(beeping) (upbeat music) - Welcome back to Portfolio Rescue. Each week we get questions into our inbox at askthecompoundshow@gmail.com. People reach out to us on social media. We get some YouTube questions. Sometimes people just shout at us on the street. And I think we hit a new all-time record for questions this week.

This is unofficial. - There's a lot. - That's what I'm putting it in. And every single question touched on the exact same theme. Is my money safe? This is the kind of risk no one knew they needed to worry about. And I think that's why so many people are worried and freaked out because they thought, well, wait, this isn't something I ever thought I had to worry about.

Little story here, Duncan. Six years ago this May, my twins were born. I have to admit the first three months or so were basically a blur, but I still vividly remember the day they were born. We had it all scheduled in advance 'cause my wife had a C-section 'cause of course there's two tiny infants in her stomach.

So we're sitting in the hospital room beforehand and the anesthesiologist comes in. We're waiting to go on the OR and he has to go through his little checklist. I don't know if they have to tell you this or what, but here's your potential side effects from the anesthesia and the surgery, right?

Headache, numbness, nausea, vomiting, whatever. Itching, it's a bunch of other stuff that's way worse. - I'm already passed out on the ground at this point. - Well, he walks us through the probabilities. Yeah, I'm not good in hospitals either. One out of every 40,000 people this happens to, one out of every 5,000 people this happens to, and he left us with a great line though.

He said, "Listen, I know there's a ton of stuff "to worry about that could go wrong today, "but the riskiest thing you ever did "was drive to the hospital." He's like, "You guys made it through that. "You're far more likely to get in an accident "and have something go wrong in a car "than in the hospital." I almost laughed because it reminded me of the Lloyd Christmas "Dumb and Dumber" line to Mary Swanson on the way to the airport.

You're, Mary, you're much more likely to get killed on the way to the airport. And it kind of reframed the risk for us of worrying about the stuff that we were worried about, all the possible things that could go wrong. I liked the Carl Richards quote he wrote once, "That risk is what's left over "after you've thought of everything." It kind of seems like that's what this week feels like.

There's the old saying, "We make plans and God laughs." I think it's the financial version of this is Wall Street strategists make an annual outlook and God laughs because people are writing the "What to Expect for 2023" reports. No one had bank runs listed, right? Bank failures, bank runs, potential financial crisis in the finance sector.

And of course, regular people weren't planning on worrying about the amount of money in their bank account. We had people, regular people email us in and say, "Listen, I was supposed to get paid on Friday, "but my paycheck is administered through SVB Bank, right? "And I didn't get paid.

"I had to wait till Monday or Tuesday to get paid "until things got figured out." So based on the amount of questions that came pouring in this week, a lot of people are worried about the safety of their cash. So we're gonna go through a bunch of those today.

So let's get into it. - Okay, so first up today, we have a question from Sean. Did VCs really cause the SVB bank run via Twitter? What impact does this have on trust in banks? And this, I threw this part in because this is what we were talking about.

Is causing a bank run a criminal offense or is there any culpability here? - Okay, let's bring in some help right away on this. - Yeah, I really demand to be heard on this topic. - Wait, I do have stuff to say on this. Can we go back one topic though?

I like that story that you told, Ben. So the doctor was like, "Listen, as risky as this is, "it's nothing compared to driving on the highway." I think that's a really... You know, Barry does all those slides in his presentation about like, you're more likely to be bit and killed by a mosquito than a shark.

And like all the risks that are clear and present right in front of our face are not necessarily the risks most likely to put us away. I think that's a really good, it's a really good analog. The biggest risk I ever took was going to a Mexican hospital during spring break.

And I sprained my wrist and the doctor was wrapping up my wrist and he had a lit cigarette dangling from his mouth. And then we went to the Mexican pharmacy for the pain pills. And that was probably the second biggest risk I ever took 'cause I didn't even like know what the prescription was.

I just started taking them and still being out on spring break drinking. And probably that was a bigger risk than driving on the highway in Grand Rapids, Michigan. So like that, you know, for me, like once I got through that I don't worry so much about all the risks these days.

You know what I'm saying? - Cheap healthcare though for you. Your healthcare bill is much cheaper than ours. - I mean, I wouldn't have known the difference. I was probably 18. I don't even know who was paying for it or how it got paid for. I just, you know, it's one of those things.

All right, I'm really excited to be on the show today. Did Twitter, people on Twitter cause the bank run? Yes. - Kind of. - Who could argue with that? Of course they did. Who else did it? - Do we want to name names? Is there anyone particularly responsible? - Anyone that felt that it was necessary to not only tell their portfolio companies behind the scenes to remove capital, but then to broadcast that in some sort of reverse virtue signal.

Yeah, you did it. It was you. You were part of it. - Do you think though that, so we've been talking about the blame game all week. Do you think that there's anything that they can do to have safeguards in place? Or is this just the sort of psychological event that you can't plan for?

Like they have circuit breakers in the stock market. Do you think that would ever make sense in a bank? Or is that, does that kind of go against the whole idea of well, I need my money, it's mine. Could anything like that ever slow this down? - I don't think it, I don't think that absent Twitter, there would not have been any issue because there were short sellers who had been looking at the balance sheet and the income statement of this company for like six quarters now and saying something's going on here.

Like deposits were already quietly leaving. That's true. Pre the blow up on Twitter. That's so, that's one thing. And the second thing is they were severely offsides in their bond portfolio. You can't have $90 billion in treasuries and no interest rate hedges, especially if you have that homogenous of a depositor base.

Like everyone in the depositor base lives in the same area and does the same thing for a living. Like you can't, so there were always issues. I'm not saying like Twitter is at fault for the bank having issues. Twitter definitely accelerated the meme of pull your money out of Silicon Valley Bank.

- The trust thing going forward I think is interesting because I've been hearing this from a lot of people who never pay attention to the financial markets or the banking system. And I really can't tell if this is something people pay attention to for two weeks and then they move on to their lives and worry about the next thing.

Or if this is something that will actually seep into people's psyche and they will go, wait a minute, if I'm gonna have to think about this all the time, I'm gonna be more thoughtful about where I have my money. - It's such a great question. People learn, but they don't really learn.

Or they learn, but they don't really change. In America, we have prioritized convenience over everything else, which is like, you think about like internet passwords. People have the same password for every website. 'Cause it's not realistic that you're gonna come up with 80 different passwords for 80 different apps.

So it's just like, this is the system that we have. With banks, it's not gonna be much different. Like as much as we all learned from Lehman, MF Global was three years later. You can't really eliminate all risk from financial institutions. You can't really have perfect trust in the financial system.

It's not realistic to think that that's even possible. And so community banks will always be slightly riskier than money centers, but money center banks are risky too. And people will eventually default to whatever's the most convenient and easiest solution. So I don't think the idea of local banking is gonna completely disappear.

In fact, the events of this week might make it so that there's almost no advantage for any bank in terms of safety. Like we just might have seen the, we might have witnessed FDIC insurance becoming unlimited. >> Right, all right, Duncan, next question. >> Okay, up next we have a question from Alex.

My wife and I have the bulk of our investments in two accounts. Is this a dumb practice? Should we be more diversified with our institutions? We've been discussing this for a while and after SBB, it's brought the discussion back to the kitchen table. I understand that the FDIC insures up to 250,000, but once you get north of that, are there any best practices for what to do?

And the second part of this was from another listener. If a brokerage fails, what happens to customers' holdings? >> So before Ben jumps in, just real quick, brokerage and bank are two separate things. FDIC and SIPC are not the same thing. So there's a very important distinction there. And then like what I would basically just say, very, very, very simply, again, based on the events of this week, I don't think FDIC insurance is really going to matter anymore.

Because if they were willing to bail out the people who had bank accounts at Signature and at Silicon Valley, how could they discriminate against the next bank that comes along, their depositors? So I almost think like it's de facto now a moot point. If you have money in a bank and the bank screws up, you're probably okay.

Last thing, it's not as though Silicon Valley's bank balances were going to be wiped out to zero. This is more like, do they have to take a five or a 10% haircut? That's what we're talking about. This is not a bank that had a gaping black hole of losses.

They had a treasury bond portfolio that if held to maturity, would have been money good. So this was never about like, oh my God, my savings were wiped out by a bank. >> Yeah, this was about the bank of Sam Venkman Freed. >> No, and so I think there's a lot of misunderstanding about that in the public.

They think like, oh, the bank was insolvent, meaning the deposits were going to be wiped out to zero. None of that was ever on the table or was ever going to happen. >> So we've gotten questions like this on the brokerage angle before in the past. What if Vanguard or Charles Schwab or Fidelity or Robinhood go under?

What happens to my securities? And people have actually asked us that in the past and we've got a lot of questions on it this week saying, you know, I'm scared here. And I think the people are conflating the two, to your point about brokerages versus banks. It's not like a brokerage can take your money and that, or take your securities and lend them out on your behalf and speculate.

So that, it's kind of, they're the third party. >> Well, FTX did that. That's what FTX literally did. >> If you're not in the bank of Bernie Madoff or Sam Venkman Freed. >> That's right. >> These are third party custodians. The SEC has consumer protection rules in place. And I guess the way to think about it is if you own a stock or a bond or a mutual fund or an ETF, wherever you hold it, as long as it's not the bank of Madoff, those holdings are yours.

And if something ever happened to the underlying financial firm, you still own those holdings. It's not like they can take them from you in a creditor or something if the bank went under or the financial firm went under. >> So here's something interesting. I don't think this is as prevalent now, but back in the day, there was a difference between holding securities in your own name versus holding them in street name.

And when you hold them in your own name, you are deliberately, so the brokerage firm typically defaults to your securities. So let's say Ben has an account at a brokerage firm. And in that account, he owns shares of Meta and Goldman Sachs and Amgen. Those are his three stocks.

The default is that the brokerage is holding those securities for Ben in street name, which means they basically have them sitting there in an account that short sellers could borrow those stock certificates to use them to sell it short, et cetera. Now, if you want to be very specific, you could say, put those in my name, not in street name.

And you can literally instruct the brokerage firm as the custodian of your securities to move those into what they call the vault or move those into your own name or whatever. So like, this is the kind of thing that's like a little bit confusing for people. But what Ben said is the main point.

They don't have the right to turn your securities into their securities. They can't use your securities as part of like some bigger trade or speculation they're doing. However, on the bank side, it is that way. They can literally take your cash and invest your cash into contracts, into bonds, into stocks.

So that's a very different phenomenon. And that's why the sell-off in Schwab made absolutely no sense to me. Because yeah, Schwab has a bank, but that is a securities business. And people's securities portfolios were not at risk. - Yeah, and if all of a sudden people started showing up and their securities were gone for whatever, I mean, this is the kind of thing-- - Jail.

- Right, yeah, that's not gonna happen. - So Cliff beat me to this in the chat, but I was gonna ask, can you still get a paper certificate for stocks? Would that be safer? I just had a stack of them in my apartment. - You can, you have to ask for it.

You have to request it. - I think you also have to put a panic room in your house, though, to store them. Otherwise-- - I would just keep it with all my precious metals. - You know what you get a paper stock certificate for? Instagram, like you want to-- - They are cool, they're pretty cool.

- You ever see like five years ago, Kanye West bought Kim Kardashian an anniversary present. He bought her, she had physical stock certificates for Google, Disney, Apple, all these stocks, and she posted that to the 'Gram. And that was kind of cool because I think it encouraged young people to want to invest.

So I kind of feel like that's what you would do, something like that. When I was new in the business, we would buy client shares of Disney and then have the stock certificate sent to them. And they would like give it to their son or daughter and like frame it in like a nursery or something.

Other than that, there's no real purpose. - I think I mentioned last week, Duncan, I gave a talk to a high school recently. And as a thank you, they sent me like a share, one share of Disney in a little certificate. So you actually, I can't remember the name of the company, you can do that.

- Yeah, I've seen that before. Atari has really cool ones too. I've seen those, you can buy them on Etsy. - All right, let's do another one. - But they're not, this is important, they're not like bearer bonds. - Right, it's not like diehard, you can steal them from someone.

- Right, like if Duncan has one share of Disney or Ben has one share of Disney, I can't take that and then go turn it in for the money. That's not how it works. - So not really that useful. - It's not like Heat, the movie Heat, right? Where like you could steal a tranche of stock certificates and then turn them in some way.

- I'll abandon my movement to bring back paper stock certificates then. Okay, and part of that question was from Handle Crispy Delicious. So I forgot to shut him out. - Yeah, it was a Twitter question, I think. - Okay, so up next we have a question from Matthew. The Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco has a lot of exposure to SVB and other similar banks based on public SEC filings.

My money market fund has approximately 20% of its holdings in FHLB securities as of February 28th. Should I be concerned? I understand FHLB is a GSE. Y'all will have to explain that one. I don't know what that means. Just like Fannie and Freddie, who I'm sure you remember from the GFC, Global Financial Crisis for people watching.

The second largest bank failure in U.S. history is enough of a low probability event for me. Just want your thoughts on if I should be concerned with other low probability events like something non-crypto breaking the buck because of SVB. - GSE is a government sponsored enterprise, something like that.

- Okay. I was gonna say entity, is it enterprise? Yeah, it's one or the other. Okay. - The Wall Street Journal had a piece on this. - Wait, Ben, is FHLB is, so when he says securities, he owns bonds. - Yes, I think he's saying that, so the Wall Street Journal had a piece on this and they said that FHLB basically underwrote some of those bonds, I think, and they said that they gave them like 13 billion in bonds, but they had to pledge 45 billion in collateral for that.

So the Wall Street Journal piece, and the FHLB of San Francisco did put out a statement on it and they basically said, "We're a AAA rated financial institution. "Don't worry about it." I think this is, it sounds like it's pretty insulated. This just seems pretty far down the line in terms of worries that, and it never really got to the point, I think, where they've had to worry about this yet.

So I think reaching the money market, we got another question on money markets coming up, but this seems to me like another one of those systemic issues that, do you really think that the Fed would allow one of their regional banks to sort of be left holding the bag here?

No, of course not. There's a debate to be had whether or not there should be a such thing as a GSE. I think like in the '30s, '40s, '50s, '60s, they were trying to encourage the suburbanization of America. They were actively looking to move people out of apartment buildings and move them into the suburbs and buy homes and buy automobiles and have kids and have public schools built.

And in that environment where we were basically building something that didn't exist, you really needed Fannie, Freddie. Now they back the entire mortgage market. There's not even an alternative to Fannie and Freddie. So I think these things are less risky, if that makes sense to you, rather than more risky in a crisis especially.

This is the type of paper that people are clamoring for to own in what feels like a private market crisis. The government is not gonna let their own agencies go under. No. By the way, fun fact, do you know why the government was so intent in the 1950s on moving people out into the suburbs from the cities?

McDonald's? I don't know. No, communism. This is true. There was this red scare and the politicians were terrified that we were gonna get these communist uprisings like they had all over Europe. Europe basically didn't have suburbs. They had farms and cities. So the idea was if people own property, they're less likely to become communists.

This is a true story. No one's driving to a protest. You know what I mean? Literally. If you rent in an apartment building, you're more likely to be persuaded, but not modern, to be persuaded by these socialist uprisings versus if you own land, right? You own a car, own a dishwasher.

You're not running off to join a communist mob. I'm putting the pieces together here about why everyone says that Millennials and Gen Z are communists because the last time they built-- 'Cause they live in the city. No, the last time they built a bunch of homes was the 1950s.

So maybe the Millennials are trying to get the government to build more affordable housing. If you want to keep the status, right, if the boomers want to keep the status quo for the next 20 years until they're all gone, the smartest thing to do is help turn the Millennials into homeowners as quickly as possible.

Otherwise, full-blown AOC-style collective farms. We're gonna revolt. Yeah, Duncan's gonna be leading the charge. This isn't live, right? We could edit this? Yeah, we'll edit this after. All right, let's do another one. Okay, up next, we have a question from Travis. I'm considering keeping our emergency fund in a money market fund.

Is this too risky without it having FDIC insurance? I hope you guys can help me understand this because I still don't understand the point of a money market fund, really, what purpose it serves. So this is another one there. I feel like a lot of these questions come down to we have the rules and regulations in place that are written down on the books, and then we have the unspoken ones that you have to kind of use common sense for, and we can't make any guarantees or promises.

But with stuff like this, if you think about the Prime Fund broke the buck in 2008 'cause Lehman failed, and that caused a run on money markets. They have done, they have put new rules and regulations in place. They actually did. There's some sort of, they try to keep the NAV, but some of them can float now.

But also, they allow some of these monies to put gates on 'em, right? I think 2016, they put some new regulations in place that would allow these funds to be gated if there was a run. So they did change the rules on these a little bit. - We should talk about why the money market fund, the Prime Fund, which was one of the most prominent, most widely used money market funds broke the buck.

And there was like a good reason. They were jammed with commercial paper. And commercial paper is like seven day debt. The way to think about it is like the grease that allows commerce to take place. It's like how money moves around very quickly between corporations. - These repo things and yeah.

- Yeah, it's not right. It's not like a long-term bond. It's like, look, for seven days, I need you to float this much capital. And so there's a trading market for this kind of paper. And the commercial debt market froze up. One of the major warning signs that the Fed should have been paying more attention to in '06 and '07 and wasn't.

Well, you better believe they pay a ton of attention to the overnight repo markets, the seven day funding markets, commercial paper. So again, this is like the, it's less likely we'll be a victim of whatever the problem was from the last war. And all generals fight the last war.

So I wouldn't worry tremendously about money market funds. But yeah, anything that you're doing to get a quote, better rate of return than somebody else, or then what is standard, obviously is gonna carry a little bit more risk. So you always wanna say like, what is the risk worth taking?

If it's for two extra basis points, probably not worth the risk. If it's for 20 extra basis points, I don't know how much money is at stake. There's a conversation to be had there. - I looked this up and the Investment Company Institute says there's $5 trillion in these funds.

It's a lot of money. They broke them up into like government and institutional and retail, and like 2 trillion is in retail. I mean, excuse me, there's a ton of options. You have online savings accounts. You can put your money in T-bills. I mean, if you want the safest savings account, there is a T-bill is pretty close.

Maybe not as liquid as like an overnight savings account. IBON, CDs, there's all these things you can put it in. The good news is, I hate to like denigrate anyone who's worried about this stuff, but it almost feels like people who make $50,000 a year worried about billionaires getting taxed too much, right?

Because how many of us actually have 250K sitting in cash? Not many. I know it's businesses do. That's the good thing you have to think about. Obviously, you don't wanna keep all your money just sitting in a checking account, but there are so many different ways, easy ways that you can manage your cash these days.

The good news is, outside of the actual rules and regulations, it's pretty easy for people to keep their cash safe if that's really a huge worry. - Can I say one other thing, just as like a capper to this whole conversation? I totally understand why people are worried about this stuff because it's a nightmare scenario.

You trade years of your time, maybe decades of your time, try to save money. It's so hard to do with the cost of everything, especially you have kids, you have real estate. It's so hard to save money. You manage to, and then there's like this nightmare that like some force beyond your control can take it all away.

I want people to understand that that doesn't actually happen. Like the history of the modern history of the United States is not one in which people wake up one day and some asshole banker ruined their lives. We just don't have this as part of our system. So yeah, of course, it's understandable why people should worry, but don't fixate on this to the point where like you need Xanax so you can't sleep at night.

It's not actually gonna happen to you. - Yeah, the weird thing is that faith and trust are so much a bigger part of this whole financial system that if the regulators and the government ever allowed that faith to be truly broken by people having their assets-- - It's a civil war.

- Seized somehow. Yeah, the whole system would cease to work. It would all seize up and it wouldn't, it really wouldn't work anymore. - Yeah, I think people should understand like, imagine that happened to you and not your neighbor because you banked at two different banks. What the hell is that?

- Right, how fair to them, yeah. - Come on, that's not, Matt Levine made a really good point. Somebody was saying, maybe Cliff was talking about like the more, I'm not on Twitter, I don't even know. Somebody was saying the moral hazard like of bailing out the depositors at one bank, you're sending the wrong message that, you know what, banks are one of these things that are just supposed to work.

It's not like an investment in a mutual fund. You're not supposed to have to read the fine print in a federally chartered or a state chartered bank. It's just supposed to work. And by work, I don't mean you get the highest rate. I mean, your fucking money is there when you need your money.

Like that's how it's supposed to work. So I don't think there's any moral hazard in making sure that that works. I just, I don't see it in this case. - There've been quite a few comments on our videos recently about Silicon Valley Bank of people kind of indicating that this was a bailout for the rich and that this is gonna somehow hurt the average person.

Is there any truth to that? Or is that just a misunderstanding? - The first part is true, the second part is not. - Okay. - Right. - And that's because this is not tax-backed. - People probably have more protection now than they did before this happened. I think, so- - This is why we have to stop playing this class, this classism, this game.

It doesn't, in the end, it doesn't work for, yes, it's true that most of the signatories for the bank accounts at Silicon Valley Bank are on the wealthier end of the spectrum, of course. If you have millions of dollars in a bank for your corporation, and you are the head of the corporation, obviously you are, quote-unquote, the rich.

However, if that deposit is lost, you're probably closing your corporation, you're probably retaining some money, the people you're firing get nothing out of the deal. So we really have to stop playing this game. It really doesn't, it doesn't work for anyone if we start blowing up bank accounts. - Right, like I said- - Peeling it at the story.

- We heard from a few people who said, I did not get my paycheck on Friday. I was supposed to get paid, and I was supposed to run through SVB, and I had to worry all weekend about getting my paycheck, and this isn't some executive at a bank. This is a regular person who just needed their money, and was sweating out all weekend getting their paycheck.

- Seth in the chat says, why would a deposit make interest if there's no risk? Is that a fair point? What would you say to that? - Well, I mean, how many checking accounts actually pay interest, right? - They barely do. - And so the things that you do get paid for, and yeah, T-bills are taking a risk, 'cause that's interest rate risk or inflation risk.

So yeah, anything, anything that you put your money into is taking a little risk, but putting your money in a checking account is you're not actually taking any risk there, right? You're not expecting to earn any reward at least. - Right. - All right, I think we got one more.

- Okay, last but not least, we have a question from Tim. This banking crisis has to make it more likely that we see a recession, right? - My initial read on this whole thing was that- - Wait, say it again. Say it one more, you guys flashed that too fast for me.

I don't process at that speed. The banking crisis has to make it more likely. Yes, more likely, definitely. Ben, do you agree? - Yeah, no, I think that any time you, if credit is gonna contract in any way, or if people just, their lack of trust in risk-taking goes down, that's deflationary to me.

And I think that has to- Yeah, recession is much higher likelihood than it was 10 days ago, I think. - Yeah, it doesn't mean it seals our fate, but it's a disinflationary shock. It 100% changes people's sentiment, probably changes some people's behavior. It's like a wake-up call for people that haven't worried about this ever in their life.

All of a sudden, it makes it more likely. Statistically, I don't think either of us really have a strong view. Is it 5% more likely, 50? I don't know. - I went from 38 to 40. - More. - Why is the stock market up today, Ben, though? If people think the recession's more likely than- - The stock market priced in a recession last year.

I don't know if you've been- I don't know if anybody remembers 2022 anymore. - I mean, my portfolio didn't, but I know for a lot of people it did. - The last three years is the perfect example of why the stock market is not the economy. It's completely backwards some ways.

Sometimes it goes with it, sometimes it goes against it. The stock market thinks it's like eight steps ahead of the economy. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. I don't think you can use the stock market as a barometer of, are we going into a recession or not? 'Cause to Josh's point, what if we already priced it in and it's just waiting for it to happen?

If we see a recession, the stock market's gonna take off. I mean, that's the kind of thing where you can't use the stock market as a signal. - Listen, I wish there were a way I could just invest directly into GDP. Then all these experts on the economy would have like a vehicle they can, like, maybe Calshi does that, I don't know.

Like, can I just buy a share of GDP and stop worrying whether or not the stock market is pricing it in or not? - We should put together a pitch deck. That sounds like a company. - Yeah, we'll get Silicon Valley Bank to back us. - Oh, God. But I mean, this is also a great reminder that 14 days ago, we were worried that the economy was too strong and inflation was too hot.

And then this thing, just the Molotov cocktail gets thrown in through the window and all of a sudden we're worried about disinflation and a financial crisis and potential deflation. And those competing ideas, I think, this is one of those things where I don't know which one is gonna win out here.

- This guy on one of my shows last week was like, "This is the Fed getting what it wants." No. - Yeah, they did not- - I don't think so. - No, they did not want a- - I don't think so, sir. - Yes, they don't want trust in the financial system to all of a sudden go, that's not how they want inflation to come down.

Right, they were hoping higher interest rates would make some CEOs fire a few people. They were not hoping that, like, they'd be dealing with bank failures and being brought in front of Congress to explain why they didn't see this coming. - Right, exactly. I don't think so. Hey, this has been so much fun.

Thank you guys for letting me join in today. I'm a big fan. - We appreciate it. - I watch. - You're the first one who's ever come on here with a suit and tie, so you gave this show a lot of respectability today. - This is serious business. - It's true.

New "Compound" and "Friends" tomorrow, right? - Hell yeah. - Sure. - Yep. YouTube, anywhere you get your podcasts. Remember, if you have a question for us, askthecompoundshow@gmail.com. If you're listening in podcast form, leave us a review. Hit the like button. How many subscribers are we up to, Duncan? - 118,000.

- 120,000? - We're approaching 120. - Let's do it. All right. - Let's do it. - Any "Compound" merch, idontshop.com. Keep those comments and questions coming. Thanks to everyone who tuned in live. We'll see you next time. - Thanks, everyone. (upbeat music) (upbeat music) (upbeat music) (upbeat music) (upbeat music) (upbeat music) (upbeat music) (upbeat music)