a large margin. So, this is a company that I've talked repeatedly about as being one of the most boring companies in the market, but one of the most phenomenal in the market. Most of the financial metrics of Mastercard are truly unbelievable. The only company that really comes close is Visa. For example, we look at the profit margin. This number is just wild. It's 47% profit margins for this company. That's actually close to the gross margins of Amazon. It's crazy. But this isn't a whole review of Mastercard. This is the valuation and what I believe is a fair value today. Right now, the stock trades at $659. And I believe the fair value is around $700 per share. Now, that's only around 6% upside from today. So, Mastercard's actually a company that I don't believe is that undervalued. I think it's trading close to its fair value and I value that off of a few things. First of all, we have the PE ratio on a Ford basis around 30. That seems expensive, but you have to look at the PE ratio in context with the economics of the company. Mastercard is a much better company than 99% of companies in the world. Therefore, it deserves a higher PE ratio. And looking at the trailing valuation of the company, it has recently gone through a big resurgence and it has had a massive price recovery. You can see that it was trading at a very low valuation in mid 2026, but it's since recovered and now it's back up to its normalized PE ratio over time. In fact, it's still slightly below its median historical PE ratio. Now, psychologically, when a company like this resurges back from the lows to the highs, you naturally want to take gains. You want to lock in some of the wins. You're relieved that the company is doing well. And that that natural tendency is just human emotion. But when I look at Mastercard with clear eyes, I see a company that is now back around where it deserves to be. The company's doing great. The last earnings report showed continued strength. The mo I believe is wide as ever. The company's making record profits, and it's now back to its historical normal medium PE ratio. So, at $700 with Mastercard, that leaves a little upside, but for me, it's a hold. Now, next up, we have Amazon. For this stock, it is now my second largest position. It's at $182,000 with $57,000 in the green. Now with Amazon, it went through a roller coaster of a earnings report. And this is something that was really funny because right after Amazon reported their earnings, it fell dramatically. In fact, a lot of investors were like, "Oh my gosh, the stock is down 7%. What am I going to do? Google just fell and now Amazon, the market's getting crushed." But look at what happened over the remaining week. Over the past 5 days, Amazon is flat. In fact, it's up just slightly. So, you can see what happened here on the price chart. They reported their earnings and the stock fell 7%. Then the next morning, the stock went up 3 or 4%, it recovered part of the the loss and then this morning later it went up another 3 or 4%. Now i ...[Transcript truncated for size]...
Perhaps the most important news that was somehow shunned by the stock market going down last week was that Open AI missed its valuation target and didn't get as much money as it expected. The target valuation was 1.3 trillion. They got 1.25 on much less money that they expected. They got something more than 10 billion, which is not 40 billion. What does this mean? Well, most of the AI narrative over the last 4 years was constantly investing in stock prices going higher and higher. Now, with AI getting just 10 billion, which I would dare to assume was just from previous investors giving a little bit more money to push the valuation higher so that they can unload in a 2027 hopeful IPO. But, the risks here are huge. If it gets clear that it will not work, then those that funded the billions in the previous rounds, everything reverts. So does the stock market. Open AI doesn't have the money to spend the billions they promised. Like Anthropic, investors get scared there, too, and that might lead to the bubble truly bursting. I discussed this situation and a lot of other things related to AI, the risks, the bubble bursting in the video below.
If you bought a stock on the stock markets, and it's gone down, and you're still holding it, then I want to teach you this tax trick. So, it's legal, it can save you a bunch of money, but there are rules that you need to know. Okay, so what I'm referring to is called tax loss harvesting, and I'm going to teach you how to do it in this video, and also what you need to watch out for. Now, let's start here. What is tax loss harvesting in the stock markets? So, tax loss harvesting is a strategy that you can do to pay less in taxes. And you have to do this by December 31st, and most people do this in November or in December. Okay, I want to explain this to you by starting with an analogy to help you better understand the situation. So, let's just say that you bought a home 20 years ago for $200,000, and today in 2026, it's now valued at $1 million, and you're still living in that same home. Okay, so you made money, right? Okay, now I want to ask you a question. For your 2026 tax return that you're going to file, will this whole situation cause you to pay more in taxes? And the answer is no. Okay, why is that? It's because you have not sold your home yet. So, sure, it's gone up in value, right? But, there's only a potential tax consequence when you sell your home. So, the home's gone up in value from $200,000 to $1 million, so you're at a gain of $800,000, right? But, that gain, it's only on paper because you haven't sold the home yet. So, that's called an unrealized gain. And the IRS is not going to tax you on an unrealized gain. But now, if you sell your home, that's when you report the sale of your home on your tax return, and that's when your taxes come into play. So, that's because you completed the transaction, you bought the home, and now you sold your home, and the transaction is done. And you actually realized the gain of $800,000, so it's no longer just on paper, you actually realized that gain. So, the bottom line is that the IRS taxes you on realized gains, and the IRS does not tax you on unrealized gains. So, in other words, when the transaction is complete, you bought it, and then you sold it, then there's going to be tax consequences. Now, it's going to be the same concept with stocks on the stock market. So, let's say it's 2026, and you bought Microsoft stock in January 2026, and let's say that it's gone up by 10%, and we're still in 2026. And then, let's say that 2026 ends, and you did not sell your Microsoft stock. You held it all year long. So, are you going to have to pay taxes on your 10% gain? And the answer is no, because it's an unrealized gain. It's an unrealized gain because you didn't complete the transaction. You bought it, but you didn't sell it, so there are no tax consequences, at least for this year. So, if you sold it, if you sold your Microsoft stock in 2026, then you would have completed the transaction, and you would have realized the gain. And then, you would have to pay taxes on that gain. So, that's because the IRS taxes realized gains, and not unrealized gains. Now, let me show you how tax loss harvesting protects you from unfair treatments from the IRS. So, we're going to work with a just a big round number. Let's just say that you have $100,000 on January 1st of 2026. And in 2026, you invested $100,000 into Apple stock, okay? And let's just say that you doubled your money in Apple stock, and then you sold it sometime in 2026, and congratulations, you now have $200,000 in your account. You know, your 100 K doubled to 200 K. And then, let's just say that you took that $200,000, and then you invested all of that into Tesla stock. And then, let's just say that Tesla stock falls by 50%. So, now your account is back at $100,000 again, you know, back to where you started, but you didn't sell your Tesla stock. And then, 2026 ends. So, here's what's going to happen. In reality, you didn't make any money, right? You started with $100,000, you ended with $100,000. But, here's the thing. Now comes tax time. And what's going to happen? You're going to get royally screwed over in this scenario by the IRS. So, let me ask you, what's your realized gain? It's the $100,000 that you made from selling your Apple stock, right? And let's just say that your tax rate is 30%. So, you're you're going to have to pay $30,000 in taxes from your $100,000 realized gain from your Apple stock that you sold and you made money on. So, now your account is going to be worth $70,000 because you got to pay your taxes. And that's how you get screwed over by the IRS. And if you're an investor, then you should know that it's easier to make money when you have more money. So, I want you to think about it like this. Let's just say that your goal is to get back to $200,000, okay? Then with $100,000, then you need to double your money to get to 200,000, right? But, if you get chopped down to $70,000, then you have to nearly triple your money to get to that $200,000. And if you say that's not fair because you lost $100,000 on Tesla stock, well, the rules are that the IRS only cares about realized gains or realized losses. So, if you sold your Tesla stock for a loss in 2026, then you would have a $100,000 realized loss. So, then you would have a $100,000 realized gain from Apple and a $100,000 realized loss from Tesla, and then they would net together the gain and the loss, and then your total realized gain would be $0, and then you would pay $0 in taxes. So, the question is, would you rather have $70,000 right now and a $30,000 tax credit with the IRS to use in the future, or would you rather have $100,000 right now? Like, personally, I would rather have $100,000 right now because of the time value of money because it's easier to make money, of course, if you have money. And I believe that my money is better with me than it is with the government. Now, let's run this scenario. Let's just say that you have $100,000 to invest. You invest half of that, so $50,000 into Walmart and $50,000 into Target. And let's just say this happens in 2026. And let's just say that Walmart goes up by $20,000 and you sell it. And let's say that Target goes down by $20,000 and you still hold it. So, it's going to be the same situation. You're going to have a $20,000 realized gain on your Walmart sale and you're going to have a $20,000 unrealized loss on your Target position. And the IRS only cares about realized gains or realized losses. So, you're going to be taxed on your $20,000 realized gain from Walmart, which will cost you about $6,000 in taxes. And then at the end of the day, you're going to be down from $100,000 to $94,000 after the tax consideration. Now, to prevent this from happening, investors typically sell their losers, so their losing stock positions by December 31st to tax loss harvest. So, it's essentially done legally to claim your tax benefit from your losing positions. So, this is not like a loophole to cheat the IRS or the government. No, tax loss harvesting is a way to prevent the IRS and the government from basically cheating you. And it's better to take the tax loss in the current year rather than in the future or future years because of the time value of money. Again, it's better to have the money now rather than later. And okay, this is just my opinion that the money's going to be better off in your hands than in the hands of the IRS or the government. Okay, now a good question is, what do you need to watch out for? So, when you tax loss harvest, what are you essentially doing? You have an unrealized loss on a position, right? And you're essentially closing the position to realize the loss for tax purposes, right? So, if you sell your losing position and realize the loss on let's just say December 31st of 2026, then you're going to have a tax loss to claim for tax year 2026. Okay, so let's just say that you have an unrealized loss of $10,000 in Exxon Mobil stock on December 31st of 2026. And then you sell your Exxon stock to claim that $10,000 loss for tax ...[Transcript truncated for size]...