Support for Pivot comes from Pendo. Pendo improves the apps your customers and employees rely on. Whether you're building applications for customers or managing applications for employees, Pendo can help deliver better experiences for your users so they can get more value from your software. Visit pendo. Io/pivot to learn more about how your team can use Pendo to start building better digital experiences. There, you can also check out Pendo's lineup of free certification courses, 12 hours of in-depth training for your product management teams on topics from AI to product analytics to product-led growth. That's pendo. Io/pivot to learn more.

Support for Pivot comes from Anthropic. Looking for an AI solution for your business? It might be time to check out the Clawd 3 family from Anthropic, your one-stop shop for enterprise AI.

Whether you're powering a customer chat experience, doing complex R&D, or need advanced analysis, Anthropic can help provide you with frontier intelligence.

Whether you're looking for speed, power, anything in between, the Clawd 3 Model family offers AI models for a variety of tasks and budgets. Join the thousands of enterprises who use Anthropic to navigate this new frontier. Visit Anthropic. Com/clawd, C-L-A-U-D-E.

Today, jumpstart your genius with Claude 3 by Anthropic.

Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Kara Swish Sure.

And I'm Scott Galloway.

I'm in Vegas. Where are you?

You're in Vegas?

Yeah, I got here at 1:00 in the morning. I'm leaving just as soon as I can.

What are you doing in Vegas? You're feeding your gambling habit again.

Feeding my gambling habit. Another book thing, a book related thing. Yeah, still on that best seller list, so I got to stay there.

Yeah, I've heard that about seven times a day in our little...

Yeah, I know.

No, it's fantastic.

It's very exciting. This is how you see. You're on everything. What are you talking about? You're on Rick Roll.

You're on Rich Roll. And by the way, I want to adopt that guy as my brother. That guy He has such a chill vibe about him.

He does. He is your guy, isn't he? Someday you're going to have that beard. I think you're going to have that beard.

I don't have a good scraff.

Really? Now, if you grew it forever. No?

Not like that. He's blessed. That guy is very handsome.

That means he's beerile, as they say. Beerile.

Yeah. He's got a really interesting story. He was an addict, and he was so grateful to the community that he's built a bit of a media company around some of the principles of recovery. Yeah. He's just so soulful and so sincere. He's really leaned in a podcasting. He has this beautiful studio in Agoura Hills, and he forces people to come out there. Oh, wow. But he does a great job. I think it's really interesting. He's built a nice business. He's been doing it for 12 years.

But you are everywhere. You're moving into the promiscuous stage of your book.

Okay, you've banged the whole football team, and you're accusing me of kissing more than one guy.

Yeah, that's true. Now, Scott, you're at the TED conference in Vancouver. How's it going?

Ted, I've never been here before. Ted is wonderful. It's easy to be cynical about it. First off, Vancouver is beautiful. It is.

What a great city.

I haven't been here in 20 years. Last time I was here, we were checking out retirement places for my mom to retire. We came to Vancouver. It is gorgeous.

It is indeed.

The people are just super nice. It's a nice vibe. I enjoyed the talks. I was more nervous yesterday before my talk than I have been in a while because I really like Chris Anderson, and he's very good at making me feel like you're going to make or break the conference. Oh, really? I said to him, They gave me 12 minutes, which they claimed was a long time. I said, I think I need 14 or 15. He looked me in the eyes and he's like, Is it great?

Oh, no.

I'm like, I think so. I hope so. He's like, Take as much time as you need as long as it's great. It's like, You're the anchor swimmer in the session. I was really nervous, but the talk went well and people are super nice.

Yeah, I heard people were lining up for you and not Bill Ackman. I've gotten reports from all my spies. They said you were very good.

Oh, thanks for that. Yeah, I spoke after Bill and after Barry Weiss. And also Andrew Yang. I was in this session called Provocateurs. Oh, dear. I'm like, We're not that provocative. We're more like milk tosters of provocation. We're not that provocative. And they had this scientist who lives in extraterrestrials who was a dorkable.

Oh, that guy. Yeah.

It's really not. I need to get out more. The only problem for me with going out in the public is that the public is there.

What did people come up and ask you about?

Well, okay, you know what's happening to me wherever I am? People are really generous and lovely. That's one of the things. I'm a glass half empty guy. People are so lovely in person that I can't get over how fucking cancerous and toxic online is. Because I would think that the world is just an awful place if I just looked at the comments around content online. People are so lovely in person. Whenever you speak, and if you do okay, people line up to meet you and be nice and get photos with you. Every time now this happens, someone comes up and they look around for dramatic pause, and then they have me sign your book. They think it's the funniest thing ever. They think it's the fun. They come up with a signature page open and a pen, and then they look around for dramatic effect, and then they turn it around. They're like, It's Cara's book.

That's Nice.

I'm just happy to be here. I'm having a wonderful time.

Good. I'm glad you're enjoying yourself.

We'll come to Ted together. I think you would love it here. They would love people.

I've been there a hundred. No, they will not have me on stage. I've been there since the beginning. I used to go in Richard Norman.

You said that about Bill Maher, and they keep inviting you back. I have never been invited to Ted. Never. Chris Anderson will hear this, and he will invite you to speak next year.

Doubtful. I will give you a doubtful Chris Anderson will not. We have a long history. I doubt it. Really?

I love Chris.

Yeah, I think he thought of us as a competitor at code. I don't know. He came to code. I'm happy. I spoke at a TEDx for sure, but that's organized by other... Well, never will he have me on stage there.

Tony, they do a great job. I know they do.

They do a great job. They do. There's a whole patented Ted patent thing.

I'd like to roll I'll do you in Vegas. I think it'll be funny.

I still think the White House is better for us. I think it's us going to White House.

I'm intimidated by the White House. All right. We'll come to Vegas. You can show me around the White House. I'll show you around Vegas.

We'll come to Vegas. I'm most interested in the really good restaurants here. I'm not interested in the.

I don't know the weirdest stage of my life, and this is a true story. When my mom was dying, my mom asked to die at home, and I said, Fine, I have some flexibility and economic security. I will move to Vegas, and I moved in with her. During the day, I managed her health care, and we watched Jeopardy, and everybody He loves Raymond. I look at old photos. It was actually a very rewarding, nice time in both of our lives. Then at night, I would go down to the strip, and I would get shitty drunk with strippers and a couple of guy friends I made. It was a very strange part of time in my life. Anyways, that's my Vegas story.

My memories of Asia Tony Shay coming here and talking to him about what he was doing.

Oh, he was building that community, right? Yeah.

And CES, of course, getting stuck here with CES forever.

I've been to CES once, and I didn't enjoy it.

My good friend, I brought One time, I'll do my Vegas story, I brought my friend Jennifer Beels, who did Flash dance. There's an actual game that you play.

Where they pour water all over you after a dance? I don't know.

It's a slot game, which she was horrified with, but I took a picture of her in front of it. But I kept telling people she was a tech executive Executive, and everyone believed it. I was like, Yeah, she works for eBay. She's a top executive of eBay. That's what I told.

That's funny.

Yeah, we had a good time.

I saw Casey in the Sunshine Band when I went to see us. That was almost worth it.

Okay. That's good. He puts on a great show. He puts on a great show. All right. Our Vegas Memories for Scott and Cara. Anyway, We've got a lot to get to today, including Tesla asking shareholders to reinstate Elon Musk's multibillion dollar pay package. We knew that was coming and moving to Texas from Delaware. And NPR becoming the latest company to face dissent in the newsroom. What a surprise. But first, the TikTok ban is back and might be fast-tracked through Congress this weekend. Oh, tricky little legislative moves. Speaker Mike Johnson, who seems to have found a spine a little bit, plans to bundle TikTok legislation into a package that includes aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. The vote is expected in the House on Saturday. If it passes, a package will go to the Senate for a vote and then head to President Biden. The bill would give TikTok parent company, ByteDance, 270 days to divest the app for a little longer. The President will also have an ability to issue a one-time, 90-day extension. It's an interesting strategy because it'll be hard for the Senate to peel it off. They certainly could, but they want to get this thing passed quickly, and I know Johnson certainly does.

The people in the Senate want these foreign bills to go through. He's under a lot of pressure from Marjorie Taylor-Green and the rest of the Yin-Yangs over there. What do you think? What an interesting legislative ploy to get it through faster.

Well, I'm very focused on a few things. One, I would like to see aid to Ukraine and Israel. I'd like to see us get our act together and support our allies and push back on autocrats and terrorism. Also, just to be fair, I could not be more different around policy than Speaker Johnson, but the speaker of the House is supposed to be largely an administrative, not a political position. I think you got to give the guy some credit. I think he's doing his level best to get shit done in the face of crazies who have figured out they have some leverage, so they are absolutely saying, I'm going to put my crazy on full display. It's like Senator Manchin was in the news a lot because he was the swing vote. You have these individuals who are really political opportunists. I like the fact that he's saying, Okay, kick me out. Fine. You want to put two or three bullets in the chamber and play Russian roulette? Fine. But all these fake threats about she said she was going to... She was filing to oust the speaker. I'm like, Yeah, let the Republicans go through that again.

So I hope this goes through. The TikTok ban, I'm actually very excited about this. I've said all along, the ban, I think, will be passed, and then they will come to some accommodation with the White House. This is an enormous, in my opinion, the best investment opportunity out there right now is to go buy shares in the secondary market of TikTok. Oh, interesting. Because It's trading, I think, in the private markets for about $220 billion. There's some hair on it because you can't sell your shares for a while. Or if you buy employee shares, I think there's some restrictions on it. But keep in mind, this is a platform that's ascending faster than Google or Meta has huge revenues, huge profits, global presence, and it's trading at a fifth of what Meta is trading at, and it's trading at an eighth of what Google is trading at because of this overhang of political uncertainty. I believe that will be lifted at some point. Anyways, I think it's super interesting. What are your thoughts?

I was surprised to see him on CNN last night, sounding like a Democrat or two nights ago. He's maybe decided he should govern and realizes that The right... Karl Rowe wrote an interesting amount of fan, but nonetheless, he wrote a piece about Russian disinformation amid the Republican Party. I think Johnson got in that memo in terms of this advantage is nobody but the Russians. There's so much talking points of Russia in the Congress on the right that it's disturbing. It's not even like the Manchurian candidate. They're just out and about. They didn't even have to take them to a place. They're just repeating it.

We're taking our own family hostage. Have you seen any of these hearings on the impeachment of Joe Biden? It's being run by the GRU. Their primary witness is a Russian spy.

Yeah. Also, I saw some of the outbursts in Congress. They at least come up with proof or shut up, and they just won't. They're just Comer, especially. What an idiot he is. I think he's going to probably be replaced, would be my guess, or he has to just stick with the Democrats is what he's found he's going to have to do. Who knows? Maybe Hakeem Jeffrey becomes speaker of this. I think they're going to lose the House in any way, so he'll be put out of his misery sooner than that if trends, lines are showing. It doesn't really matter. I suspect the Democrats will have a solid little majority, and they tend to stick together better and don't do this murderous stuff to each other. We'll see. Anyway, speaking of things that are totally unfair, college basketball star Kaitlyn Clarke is headed to the WNBA to play for the Indiana Fever. She's staying in the Midwest following this week's draft. Many are crying foul when it comes to what she'll be paid. Clarke is set to earn $338,000 over four years with a base salary of $76,000 for her first year, according to the WNBA's collective bargaining agreement.

The number one pick in last year's NBA draft got $55 million for your contract when he signed with the San Antonio Spurs. Wnba players have been fighting for pay equity for decades. Many play internationally in the offseason to supplement their income, as we saw with Brittany Griner. Caitlin Clarke has all sorts of scoring and viewership records. A lot of these women, very suddenly, they're really good numbers. Just the TV pay has not kept up. That said, some of the numbers, they're veering in on really heavy duty, should be paid more, but their TV deals are in place, and it is what it is. I think they only get 66 million versus a couple of billion. It just puts in into stark relief. This is an amazing generational player, and at the same time, a hugely attractive media asset for everybody, and she's getting bucked, but that's because of the way it was, not the way it should be or the way it will be.

Yeah, I don't think This is unfair. I do think it brings sharp relief into the fact that the WMBA, thus far, has not been a successful league financially. It does about 200 million in revenue. The WMBA does 10 billion. And above minimum wage, we decide that the marketplace is based on supply and demand. I don't think The connotation here is that there's some systemic sexism going on, and I just don't think that's true. I think the WMBA, to date, if you're upset about this, then start watching WMBA games, is what I tell people. And also, she will probably make several million dollars a year off the court for sponsorships. She could do for the WMBA what you and Bill Simmons and Joe Rogan did for podcasting. I think she is going to elevate the revenues of the league. She's bringing much needed attention in the WMBA. The bottom line is that WMBA MBA so far, Cara, has been a giant thought. As a result, they don't get any money, and they don't have the money to pay these folks. She's going to the highest bidder in this industry. With the current economics, the highest bidder is this.

Their numbers are getting very interesting the way they- They're getting better, much better. Agree. Very, and quite good, actually. Probably these TV deals will be better as people start to really like watching these things. They'll make more money. She's a bargain, like an amazing bargain. She'll make a ton of money, of course, on Nike or whatever the heck. She'll make a fortune with sponsorships.

A hundred %. She deserves it. She's a phenomenon.

I doubt she'll play internationally. Why damage herself? Why do that? She'll make plenty of money. I forget what she has, State Farm or whatever. She has a ton of sponsorships, and she'll get a ton more. It'll help the WMBA in that regard. You need players like Megan Rapino and her and others to call attention, because in that case, they were doing much better than the soccer man, in terms of everything, in terms of numbers, viewership, and the soccer man got paid more. I mean, that was a slightly different situation in this case, just better ratings. But the ratings are excellent, and we'll see where they go and if they can- Well, the under-18 Australian soccer team beat the women's soccer team in the US.

Should they get paid more?

No, but I'm talking about viewers. You're talking about just purely viewership. Megan Rapino is a star, and so she made more money. I mean, she should make more money. I agree. If the numbers are up, they're up. It doesn't matter of beating. That's It's a stupid comparison. I'm sorry.

The connotation is that there's something unfair here.

Oh, in the case of the soccer thing, it's a very different case.

I think you actually- I don't know. Are the revenues for women's soccer comparable to that?

Yes. I don't know that. Yes, much more so, and the numbers are higher and everything else. That was a very different situation in this. But hopefully, these numbers will go up, and we'll see where it goes. But congratulations to Kaitlyn Clarke. I hope she makes a ton of money from whatever advertiser. She's a very wholesome. She's funny. She's bringing in the numbers. It should benefit her over time.

It'll be interesting to see if her popularity and the massive increase... I mean, to me, the unfairness here is that college athletes aren't paid. All the old white guys at the NC2A and the coaches make millions, and the young, more non-white people on the floor generating tens of millions for their host institutions, we've decided that that's pure to not pay them. That is total bullshit. That really is unfair. I would agree.

You know I'm going to prove you no one for I'm for that. They should pay for what they make for these colleges.

And these colleges benefit. And there should be a free market to bid on them. There's a free market in the WMBA. What will be fascinating is to see if her incredible talent and popularity translates to the WMBA Because so far it hasn't with these stars. We'll see.

This is what you need, these players that bring interest. Soccer wasn't popular until it was, right? Kind of things in the United States, at least. In any case, speaking of things that aren't worth it, Trump media stock continues to plummet, but the company is already announcing its next venture, streaming. Tudu Social is launching a live TV streaming service, allegedly, to focus on content that has been canceled at the risk of cancelation is being suppressed. I wish some things were canceled. Trump Media says it tested the streaming Service on its web and iOS platforms for six months and has finished the research and development phase. The company stock was down 14% on Tuesday. It was already down like crazy. It's getting down into... It will be down into the sub $10 level very soon, I think, following the stream announced. I don't know. What are they just... The next thing, they're going to be an AI company, I guess. I don't know what to say. This is just not a company, people. As Barry Diller says, it's a scam. It's a scam to support former President Trump to give him money.

Yeah, I agree. They're going to go, What do they have? They have an exclusive on, quote, unquote, Donald Trump, his affiliation with it. They've created this weird vessel that people who support Donald Trump have decided to buy the stock and send it on a meme stock. I mean, even with an incredible drawdown on the stock price, the company still has a $4 million market cap on $4 million in revenue, so it's trading it a thousand times revenue. It really is crazy town. I'm not even sure they're ever going to do this. First off, okay, they have a lot of attention because he's constantly in the news every day. They have not shown any ability to run a business. I mean, think about all the goodwill they supposedly have. You think some of that would translate to conservative companies wanting to advertise? Some are good, yeah. We have a bigger business than TruSocial. Pivot is a much bigger business than TruSocial on revenues, and they're trading at 4 billion. So they don't have competent management. They don't have anything resembling a strong user base. And they're like, I know. Let's launch in another medium. And by the way, that medium is declining and struggling itself.

A news station does, I think they have fantastic talent. It's not like they've attracted a large viewership. So this is a difficult business. I'm not even sure they'll launch. I don't think they have the competence, the content. I think they're doing anything to try and say, Hey, look over here, we should be worth 4 billion.

It was down to $24 yesterday. It opened, and then now it's slightly up to 29. It's just their troops are trying to rally around Trump. There's huge declines, but everybody is going down. I'm sorry. There's been a lot of losses, so it's going to go back up again. But this is a Trump. He owns 60% of the shares, essentially. This is to help him. You can make a lot of move with just buying a small amount, and I suspect rich people will do that just for the loss leader. But if you're not wealthy, please don't do this yourself. You'll lose money. You've lost money and you'll lose more and you're a chump. Let the rich people do it to support them or the ones who have extra money if that's what they want to do. But you might as well throw your money into the trash can at this point.

But I think what DJT or Donald Trump media is about to become is, I've been thinking a lot about obesity and GOP1 drugs and how the virus that kills more people than COVID and how we ignore it because we have the industrial food complex that gets you addicted to shitty, salty, fatty food and then hands you over to the diabetes industrial complex. We've decided not to in any way, eliminate the presidential fitness awards, but tell people who have the fashion industrial complex say that people who are hugely overweight, that they're finding their truth. I think it's all about money. If you think about McDonald's, if you think about PepsiCo, there are companies for more than that. They're basically obesity indices. As obesity has skyrocket and gone from 5% morbid obesity to 9%, from 30% obesity to 40%, these stocks are up 8 and 12 fold over the last 20 or 30 years, and I believe they're going to crash as GLP-1 drugs help the most needy people in terms of body mass index. I think the same may end up happening here, and that is Donald DJT or True Social might end up becoming an index for Donald Trump's popularity or polls as we move into the election.

I think when he upticks, you're going to see the stock have a brief burst, and when he downticks, it'll come down. I think it's about to become an index for the polling.

Oh, interesting. That's an interesting thing. Well, look, if you don't have money, though, don't put your life savings into this. Even though I think you're probably a terrible heinous person. Don't throw your money at this if you're doing this for yourself. Anyway, please don't. Don't buy the shares if you cannot afford them. If you want to play games with Donald Trump, that's certainly your right. But it's not a company. It's not a company. Okay, let's get to our first big story. Tesla is asking its shareholders to reinstate that multibillion dollar compensation package for CEO Elon Musk, the one that was rejected by a Delaware judge as unfair earlier this year. The board says it still stands behind the pay package. Of course it does because they get paid. And that a vote in favor of it at the company's annual meeting would, restore Tesla's stockholder democracy. Again, but they're pulling in all the way. I can't believe First Amendment wasn't shoved in this statement. Shareholders shareholders will also be voting on Elon's plan to move Tesla's corporate home from Delaware, Texas. So it's moot, the Delaware decision. This is what they said they were going to do.

They will do it. He'll get his money back. They'll win on this one. Tesla shareholders very much like Trump, true social Although Tesla is an actual business, still will bid it up no matter what he does. So they want to pay him. Maybe he's worth it if the stock does well, if he can turn around and get better cars and get the economic prospects of Tesla doing well. He's certainly capable of compared to Donald Trump. But the argument seems to be they may not have been aware what was behind the creation of the pay package, but now they are. I think they will approve it. I think most people think they will. Just for people to be aware, Tesla's stock performance has been more than lackluster in 2024. The shares have lost 38% of their value so far. Elon's pay package was worth 56 billion in January. Now it's close to 45 billion. He is the key man in this thing at this point. It probably shouldn't be. He wanted voting control back in January. He'll get that, probably. It's his company to do with what he wills, what he wants to. I don't know.

It's capitalism. Nice to meet you.

I think that's right. I do think his pay package will be reinstated. The thing that Ashtal Atamono and my colleague at Stern pointed out that made a lot of sense to me is we see the headline number 56.45 billion. The delay, by the way, if he would exercise and sell all his shares, I don't know if he was planning to do that, it's costing 10 billion, even if it's But that's the headline number. But when they actually devised and awarded the compensation package, it was on options on stock when the stock was far below this. Meaning that if you valued his actual compensation package when the award was made, it was dramatically less than $45 billion. As much as I hate to in any way defend or acknowledge the point, he wasn't paid $45 billion. He was given options much much less than that. And because the stock skyrocketed, he's registered this enormous windfall. So I'm not sure it's entirely fair to say, should the board be paying him $45 billion? If Vox gave us, let's say $10 million worth of options, options that had a value of $10 million, and you value options based on their upside, potentially using the Black-Scholes method.

And then Vox's stock went up 10X. Our shares would probably be worth somewhere between $100 and 200 million. And people might say, Well, these podcasters aren't worth that. But that's not the number. You look at the initial compensation or value of the options when they were awarded. So I think it'll be reinstated. And I do think it's a little unfair to look at the headline number because what we're not taking into account is the fact that the stock skyrocketed after they were in the options.

Absolutely. Again, I think the point the Delaware Court was making is a good one. This board is in his pocket, and that's as many corporations are, FYI. They're particularly in his pocket. This board benefits from him. They party with them. It just shows corporate boards. This is a particularly very compromised one that will do his bidding. To me, that's the message here. I think the Delaware Court is right, and this terribly compromised board has every right to reward him because he's it. He's the one, he's the guy. Again, grotesque, certainly worth it. The stock has been up under his leadership, so they've all benefited. In this case, they've all done very well with whatever his antics may be. I do think they're facing a lot of challenges, as we've talked about, and I think we've borne out to be right, even though we got slapped by all the stands, which is let's look at the company itself. The product is tired. The toxic behavior is hurting the brand. There's competition, and it's a tough market. That's really what people should be looking at with this company more than anything else. The Delaware Court is 100% right.

They should go after every company. Often, it's I think this just happens to be the most egregious example of that, presumably.

But so far, year to date, Tesla is the worst performing stock in the S&P. Out of 500 stocks, it's the worst performing. Also, they had their biggest miss in terms of estimates for vehicle delivery. I think this stock has a long way to go down. They've laid off 10% of the workforce, which is probably the right move. But the hardest thing about being on a board, I find, and and more broadly, probably about management, is compensation. In this instance, it's, Okay, how do we try and justify the compensation here? What I do think this will have an impact on is I don't think he's going to be issued so many shares that he controls the company or a new class of shares. I think that this has basically sent a signal to the board that there is other governance, and you can't just do ridiculous things that are clearly off-market.

And they're benefiting. That second journal piece was so Like, revelatory what the fix is in for this guy. Again, he's done really well with the stock. I do not compliment Elon Musk, but the problem with this company is not that he has not paid enough. It has to do with the... Stop focusing on Twitter and focus on doing better cars. Actually, it doesn't even matter now because there's too much competition. There's too much consumer sentiment against him. It doesn't matter unless he comes out with the best car ever. No matter how many jazz hands he puts around, robo-taxis or anything else, I would be He's surprised if he can pull a rabbit out of a hat here. He had his time, and it's a good car, but there's lots of good cars now, and that's the way it is. This is so inevitable what's happened to him, and it's a business story rather than a Elon Musk story. Anyway, let's go on a quick break. We come back We'll talk about newsrooms facing challenges from within and take a listener mail question about the pros and cons of dual class shares. Very much in the news now with Paramount, the really weird stuff swirling around Paramount with all these complex deals.

Hey, everyone. This is Jesse David Fox, host of Good One, a podcast about jokes. I am proud to announce that I have personally won the Streaming Wars. And there's a new docu special on Peacock based on our own Vulture podcast. Good One, A Show About Jokes, follows Mike Berpiglia as he develops new material, taking audiences through the process of transforming personal stories into stand-up.

Featuring interviews with Mike's family and comedy colleagues like Seth Myers, Hasa Minaj, and Asko O'Katzka, Good one.

A show about jokes is streaming now only on Peacock. Support for Pivot comes from Green light. Things have obviously changed a lot since I was a kid. And one of the things that is great that has changed is today there are tools available to help parents teach their children lifelong financial literacy skills, including Greenlight. Greenlight is a debit card and money app made for families. Parents can send money to their kids and keep an eye on kids spending and saving, while kids and teens can build money confidence. In fact, we are a Greenlight family. That's the best endorsement I can give the product, and we were before they decided to support our podcast. With the Greenlight app, kids learn how to save, invest, and spend wisely, thanks to games that teach money skills in a fun, accessible way. Millions of parents and kids are learning about money on Greenlight. It's the easy, convenient way for parents to raise financially smart kids and families to navigate life together. Sign up for Greenlight today and get your first month free at greenlight. Com/pivot. That's greenlight. Com/ Pivot to try Greenlight for free. Greenlight. Com/pivot. Support for Pivot comes from Funrise.

You know the adage, buy low, sell high. It's easy to say and hard to do. For example, high interest rates are crushing the real estate market right now. Demand is dropping and prices are falling, even for many of the best assets. It's no wonder the Funrise Flagship fund plans to go on a buying spree, expanding its billion-dollar real estate portfolio over the next few months. You can add the Funrise Flagship fund to your portfolio in just minutes with as little as $10 by visiting fundrise. Com/pivot. Carefully consider the investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses of the Fundrise Flagship fund before investing. This and other information can be found in the fund's prospectus at fundrise. Com/flagship. This is a paid advertisement.

Scott, we're back with our second big story. An NPR employee has resigned in the aftermath of an essay he wrote, Accusing the Company of liberal Bias. Editor Uri Berliner was initially disciplined with a five-day suspension for not getting approval to write for another outlet. He's been going all over the place. He's more promiscuous than a Vegas madame in that regard.

I think you're projecting.

Whatever. I think you're projecting. Whatever. I wouldn't do this. He ultimately gave his notice saying, NPR CEO, Katherine Mar's divisa views confirmed the issues he cited in his essay, his sloppy essay, by the way, his sloppily edited essay. Npr management has pushed back against the criticism, and over 50 employees have sent a letter to NPR CEO and editor-in-chief asking for a public rebuke of the essay. I wish she had done this, too, because it's full of errors. Let's start with what happened in NPR and then want to talk to the bigger picture. I mean, he had a critique. He can have that critique. It is a fair critique that said, Full of errors, NPR Steve Inskeep, who I I would say, usually is a very good journalist, shared his reaction on Substack saying, My colleagues articles was filled with errors and omissions. Very easy to pick apart that, and I get it. I think the focus is on his critique. It's a liberal organization. Okay, Does that mean they can do their job or not? Does it mean, et cetera, et cetera? When you do a piece like this, you should get reaction. If you want to do this, if you actually pretend that you really care about the institution, I don't really know what this guy's game is in any way, except he sounds like a disgruntled, sloppy person.

But it's worked. It's worked, and it plays in the hands of the right, as always. They don't let facts get in the way of a good story. I think NPR should have been much more aggressive. Talk a little bit about your thoughts on this. Away from NPR as liberal, about this particular incident?

The bottom line is, Kira, I don't feel like I have the domain expertise you do here. The thing that strikes me is if it's national public radio, does that mean they're getting government funding?

Not very much. Not as much as you think.

Yeah, it's like, what is It's tiny.

I forget. I can look it up, but go ahead.

I've done- Yeah, Planned Parenthood or whatever. People don't realize they really don't get these organizations or they don't get as much money from the government as they should. I always thought PVS should just not take any government money, because when you do take government money, there is a legitimate claim that you're supposed to represent the United States, or you have some bonus to do that. If they're a fully private company, they can have whatever conservative or liberal bias that they want. I don't know if there's any veracity around this comments.

All right. So claims. Npr It receives very little direct federal funding. 1% of its budget comes from government grants, including from the Corporation of Public Broadcasting.

Why wouldn't they go to zero? That's what I'm getting. Because then they can just say, We can do whatever the fuck we want.

It receives Things come indirectly to it. The name itself feels like it does, right? It does in that way, but it doesn't... He said there are 87 to zero in the Democratic Party. That's not true. He pulled stuff like that. If you're a reporter, do your fucking reporting and tell us the actual numbers of people. That's what drives me crazy is what a sloppily edited piece. If you want to make these assertions and have these opinions, you grumpy piece of shit, do your job. That's my feeling. All right? Do your job. Steven Skipp has happened to be independent. Did he call Steven Skipp? Did he call for him?

I think you're being emotional.

I'm not being emotional. I am being emotional because I hate shitty reporters. I just hate shitty reporters. Great. I think it's Taylor made for the right wing ecosystem led by Chris Riffo to do its job. They found her. I hate Trump as a racist. And by the way, Trump is a racist, so it's factual. And by the way, if I'm head of NPR, I'm happy to say that out in public.

I love it. I absolutely love NPR. So more importantly, more importantly, because I find this boring, where are you staying in Vegas?

I'm staying at the Aria. But let me talk about the larger issue now. We're going to finish this discussion. I agree. I think this guy is going to be doing his book, angry, angry. He act like a victim when he quit. Whatever. Good luck. Good luck, Yuri. Be a better reporter. This is part of a larger trend of newsrooms and companies dealing with staffers who go public with their concerns. Google just fired 28 workers who participated in sit-ins to protest the company's cloud computing contract with Israel. That was interesting. It's not just about Israel and Gaza. Nbc had a rebellion with the Ronan McDaniel hiring. What is going on here? I mean, it's just all these workplaces. Again, we're back to a couple of years ago. Same thing, people having fields all all over the place.

What do you think about it? We had to put up with this shit when the labor market was tight in the tech market. These folks that are under the impression that this isn't the year of efficiencies, it's the year of, Oh, God, pretend that we care about their feelings. For me, this isn't an Israel issue. It's like, look, if you want to have a sit out or protest your own company and embarrass your own company, you're an at will employee. They might fire you. That's your right. But just keep in mind, it's their right to fire you.

Yeah, this is their statement, which I thought was interesting. Physically impeding other employees' work and preventing them from accessing our facilities is a clear violation of our policies and completely unacceptable behavior.

Okay, look, I ran small companies. If someone peacefully protested and made noise in the lobby about something we were doing, I'd be like, That's interesting. You've made a good point. You're fired. There are certain things you give up when you sign the backup checks and someone else is signing the front of them. The notion that you can be disruptive in any way or even embarrass the company, you might get fired.

Yeah.

I just don't on any issue.

Google is pretty strong here. It was interesting. They weren't before on other protests.

They don't need these people as bad. It's like, well, okay, there's a ton of people laid off from Metta and from all different tech companies. We don't need to put up with this childlike behavior of people who are under the impression there's more demand for them than there is. Also, to be fair, a lot of these CEOs of tech companies pretended to want to hear their feelings. Things about politics and said, Bring your whole self to work. Don't bring your whole self to work. Bring your skills to work. Create economic security for you and your family, and then protest on the weekends. If they do anything to get in the way of that, then they should be in trouble. Anyone showed up at one of my firms protesting about anything maybe I was vehemently in agreement with that was in any way a distraction, disruptive, or generally just made the firm look bad. Oh, my God, that would be an easy one. I would sit them down and say, I rarely mix pleasure in business, but you're fired.

I do support protests, but if you got in the way of people, it's their thing, just get another job if you disagree. You just get another job. That's what you have to do. I know you are all not going to like that point of view from the two of us, but that's the way it is, unfortunately. Okay, Scott, let's pivot to a listener question. The question comes from Diane. I'll read it. Hey, Scott and Cara. You came first for the first time. Longtime listener First-time Caller, I want to know about dual class shares. We know a lot about it, too. In light of what's going on with Sherry Redstone, Paramount, Apollo, and the resignation of board members, I don't understand why anyone would buy shares in a dual class system. If you can't fire Mark Zuckerberg, what's the point? With all the regulations and reporting to be a publicly traded company, how did this become a thing? Oh, that's a longer story. Thanks for taking my question, Scott. Keep telling the jokes. Most are eye rollers, but I still love them. And, Cara, you're obviously fabulous, but you do interrupt Scott a lot. Oh, my God.

No Diane, I'm going to give you the numbers. Email me, Cara.

That's volume of words, not interruptions.

All right, whatever. Because I have to because you won't stop talking. In any case, why don't you talk about... I will talk very briefly about dual-class shareholders in that many tech companies have them, but so does the New York Times. The reason it was put into place for the good part is so that venture capitalists or others couldn't take over and they could do what they wanted. It's a way to control the company with shares. Lots of companies have had them for a long, long time. A lot of people object to But people who go into these companies know it going in who's making the investment. In that regard, that's why they buy them, because it would be great to have invested in Facebook, even if Mark Zuckerberg can't be fired from a financial point of view. Scott, explain what's happening and specifically talk about what's happening with Sherry Redstone.

First off, I don't know if you know this, but I went to Vegas, Kiera, and I married my best friend. For some reason, my wife was pissed off about it. Anyway.

Thank you. Thank you. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. A little dad joke. Go ahead. Shecky Green, I think.

We're in Shecky. I'll be here all week. Try the veal. Okay. Look, brief history. The idea of a dual class shareholder company was originally initiated or justified by media companies, newspaper companies who said, We don't want the pressures of a shareholder coming in and pressuring our editorial viewpoint or coverage. You can rationalize it, but at the end of the day, it's for families that don't want economic control that is attached or detached from the risks they're willing to take with their own capital. Now, what changed everything is when Serge and Larry said, I know we want to pull the newspaper model and we want to have dual class shareholders, so we continue to control Google, even if we own less than 50%. It was a big battle And finally, because there was so much money and so much demand for Google stock that the investors agreed to it. And since then, it's gone absolutely batshit crazy. And every founder that now has a decent amount of leverage and a company looks to be well received in the market, Investors hold their nose and put up with a dual class shareholder structure. It is, generally speaking, a bad idea because it takes off, one, it's poor governance.

You can't fire Mark Zuckerberg. And two, it immediately soaks out the takeover premium. Because at some point, if a stock gets too low, someone can come in and buy the company or kick the CEO out. That's not true here. There are dual class shareholder companies everywhere. Richemont is dual class shareholder. Everyone, a lot of people in tech have adopted Now, having said that, having said that, if you actually look at the data, dual class shareholder company stocks have not underperformed single class. Why? Because typically speaking, the companies that are dual class shareholder are companies that are doing so well that the founders have a lot of control, and those companies have done really well. Case in point, Metta is dual class shareholder, and it has been an absolute screaming performer. I hate these things. I have direct experience with this. I raised $600 or $700 million to become the largest shareholder at the New York Times Company, got two of the five board seats awarded to the common shareholders, and basically what I figured out, and I knew this but I didn't know it, is that we weren't really a board. What we were was a board of advisors.

Then on any important issue, the Sulzbergers and the family would decide. For example, when we were raising $500 million during the '08 crisis, we ended up raising it from Carlos Slim. Why was it the cheapest source of capital that would be best for shareholders? No, it was because the Sulzbergers determined that Congress would never let a Mexican own the New York Times, so they weren't a threat to their ownership stake. We took money from a Mexican billionaire instead of many the billionaires in America that would have given us the money for less because the Sulzbergers were threatened by any domestic billionaire because they thought at the end of the day, you want to take over the company. I hate these things, but at the end of the day, they have not underperformed the market. But it is a weird whenever you separate economic risk from accountability and control, bad things happen.

I agree. The reason it's thought great is because Mark is doing great, a lot of the tech companies, but sometimes they just don't do great. In this case, Sherry Redstone, they've She's presided over since she took over from her father. The numbers have gone down precipitously at the company in terms of performance, in terms of value. She herself has lost billions of dollars in what it was worth and what it was worth now. She's put in a CEO that people are thinking has not run it well. Bob Backish, I think is that pronounced it. But she's still in the catbird seat, so she can reject. She's been canoodling with David Ellison, son of Larry Ellison, and they have this very... If you want to read the Backish and Forrest, Bill Cohen is, I think, doing the best job of what's happening here. It's a back and forth. They're doing all these convoluted where they buy... National Amusement, which she owns, owns the controlling stake in Paramount Global, I think. He's trying to buy that. Then Paramount Global will then turn around and buy his company, Skydance, which makes very successful movies like the Mission Impossible movies, Top Gun 2, stuff like that.

It'll buy it back. There'll be some recapitalization of some sort that looks like that or whatever, decapitalization. Larry Ellison is around hanging around the basket. Then David will take the shares in the movie company. They'll sell off a bunch of... They own a lot of ugly theaters. Meanwhile, there's another competing. There's very few people wanting to buy this, by the way, FYI. Apollo, which sees an opportunity, it's run by Mark Rowan, has made an offer, but she can reject that Apollo deal out of hand if she wants to. She's doing better with the David Ellison one, but if Apollo came up a little bit, it probably all things being equal. I think Bill is recommending the Apollo deal because it's a lot cleaner. Suddenly, Jeff Zucker is involved with Red Bird, with Cardinali, who runs that. It's all these people machinating, and the Apollo deal is pretty straightforward It's hard. Then there's another investor, Marco Ghebelli, who will probably sue. There's all kinds of people involved here. Do you want a messy one that Cheri does better on, or do you want a cleaner one where she doesn't do as well? But we'll probably remove the idea of lawsuits against it.

The third option, of course, is nothing happens, everybody walks away, and this company just gets bought and sold for parts at some point in the future. It's a bad example of a dual class shareholder, correct, Scott?

That's exactly right. This is an example of when things come off the track. When you're Google and everything's up and to the right, people will put up with a dual class shareholder structure because everyone is winning. It's champagne and cocaine for everybody. The problem is when shit gets real and the business is failing or the valuations are going down, because there's two things about the dual class shareholder structure that leak value from all shareholders to Sherry. First and foremost, what you said, she can just cross her arms and say, Yeah, it's a good deal. Maybe we're all going to get fucked, but I don't want to sell the company or I don't like the deal. So I can just cross my arms and despite owning less than 50%, just say no. Even worse than that, I would argue, is what she can do is she can hold a gun to the head of the buyer and say, Okay, you want to pay us $10 billion. I own 20%, so my stake should be $2 billion. Nope, I want more money. So the buyer might go, You know what? I don't care about the other 80 %.

So Sherry, I will pay $4 billion for your shares if you approve it, despite the fact that would be valuing the company at 20 billion, but the common shareholders only get valued at 10 billion. And that's what she's doing. She's saying, I don't give a shit. I'm not a fiduciary for the other 80 %. I want extra value for my shares to approve the deal, which is nothing but an additional $2 billion to her that all shareholders should be splitting. That spells shareholder lawsuit. Actually, the family that owns CondeNast did the exact same thing when selling a cable asset. They said, We're not going to approve the deal unless we get more. And the owners or For the new bidders, instead of having to pay double to everybody, they just have to pay double to Sherry. This is where it just comes off the tracks. More than anything, what this is a symptom of is the fact that this business just doesn't have the bidders that they were hoping based on the fact that this business is in structural decline.

Right, I would agree. I think if this was doing well, it would be very, very different, right? Correct?

100%. They'd all be fine.

We all like it when it's Mark Zuckerberg because it's doing well. He's doing a good job. Let me just read Bill just very quickly. If we're gaming this out there, and I must note a number of people around the sales process have suggested to me, half jokingly, that Puck should get a deal fee. Then I'm thinking the Apollo deal may be the best option after all. Again, not investment advice. Sure, it's not as exciting as the Ellison opportunity with all its bells and whistles and Jeffs. This would be Jeff Scheld and Jeff Sucker running the place, et cetera. And yes, Apollo is trying to buy Paramount at a low point, but as low as Paramount is trading right now, it can trade down further. Sherry would obviously refer the $2 billion that Ellison is offering over the roughly $1.25 billion that she stands to make an Apollo deal. But she will really risk letting a bird in the hand fly away. If Claire and Fiza, this is the independent directors, Nix, Jerry, and David, she'll He left with Backish and a publicly traded Paramount and a pick preferred at NIA, that's National Amusement. It's grown by 7.75% a year.

If I were sure, I would authorize Trott to start serious… That's her banker. To start serious negotiation with Impala to try the firm to raise its offer toward the Ellison Jerry territory. The plot thickens and it's getting nuttier than ever. You said you thought they'd split the baby here in some fashion. I haven't seen that yet.

Yeah, I just don't know. They're both... Ellison and Rowan and the guy who runs a media practice at Apollo, they're very smart, and they're not going to overpay for this thing. It's dysfunctional. But the thing is, it's hard to predict if someone's it's going to be rational or not. If she doesn't close with one of these two, it gets sold in 12 to 24 months for half the price now. It's not an asset that's going to grow right now in value. But I agree with you. I think Bill has done a great job, and I I think Puck should open an advisory business, which is a huge conflict. They should. Bill should.

They do in a lot of ways. Anyway, they do definitely take a side. Sometimes I don't agree with their things, but I think Bill has the most clear-headed vision of this. Anyway, if you've got a question of your own and you'd like answered, send it our way. Go to nymag. Com/pivot to submit a question for the show or call 8-5-5-5-1-pivot. Thank you, Diane. All right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be back for predictions.

Support for this show comes from Virgin Atlantic. Let's talk travel. Whether you're setting off on a business trip or taking that well-deserved summer vacation, we're always so focused to get into our destination that we forget to embrace the journey. Well, when you fly Virgin Atlantic, it serves as a reminder that a memorable trip begins right the moment you check in. That's why they offer loads of special touches to truly elevate your time in the sky, such as in-flight movies, music, TV, and podcasts that you actually can't wait to dive into. The snack bar that you can help yourself to at any time, and an iconically British high tea, high up in the clouds. They've got these little salt and pepper shakers that you're encouraged to pocket as your first souvenir. If you're feeling really fancy, how about a wine tasting experience at 38,000 feet? Really, we're just getting started From their brilliant next-level service to the food, the entertainment, the planes, the clubhouse, the crew, and so much more, these are just a few of the many special touches that make me love flying with Virgin Atlantic.

I do, I fly Virgin Atlantic a lot.

Check out virginadlantic. Com for your next trip to London and beyond, and see for yourself how traveling for business can always be a pleasure.

Hi, everyone. I'm Brené Brown, and this is Unlocking Us. In this podcast, we'll explore ideas, stories, experiences, research, books, films, music, anything that reflects the universal experiences of being human, from the bravest moments to our most broken-hearted moments. Some episodes will be conversations with the people who are teaching me, challenging me, confusing me, maybe ticking me off a little bit. Some days, I'll just talk directly to you about what I'm learning and how it's changing the way I think and feel. The first episodes are out now. We're going to do three or four-part series every so about 12 to 15 episodes a year. Unlocking Us will always drop on Wednesdays. And now you can find me wherever you normally listen to your podcast. You can get new episodes as soon as they are published by following Unlocking Us on your favorite podcast app. As always, stay awkward, brave, and kind.

Okay, Scott, I'm going to make a very short prediction before you make your prediction. Taylor Swift's album is coming out by the time this appears. I suspect it'll be out. Beyoncé's Cowboy Carter is killing it. It's number top. It's making money hand over fist. The women thing is still going.

I think it's systemic sexism against male country stars.

Women are better. It's just the facts. A Taylor Swift album is going to be gigantic if it's good. I think it will be good.

It doesn't matter if it's good.

Yes, it does. No, she suffers when it's not good.

It's going to be huge regardless.

It's going to be huge. But nonetheless, if it's good, it's going to be huge or huger. The Beyoncé album, same thing.

She could do a duet with Yoko Ohno and it would be triple platinum.

Critics be damned, but Beyoncé's thing is doing great. And by the way, I've listened to it a dozen times recently. Is it good? It's so good. It's so good. It's so fun. It's so interesting. And beyond the Texas Hold'em song, which is just infectious, there's so many good songs on that album. There's so many really interesting songs. Not all of them are country, but they all have a country feel. I get that particular criticism, but I don't give a fuck. It's a great album. And by the way, my wife, Amanda, who is a music editor and knows her way around music, at first thought Texas Hold'em wasn't all that. And now she's like, I was wrong. This is a fantastic song. It took a minute to really listen to it. But I think this Taylor Swift album is going to be a monster along with Beyoncé. The Ladies Prevail, once again, along with Caitlin Clarke. I think she's got lasting power, too, by the way, Scott.

Quite frankly, it's not a prediction if you're stating the obvious that the Taylor Swift album is going to be big. By the way, you'll like this story. Just a quick story. At the bar last night after the dinner for Ted, by the way, Chris Anderson is totally pimping me out. He asked me, I'm the entertainment at the media dinner last night.

You're very popular. This is my understanding, but go ahead.

Anyway, so I met this lovely young woman who works at, I think it's called Pivotal. It's Melinda Gates, a venture firm focusing on women-owned businesses. She came up to me. She's like, I like you. I love your talk. But I hate it when you interrupt Cara. I'm like, When I interrupt Cara? She said, Yeah, you interrupt her all the time. I'm like, Oh, people usually say that she interrupts me. But anyways, I thought you would like that story. I did. Okay, anyways. Prediction. I said this last week. If you look at Trump's become or Donald J. Trump media or True Social, whatever we're going to call it, it's become a meme stock. I do think that valuation is gravity. You can defy gravity for a little while. When Michael Jordan jumps from the foul, he does look as if, wow, this guy can defy gravity. At some point, even Michael Jordan comes down to Earth. Every meme stock has had its moment, and then ultimately it comes down to Earth. All of the meme stocks, AMC, Gamestop, all of them are off 90 plus % from their highs because they never made any sense. I think that might happen sooner rather than later here.

My prediction is that within the next 60 days, it's a a single-digit stock. I also think there's an outside chance this thing goes to $2 or $3 a share, that it lose 90 % from here. Because people, they may love Donald Trump, but I do think at the end of the day, they love their money more. Also, if you look I think it's Kahneman's work, it's really interesting.

This is Daniel Kahneman.

Daniel Kahneman, the behavioral economist who just passed away. One of his great breakthroughs was loss aversion theory. It's really fascinating. Actually, I read it a few years ago, and it's when I decided to cancel all of my insurance. By the way, I'm not recommending that. I can do it because I can absorb big losses. But essentially, the reason insurance is the best business in the world is that people would rather have a guaranteed series of losses, of small losses, than risk one big loss. We overestimate the likelihood of extraordinary events. So insurance taps into this behavioral flaw in the species, if you will. What I think is going to happen here is I do think when people, no matter how much they like Donald Trump, have to consistently look at something where every day they're losing or every week, 5, 10, 20% of their money. I do think that's painful, even if they like the guy. At some point, they're going to go, Am I the idiot in the room? It's like if you walk into a room and you can't figure out who the stupidest person in the room is, that means it's you.

I do think at some point people are going to go, even though they thought, I like the guy, I want to buy it, just the constant ping, the constant cut of, Okay, the $100,000, $10,000 I put into this thing, I lost $2,000 last week. I think as soon as people start to vacate from this thing and said, Okay, I did my best, you're going to see this thing return to Earth similar to AMC or Gamestop or any number of meme stocks. Anyway, my prediction, single digits within 60 days in a non-zero probability, it goes below five bucks a share in that time.

Yeah. Oh, wow. Okay. Again, it's just not a business. Let's just keep stressing that to people. Buyer beware, as they say. Okay, we've covered a lot today. Where are you going next?

Where's your next destination? I'm on a flight this afternoon to Orlando to speak to a large hedge fund. Then I go to New York for my book launch next week. Our good friend Stephanie Rule is hosting a book thing for me, and I'm going to be on... I'm horing myself out to every meeting. I'm doing a book event at Stern. Bradley Tusk has this lovely little bookstore on the Lower East Side. He's hosting a thing for me. I'm doing basically a book thing every day. And then I go to LA for Bill Maher, and then I go back to Florida for another hedge fund thing. The only people that can pay my speaking fees now are all these hedge funds. Hedge funds. And then I go, Then I go home to London. I'm crisscrossing across the great country of North America. By the way, Vancouver, third most expensive housing market in the world. Again, the rich want to weaponize government to make it more expensive for new entrants such as the value of the asset. They already own their own home skyrockets in value. Yet another transfer of wealth from the young to the old, Cara.

You're right. Although there was a good story in the journal about luxury housing prices being down quite significantly. Really?

Can you send me that? Well, also, the journal is doing a great job. They do. Just a quick shout out.

Okay, Scott, let me just say congratulations on your book launch. I'm very excited. We'll talk about it next week. We're going to focus on your book next week. It's going to be all about Scott and the things in your book. A few of my favorite thing. Yes. We're going to make We'll get a section where we're going to talk about what's in your book and what you tell me your advice, et cetera. I'll do a little interview with you. It'll be great. It looks great. I'm excited to read it, and both my kids are excited to read it.

I think all of that was true, except for the last part. I really don't think you're excited to read my book on financial security.

No, you're kidding? They read your book. Alex loves your books. I don't care. What do you think? They do. I wouldn't tell you if they didn't. In any case, that's the show. We'll be back on Tuesday with more, and let's wish Scott a wonderful book launch week.

Thank you, Cara. Today's show is produced by Lara Naiman Zoe Marcus, Travis Larchuck, and Taylor Griffin. Ernie and Ruta engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Burrows and Miel Saverio. By the way, my entire TED Talk was courtesy of Miel Saverio. Everyone is so impressed with my talk and how much time I put into it and all the data. The reality is I just show up, press play, get all the credit, and Mia does all the work. So thank you, Mia, and well done. Nishad Kurwa is Vox Media's executive producer of audio. Make sure you subscribe to the show wherever you listen to podcast. Thank you for listening to Pivot from New York magazine of Vox Media. You can subscribe to the magazine at nymag. Com/pod. We'll be back next week for another breakdown of all things tech and business. Hit the craps table and scream out, mommy needs new shoes.