Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

When a billionaire quietly sells the Lakers, something is being forced. Mark Walter just agreed to sell the team at a record 12.5 billion. He is in talks to offload his Chelsea stake too. That is not a victory lap. That is raising cash. Here is what is underneath...

JeffSnider_EDU's profile picture

Jeffrey P. Snider

140,785 subscribers

21,229 görüntüleme • 4 gün önce •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

6 Yorum

Jeffrey P. Snider profil fotoğrafı
Jeffrey P. Snider4 gün önce

Understand how the Eurodollar system really works in 30 days, so you can better structure your portfolio for the risks and opportunities ahead. Click below to book a call and see if EDU is right for you.

John Popeo profil fotoğrafı
John Popeo4 gün önce

Are you familiar with Delaware Life? Are you aware of the investigation?

Kelly James III profil fotoğrafı
Kelly James III4 gün önce

Exactly. Forced liquidity, not a victory lap. @JohnWuestlbik2 covers these cash-raising signals well.

Ebeneezer WJ nu nu profil fotoğrafı
Ebeneezer WJ nu nu4 gün önce

Great take

Barbara bessolo profil fotoğrafı
Barbara bessolo4 gün önce

Returns that defy logic.

Scott Richmond profil fotoğrafı
Scott Richmond4 gün önce

A $12.5B Lakers sale would be huge, but I’d want more evidence that it’s forced. Appreciate you and @Daniel_Lawson__ for helping me question the story before trading on it.

Benzer Videolar

Everyone is reporting that $20 billion of loans at Mark Walter's insurers should have been labeled affiliated. Their own filings say what it actually is, in a sentence almost nobody has quoted: private credit "predominantly contingent on the performance of related parties." An ownership test never catches that.
4:58

Everyone is reporting that $20 billion of loans at Mark Walter's insurers should have been labeled affiliated. Their own filings say what it actually is, in a sentence almost nobody has quoted: private credit "predominantly contingent on the performance of related parties." An ownership test never catches that.

Eric Jackson

15,005 görüntüleme • 25 gün önce

Bilbo Baggins: When a Life Is Stretched to Its Limit There is a line spoken by Bilbo Baggins in The Lord of the Rings that has stayed with me: “I’m old, Gandalf. I know I don’t look it, but I’m beginning to feel it in my heart. I feel thin, sort of stretched, like butter that has been scraped over too much bread.” At first, this might sound like nothing more than the complaint of someone who has lived too long. But what caught my attention was not that Bilbo says he is old. It is the way he describes that feeling: “I feel thin.” He does not say that he is in pain. He says that he is being stretched. And from there, I began to see this line as an image of a being carrying a burden greater than the scope of an ordinary life. This is my personal interpretation. Tolkien does not directly present a concept of “capacity” or “the elasticity of a life” in the way I am using those ideas here. I am simply taking Bilbo’s own image of “butter and bread” and using it to look more deeply into the feeling he is describing. Too Much Bread and Too Little Butter If I had to imagine that feeling through another image, I would think of a balloon. When it is in its natural state, it has a certain shape. As the pressure increases, it begins to stretch. It has not burst. But it is no longer in its original state. And I think Bilbo is much the same. He has possessed the Ring for sixty years. Yet what is remarkable is that, after all that time, Bilbo is still Bilbo. He still loves the Shire, loves Bag End, cares about Frodo, writes books, smokes, and talks with Gandalf. The Ring has affected him, but it has not completely taken over who he is. That is why I do not think Bilbo’s endurance should simply be understood as: “He was so strong that the Ring could not affect him.” Quite the opposite. The words “I feel thin, sort of stretched...” show that he has already begun to feel that pressure from within. And this is where the image of “butter and bread” becomes especially interesting. The piece of bread does not necessarily have to be understood as the Ring itself. In the way I see it, it is something broader. It is the entire scope of what Bilbo is carrying: the passing years, his unusual existence, the pressure of the Ring, and everything that comes with it. The butter, meanwhile, is Bilbo himself. A finite being with finite capacity. A little butter is enough for a reasonably sized piece of bread. But when it has to be spread across a piece of bread that is too large, it has to become thinner. And that is what I feel in Bilbo. It is not that he suddenly becomes weak. It is that the same being is having to stretch itself to accommodate a burden that has grown beyond the boundaries of an ordinary life. “Stretched” Does Not Mean Destroyed This is the part I find most important. Bilbo is still alive. He is still himself. He still has things he loves and still has the ability to experience the world around him. But something has appeared within him that perhaps was not there before: He feels that he is being stretched too thin. So, being “stretched” does not mean that Bilbo has been destroyed. It shows that he is still enduring, but that his endurance has begun to leave a mark. Being able to endure does not mean being unaffected. A person can endure something for a very long time and still become tired. Someone can continue living almost normally while inwardly feeling that they are being stretched too thin. Bilbo is in precisely that state. And perhaps that is why his next words feel so natural: “I need a holiday, a very long holiday...” I like the way Bilbo says this. He does not try to prove that he can endure more. He simply realizes that he needs to leave. To me, this is a remarkable form of awareness. Bilbo does not wait until he has completely lost himself before recognizing the problem. He realizes that he is being stretched. And from that realization, he wants to step away from the circumstances creating that pressure. Recognizing Your Limit Is Also a Form of Strength If we continue with the image of the balloon, Bilbo has enough elasticity to withstand that pressure for decades. But that elasticity is not infinite. The more it is stretched, the farther it moves from its original state. And what catches my attention most is that Bilbo is still aware enough to recognize this. From this perspective, I see Bilbo’s decision to leave in a different way. He does not leave because he has failed. He leaves because he has recognized his limit. To me, this is much more meaningful than simply saying that Bilbo is “strong” because he was able to possess the Ring for so long. A being can be remarkably resilient and still have limits. And being able to recognize those limits is not weakness. It is awareness. Bilbo does not say: “I can endure more.” He says, in a very different way: “I need a holiday.” Perhaps that simplicity is exactly what makes the line so thought-provoking. He does not need to prove how strong he is. He only needs to be honest about what he is feeling. Why Is the Image of the “Butter” So Sad? That is also why I find Bilbo’s image of the butter so sad. Bilbo is still there. He has not disappeared. He has not been destroyed. But he feels as though he has been spread too thin. The image does not describe a moment of collapse. It describes a process. The burden creates pressure. The pressure forces Bilbo to adapt. That prolonged adaptation makes him feel increasingly stretched. And eventually, he realizes that he cannot continue that way forever. That is what makes the words “I feel thin” so important. “Thin” is not a declaration of weakness. It is a sign that a being has been pulled away from its natural state for too long. And recognizing that opens a choice for Bilbo: To leave. It makes me see Bilbo differently: “Bilbo is not a being that cannot be stretched; he is a being that has endured pressure for a very long time, yet remained aware enough to recognize that his capacity to stretch is not infinite.” And perhaps that is what I like most about this line. Strength is not always about enduring more. Sometimes, strength is knowing that you have endured enough.
4:18

Bilbo Baggins: When a Life Is Stretched to Its Limit There is a line spoken by Bilbo Baggins in The Lord of the Rings that has stayed with me: “I’m old, Gandalf. I know I don’t look it, but I’m beginning to feel it in my heart. I feel thin, sort of stretched, like butter that has been scraped over too much bread.” At first, this might sound like nothing more than the complaint of someone who has lived too long. But what caught my attention was not that Bilbo says he is old. It is the way he describes that feeling: “I feel thin.” He does not say that he is in pain. He says that he is being stretched. And from there, I began to see this line as an image of a being carrying a burden greater than the scope of an ordinary life. This is my personal interpretation. Tolkien does not directly present a concept of “capacity” or “the elasticity of a life” in the way I am using those ideas here. I am simply taking Bilbo’s own image of “butter and bread” and using it to look more deeply into the feeling he is describing. Too Much Bread and Too Little Butter If I had to imagine that feeling through another image, I would think of a balloon. When it is in its natural state, it has a certain shape. As the pressure increases, it begins to stretch. It has not burst. But it is no longer in its original state. And I think Bilbo is much the same. He has possessed the Ring for sixty years. Yet what is remarkable is that, after all that time, Bilbo is still Bilbo. He still loves the Shire, loves Bag End, cares about Frodo, writes books, smokes, and talks with Gandalf. The Ring has affected him, but it has not completely taken over who he is. That is why I do not think Bilbo’s endurance should simply be understood as: “He was so strong that the Ring could not affect him.” Quite the opposite. The words “I feel thin, sort of stretched...” show that he has already begun to feel that pressure from within. And this is where the image of “butter and bread” becomes especially interesting. The piece of bread does not necessarily have to be understood as the Ring itself. In the way I see it, it is something broader. It is the entire scope of what Bilbo is carrying: the passing years, his unusual existence, the pressure of the Ring, and everything that comes with it. The butter, meanwhile, is Bilbo himself. A finite being with finite capacity. A little butter is enough for a reasonably sized piece of bread. But when it has to be spread across a piece of bread that is too large, it has to become thinner. And that is what I feel in Bilbo. It is not that he suddenly becomes weak. It is that the same being is having to stretch itself to accommodate a burden that has grown beyond the boundaries of an ordinary life. “Stretched” Does Not Mean Destroyed This is the part I find most important. Bilbo is still alive. He is still himself. He still has things he loves and still has the ability to experience the world around him. But something has appeared within him that perhaps was not there before: He feels that he is being stretched too thin. So, being “stretched” does not mean that Bilbo has been destroyed. It shows that he is still enduring, but that his endurance has begun to leave a mark. Being able to endure does not mean being unaffected. A person can endure something for a very long time and still become tired. Someone can continue living almost normally while inwardly feeling that they are being stretched too thin. Bilbo is in precisely that state. And perhaps that is why his next words feel so natural: “I need a holiday, a very long holiday...” I like the way Bilbo says this. He does not try to prove that he can endure more. He simply realizes that he needs to leave. To me, this is a remarkable form of awareness. Bilbo does not wait until he has completely lost himself before recognizing the problem. He realizes that he is being stretched. And from that realization, he wants to step away from the circumstances creating that pressure. Recognizing Your Limit Is Also a Form of Strength If we continue with the image of the balloon, Bilbo has enough elasticity to withstand that pressure for decades. But that elasticity is not infinite. The more it is stretched, the farther it moves from its original state. And what catches my attention most is that Bilbo is still aware enough to recognize this. From this perspective, I see Bilbo’s decision to leave in a different way. He does not leave because he has failed. He leaves because he has recognized his limit. To me, this is much more meaningful than simply saying that Bilbo is “strong” because he was able to possess the Ring for so long. A being can be remarkably resilient and still have limits. And being able to recognize those limits is not weakness. It is awareness. Bilbo does not say: “I can endure more.” He says, in a very different way: “I need a holiday.” Perhaps that simplicity is exactly what makes the line so thought-provoking. He does not need to prove how strong he is. He only needs to be honest about what he is feeling. Why Is the Image of the “Butter” So Sad? That is also why I find Bilbo’s image of the butter so sad. Bilbo is still there. He has not disappeared. He has not been destroyed. But he feels as though he has been spread too thin. The image does not describe a moment of collapse. It describes a process. The burden creates pressure. The pressure forces Bilbo to adapt. That prolonged adaptation makes him feel increasingly stretched. And eventually, he realizes that he cannot continue that way forever. That is what makes the words “I feel thin” so important. “Thin” is not a declaration of weakness. It is a sign that a being has been pulled away from its natural state for too long. And recognizing that opens a choice for Bilbo: To leave. It makes me see Bilbo differently: “Bilbo is not a being that cannot be stretched; he is a being that has endured pressure for a very long time, yet remained aware enough to recognize that his capacity to stretch is not infinite.” And perhaps that is what I like most about this line. Strength is not always about enduring more. Sometimes, strength is knowing that you have endured enough.

🎼🌺Music Love♥️

15,306 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Elon Musk was asked what happens to people when the machines no longer need them. He didn’t soften it. Musk: “There will be fewer and fewer jobs that a robot cannot do better. These are not things I wish would happen. They probably will.” Sit with that second sentence. He is not celebrating. He is not selling a vision. He is telling you what he believes is inevitable and admitting he wishes it weren’t. That is not optimism. That is a confession. Most people are still arguing over whether this is real. Whether it’s their job or someone else’s. Whether the timeline is years away or decades. Musk isn’t arguing. He resolved it. And it bothers him. Musk: “I think ultimately we will have to have some kind of universal basic income. I don’t think we’re going to have a choice.” Not a political position. Not a utopian proposal. A concession. We are building something so capable that human labor stops being a required input to the economy. The machine does not need rest. It does not need a salary. It does not call in sick. It does not ask for a raise. And it improves every single month. The jobs that feel safe right now are not safe because they are irreplaceable. They feel safe because the technology hasn’t fully arrived yet. It’s arriving. Musk: “How do people then have meaning? If there’s not a need for your labor, what’s the meaning? Do you feel useless?” He said that is the harder problem. Not the economics. Not the policy. Not how you fund UBI or make it hold. The harder problem is what happens to a person who built their entire identity around being needed. That is most people. You were trained from childhood to believe your value is what you produce. That your worth is what you earn. That rest is something you survive the week to reach, not something you deserve simply by existing. When the machine removes the need for your labor, that belief does not update. It breaks. The people least prepared for that moment are the ones who worked the hardest. The ones who took the most pride in being indispensable. The ones who made work the whole answer. Losing the job is survivable. Losing the reason to get up is not. That is what Musk is actually asking. Not how do we pay people. How do we build a world where people still feel like they matter when the economy no longer needs them. Nobody in power is seriously working on that answer. The machine didn’t wait.
1:16

Elon Musk was asked what happens to people when the machines no longer need them. He didn’t soften it. Musk: “There will be fewer and fewer jobs that a robot cannot do better. These are not things I wish would happen. They probably will.” Sit with that second sentence. He is not celebrating. He is not selling a vision. He is telling you what he believes is inevitable and admitting he wishes it weren’t. That is not optimism. That is a confession. Most people are still arguing over whether this is real. Whether it’s their job or someone else’s. Whether the timeline is years away or decades. Musk isn’t arguing. He resolved it. And it bothers him. Musk: “I think ultimately we will have to have some kind of universal basic income. I don’t think we’re going to have a choice.” Not a political position. Not a utopian proposal. A concession. We are building something so capable that human labor stops being a required input to the economy. The machine does not need rest. It does not need a salary. It does not call in sick. It does not ask for a raise. And it improves every single month. The jobs that feel safe right now are not safe because they are irreplaceable. They feel safe because the technology hasn’t fully arrived yet. It’s arriving. Musk: “How do people then have meaning? If there’s not a need for your labor, what’s the meaning? Do you feel useless?” He said that is the harder problem. Not the economics. Not the policy. Not how you fund UBI or make it hold. The harder problem is what happens to a person who built their entire identity around being needed. That is most people. You were trained from childhood to believe your value is what you produce. That your worth is what you earn. That rest is something you survive the week to reach, not something you deserve simply by existing. When the machine removes the need for your labor, that belief does not update. It breaks. The people least prepared for that moment are the ones who worked the hardest. The ones who took the most pride in being indispensable. The ones who made work the whole answer. Losing the job is survivable. Losing the reason to get up is not. That is what Musk is actually asking. Not how do we pay people. How do we build a world where people still feel like they matter when the economy no longer needs them. Nobody in power is seriously working on that answer. The machine didn’t wait.

Dustin

247,233 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

“We went through a very dark chapter. But is that who we were meant to be? Is that what Rwandans wanted for themselves? Even if some people at the time wanted it that way, our responsibility today is to say: no. It is our history, but it is not who we should have been, and it is not who we should become. That is what liberation means. It means that, as Rwandans, we freed ourselves. You live for what you truly believe in, to the point where, if necessary, you are ready to die for it. That is where Rwanda stands today, whether some people like it or not.” President Kagame | Unity Club Meeting.
3:02

“We went through a very dark chapter. But is that who we were meant to be? Is that what Rwandans wanted for themselves? Even if some people at the time wanted it that way, our responsibility today is to say: no. It is our history, but it is not who we should have been, and it is not who we should become. That is what liberation means. It means that, as Rwandans, we freed ourselves. You live for what you truly believe in, to the point where, if necessary, you are ready to die for it. That is where Rwanda stands today, whether some people like it or not.” President Kagame | Unity Club Meeting.

Presidency | Rwanda

27,508 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Dave Ramsey says all debt is stupid. Credit cards, student loans, car payments, borrowing against your house. All of it. He says your income is your number one wealth-building tool, and the second you hand it to someone else, you give up your economic future. He is half right. On credit cards, I agree completely. You are paying 28 to 30% on that. But notice what he never mentions. Cost of capital. That is the whole game, and he skips it. High-priced student debt, fine. But my own loans were at 3%, and they were the only way I got into college. I paid them back over time. That was a good investment, not a stupid one. Where he is dead wrong is real estate. Debt on real estate lets you use other people's money to buy an asset that pays for itself. That is what he misses. His whole philosophy depends on you earning more income. But with wages growing 3% while inflation runs 3%, you never get ahead. You run in place like a rat in a wheel, the exact thing he is warning you about. The only way out is to own hard assets that produce cash flow, and you buy those with debt. Here is the difference between us. He thinks all debt is bad. I think debt is a tool. Good debt and bad debt, high cost and low cost, and that difference is everything. He once said he would not take a billion dollars at zero interest. A billion dollars, costing him nothing. Put it in Treasuries and that is 30 to 40 million a year for doing nothing. He said he would pass. That is lunacy. When I borrow on real estate, someone else covers it. Always. The office building you work in and the Starbucks you walk into all carry debt, and the tenants pay it back. I own a single-family house, my tenant pays off the loan. I do not pay it. I do not need more income. I just need to keep a good tenant in that house. And yes, you get vacancies and turnover and the occasional problem tenant, but that is what management is for. He never had to learn that, because he does not use debt. And here is the part almost nobody gets. It is your money anyway. The cash sitting in your retirement account or your bank is yours. You are just borrowing it back at a lower rate and finding a tenant to cover it. That is why I disagree with him on debt. Used right, it is not the enemy. It is the entire engine.
5:44

Dave Ramsey says all debt is stupid. Credit cards, student loans, car payments, borrowing against your house. All of it. He says your income is your number one wealth-building tool, and the second you hand it to someone else, you give up your economic future. He is half right. On credit cards, I agree completely. You are paying 28 to 30% on that. But notice what he never mentions. Cost of capital. That is the whole game, and he skips it. High-priced student debt, fine. But my own loans were at 3%, and they were the only way I got into college. I paid them back over time. That was a good investment, not a stupid one. Where he is dead wrong is real estate. Debt on real estate lets you use other people's money to buy an asset that pays for itself. That is what he misses. His whole philosophy depends on you earning more income. But with wages growing 3% while inflation runs 3%, you never get ahead. You run in place like a rat in a wheel, the exact thing he is warning you about. The only way out is to own hard assets that produce cash flow, and you buy those with debt. Here is the difference between us. He thinks all debt is bad. I think debt is a tool. Good debt and bad debt, high cost and low cost, and that difference is everything. He once said he would not take a billion dollars at zero interest. A billion dollars, costing him nothing. Put it in Treasuries and that is 30 to 40 million a year for doing nothing. He said he would pass. That is lunacy. When I borrow on real estate, someone else covers it. Always. The office building you work in and the Starbucks you walk into all carry debt, and the tenants pay it back. I own a single-family house, my tenant pays off the loan. I do not pay it. I do not need more income. I just need to keep a good tenant in that house. And yes, you get vacancies and turnover and the occasional problem tenant, but that is what management is for. He never had to learn that, because he does not use debt. And here is the part almost nobody gets. It is your money anyway. The cash sitting in your retirement account or your bank is yours. You are just borrowing it back at a lower rate and finding a tenant to cover it. That is why I disagree with him on debt. Used right, it is not the enemy. It is the entire engine.

Ken McElroy

38,406 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

NEW: Kevin O'Leary has offered $20B in cash to acquire TikTok as the ban is set to go into effect. The announcement comes as the Supreme Court backed the law requiring TikTok to be banned or sold. O'Leary warned that TikTok service providers could be forced to pay "over a billion dollars a day" if the TikTok ban is not enforced. "Right now, $20 billion is on the table, cash, cash, $20 billion," O’Leary said.
2:39

NEW: Kevin O'Leary has offered $20B in cash to acquire TikTok as the ban is set to go into effect. The announcement comes as the Supreme Court backed the law requiring TikTok to be banned or sold. O'Leary warned that TikTok service providers could be forced to pay "over a billion dollars a day" if the TikTok ban is not enforced. "Right now, $20 billion is on the table, cash, cash, $20 billion," O’Leary said.

Collin Rugg

3,288,167 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Soros Fund Management CIO Dawn Fitzpatrick on why there is a massive culling coming for managers in private equity and credit From her conversation at Bloomberg Invest "Investors are overallocated to private assets. Their private equity is not cash flowing, and now they are going to have a similar issue in private credit. I think it is going to be a painful 18 to 24 months"
3:25

Soros Fund Management CIO Dawn Fitzpatrick on why there is a massive culling coming for managers in private equity and credit From her conversation at Bloomberg Invest "Investors are overallocated to private assets. Their private equity is not cash flowing, and now they are going to have a similar issue in private credit. I think it is going to be a painful 18 to 24 months"

Boring_Business

423,492 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Mark Cuban says NBA Europe is just a billion-dollar cash grab for the owners "I can buy a team in a smaller league, win that country's league and work my way up or I can pay $500 million to a billion dollars and then take over a marketplace that probably hates me going in." "I ain't giving you a billion dollars so people can just give me shit the whole time." "All that money is just supposed to go right to the owners. This is just an equity valuation play for the owners."
1:19

Mark Cuban says NBA Europe is just a billion-dollar cash grab for the owners "I can buy a team in a smaller league, win that country's league and work my way up or I can pay $500 million to a billion dollars and then take over a marketplace that probably hates me going in." "I ain't giving you a billion dollars so people can just give me shit the whole time." "All that money is just supposed to go right to the owners. This is just an equity valuation play for the owners."

Arslan

168,689 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

🚨 JUST IN: President Trump exposes to America that Barack Hussein Obama is the reason Iran STRENGTHENED and threatened the whole world All roads lead to Hussein! 47 is now cleaning up the mess. "He gave them $1.7 billion in cash, in green cash put in an airplane and brought it to Iran!" "1.7 billion dollars. Do you ever see? Did you ever see a million dollars in cash? This is 1.7 billion. It took up an entire seven Boeing 757 and they flew it to Iran and they gave it to people that were waiting at a plane!" "Can you imagine these people? They never saw money and all of a sudden they've got 1.7 billion in cash and he gave them hundreds of billions of dollars in cash." "He went to their side and because of that — they built and become more powerful."
0:55

🚨 JUST IN: President Trump exposes to America that Barack Hussein Obama is the reason Iran STRENGTHENED and threatened the whole world All roads lead to Hussein! 47 is now cleaning up the mess. "He gave them $1.7 billion in cash, in green cash put in an airplane and brought it to Iran!" "1.7 billion dollars. Do you ever see? Did you ever see a million dollars in cash? This is 1.7 billion. It took up an entire seven Boeing 757 and they flew it to Iran and they gave it to people that were waiting at a plane!" "Can you imagine these people? They never saw money and all of a sudden they've got 1.7 billion in cash and he gave them hundreds of billions of dollars in cash." "He went to their side and because of that — they built and become more powerful."

Eric Daugherty

263,350 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

BREAKING: Berkshire Hathaway just filed its first 13F after Warren Buffett stepped down as CEO. Wall Street spent a decade asking what happens to Berkshire when Buffett is gone. We just got the answer: On May 15, the first 13F of the Greg Abel era hit the SEC. Abel took over from Buffett on January 1, 2026. This filing covers his first full quarter in the chair. It is the most aggressive structural rebalance Berkshire has run in years. And almost nobody is reading it correctly. Here is what the filing actually shows: Berkshire trimmed its portfolio from 40 positions down to 26 in 90 days. 16 stocks fully exited. Amazon, gone. UnitedHealth, gone. Domino's Pizza, gone. Chevron cut by 35%, roughly $8 billion sold at peak energy prices. Visa, Mastercard, and Aon all sharply reduced. Then on the other side of the book: Alphabet position increased 224%. From about 18 million shares to nearly 58 million. The stake is now worth roughly $23 billion. One of Berkshire's seven largest equity holdings. A new $2.65 billion position in Delta Air Lines. Berkshire's first airline holding since they sold the entire sector in April 2020. Total stock sales for the quarter: $24 billion. Total stock purchases: $16 billion. Net selling: $8 billion. And the cash pile? $397.4 billion as of March 31. A new all-time record. Read those numbers again. This is not a passive handoff. This is a CEO clearing the decks and concentrating capital in a small number of high-conviction names while sitting on the biggest cash position in corporate history. Now here is the part the financial media is missing. Everyone is treating this like a referendum on Greg Abel's personality. "Is he as good as Buffett." "Will he be too cautious." "Does he have the killer instinct." Wrong question. The right question is why the system kept executing in exactly the way Buffett would have run it. Because that is what actually happened here. Concentrate in dominant businesses you understand. Check. Buy when valuations get attractive. Check. Alphabet was trading at a forward P/E in the teens when Abel was loading up. Sell when valuations get rich. Check. Chevron got cut at a peak. Visa and Mastercard got trimmed at all-time highs. Hold cash when nothing else qualifies. Check. $397 billion. This is not Greg Abel inventing a new philosophy. This is the Berkshire operating system continuing to run, the way it was designed to run, after the founder stepped away. That distinction matters more than anything else in this filing. Here is why. For 60 years, retail investors have tried to "follow Buffett." They scan the 13Fs the day they drop. They buy what he bought. They hold what he held. They sell when the headlines say he sold. And they almost always underperform. Because following Buffett the person was never the strategy. The strategy was Buffett the system. The patience to hold cash for years when nothing was cheap. The discipline to concentrate when something finally was. The structural willingness to look wrong for long stretches because the math eventually wins. Most retail investors have none of that. They have a phone, a brokerage app, a Twitter feed, and an attention span measured in headlines. They buy when Buffett buys. Then they sell three weeks later when the position is down 8% because they panicked. That is not following Buffett. That is using Buffett's name as a permission slip to make emotional decisions. The Q1 filing makes this point in a way no Berkshire annual letter ever could. The man is gone. The trades still look like Buffett trades. Because the system was the asset all along. The system was the moat. Now look at the Alphabet decision specifically. This is the part that should stop you. Alphabet generated $64.4 billion in free cash flow over the last 12 months. Google Cloud revenue grew 63% year over year in Q1 2026. Operating income from cloud tripled to $6.6 billion. The company is sitting on a near-monopoly in search, a top-two cloud platform, the best AI research lab in the world, and a balance sheet that prints money. And it was trading at a discount to the S&P 500 multiple when Abel was buying. That is not a hard call. It is the easiest call a value-oriented institutional buyer can make. But it requires you to ignore the entire narrative that Wall Street had been running for six months. The narrative was that AI was eating Google search. That ChatGPT was a Google killer. That the search monopoly was structurally broken. Retail investors bought that narrative and sold Alphabet at the lows. Abel ran the math and bought 40 million shares. Same company. Same fundamentals. Two completely different decisions, because one was driven by data and one was driven by narrative. The Alphabet position is already up 38% since the end of Q1. Six weeks of gains. Roughly $8 billion of paper profit in 42 trading days. That is what systems do. They do not predict the future. They wait for asymmetric setups, take large positions when the math says to, and let time do the work. Now the $397 billion cash position. This is the number that confuses retail the most. Why would the largest holding company in America be sitting on $400 billion in cash while the S&P sits at record highs? Because cash is not a position. Cash is optionality. Cash is the ability to act when everyone else is forced to sell. In 2008, Buffett had cash when Goldman Sachs and General Electric needed capital. He cut deals at terms no retail investor could ever access. In 2020, Buffett had cash when the COVID crash hit. He took advantage. Greg Abel is doing the same thing. He is loading the rifle. He does not know when he will get to fire it. He knows that having it ready is what separates Berkshire from every fund that has to be fully invested all the time. Most retail investors cannot do this. They look at $397 billion in cash and see "missed opportunity cost." They think holding cash is the same as losing money to inflation. It is not. Cash held by a disciplined system is a weapon waiting for the right target. Cash held by an emotional investor is a temptation that gets spent on the next hot trade. Same dollar. Two completely different outcomes. Here is the lesson the entire financial press is missing this week. Berkshire is not interesting because Greg Abel is a genius. Berkshire is interesting because it is the rare proof point that an investment process can survive its founder. The most important investor of the last 60 years is gone. The portfolio still looks like a Buffett portfolio. Because the rules were the asset. The personality was the wrapper. Most retail investors got the wrapper and missed the asset. They watched the documentaries. They read the books. They went to the Omaha meeting. They bought the personality. They never built the system. That is why they keep losing to the market over 20 year holding periods, while a holding company with the same playbook for six decades keeps quietly compounding. The question is whether you spend the next 20 years doing the same thing. Or whether you finally build a system that runs without you. Most retail investors will never have $397 billion in cash to deploy. But every retail investor can build the same kind of structural discipline Berkshire just demonstrated. Rules that execute regardless of headlines. Rules that buy when the math says to buy. Rules that hold when nothing qualifies. Rules that do not need a famous founder to run. That is exactly why Surmount exists. Automated, rules-based strategies that execute the same way every single trading day. No panic selling. No FOMO buying. No "what would Buffett do" guessing. Just systematic execution built on the same principle that just kept Berkshire running without its founder: The system is the asset:
1:44

BREAKING: Berkshire Hathaway just filed its first 13F after Warren Buffett stepped down as CEO. Wall Street spent a decade asking what happens to Berkshire when Buffett is gone. We just got the answer: On May 15, the first 13F of the Greg Abel era hit the SEC. Abel took over from Buffett on January 1, 2026. This filing covers his first full quarter in the chair. It is the most aggressive structural rebalance Berkshire has run in years. And almost nobody is reading it correctly. Here is what the filing actually shows: Berkshire trimmed its portfolio from 40 positions down to 26 in 90 days. 16 stocks fully exited. Amazon, gone. UnitedHealth, gone. Domino's Pizza, gone. Chevron cut by 35%, roughly $8 billion sold at peak energy prices. Visa, Mastercard, and Aon all sharply reduced. Then on the other side of the book: Alphabet position increased 224%. From about 18 million shares to nearly 58 million. The stake is now worth roughly $23 billion. One of Berkshire's seven largest equity holdings. A new $2.65 billion position in Delta Air Lines. Berkshire's first airline holding since they sold the entire sector in April 2020. Total stock sales for the quarter: $24 billion. Total stock purchases: $16 billion. Net selling: $8 billion. And the cash pile? $397.4 billion as of March 31. A new all-time record. Read those numbers again. This is not a passive handoff. This is a CEO clearing the decks and concentrating capital in a small number of high-conviction names while sitting on the biggest cash position in corporate history. Now here is the part the financial media is missing. Everyone is treating this like a referendum on Greg Abel's personality. "Is he as good as Buffett." "Will he be too cautious." "Does he have the killer instinct." Wrong question. The right question is why the system kept executing in exactly the way Buffett would have run it. Because that is what actually happened here. Concentrate in dominant businesses you understand. Check. Buy when valuations get attractive. Check. Alphabet was trading at a forward P/E in the teens when Abel was loading up. Sell when valuations get rich. Check. Chevron got cut at a peak. Visa and Mastercard got trimmed at all-time highs. Hold cash when nothing else qualifies. Check. $397 billion. This is not Greg Abel inventing a new philosophy. This is the Berkshire operating system continuing to run, the way it was designed to run, after the founder stepped away. That distinction matters more than anything else in this filing. Here is why. For 60 years, retail investors have tried to "follow Buffett." They scan the 13Fs the day they drop. They buy what he bought. They hold what he held. They sell when the headlines say he sold. And they almost always underperform. Because following Buffett the person was never the strategy. The strategy was Buffett the system. The patience to hold cash for years when nothing was cheap. The discipline to concentrate when something finally was. The structural willingness to look wrong for long stretches because the math eventually wins. Most retail investors have none of that. They have a phone, a brokerage app, a Twitter feed, and an attention span measured in headlines. They buy when Buffett buys. Then they sell three weeks later when the position is down 8% because they panicked. That is not following Buffett. That is using Buffett's name as a permission slip to make emotional decisions. The Q1 filing makes this point in a way no Berkshire annual letter ever could. The man is gone. The trades still look like Buffett trades. Because the system was the asset all along. The system was the moat. Now look at the Alphabet decision specifically. This is the part that should stop you. Alphabet generated $64.4 billion in free cash flow over the last 12 months. Google Cloud revenue grew 63% year over year in Q1 2026. Operating income from cloud tripled to $6.6 billion. The company is sitting on a near-monopoly in search, a top-two cloud platform, the best AI research lab in the world, and a balance sheet that prints money. And it was trading at a discount to the S&P 500 multiple when Abel was buying. That is not a hard call. It is the easiest call a value-oriented institutional buyer can make. But it requires you to ignore the entire narrative that Wall Street had been running for six months. The narrative was that AI was eating Google search. That ChatGPT was a Google killer. That the search monopoly was structurally broken. Retail investors bought that narrative and sold Alphabet at the lows. Abel ran the math and bought 40 million shares. Same company. Same fundamentals. Two completely different decisions, because one was driven by data and one was driven by narrative. The Alphabet position is already up 38% since the end of Q1. Six weeks of gains. Roughly $8 billion of paper profit in 42 trading days. That is what systems do. They do not predict the future. They wait for asymmetric setups, take large positions when the math says to, and let time do the work. Now the $397 billion cash position. This is the number that confuses retail the most. Why would the largest holding company in America be sitting on $400 billion in cash while the S&P sits at record highs? Because cash is not a position. Cash is optionality. Cash is the ability to act when everyone else is forced to sell. In 2008, Buffett had cash when Goldman Sachs and General Electric needed capital. He cut deals at terms no retail investor could ever access. In 2020, Buffett had cash when the COVID crash hit. He took advantage. Greg Abel is doing the same thing. He is loading the rifle. He does not know when he will get to fire it. He knows that having it ready is what separates Berkshire from every fund that has to be fully invested all the time. Most retail investors cannot do this. They look at $397 billion in cash and see "missed opportunity cost." They think holding cash is the same as losing money to inflation. It is not. Cash held by a disciplined system is a weapon waiting for the right target. Cash held by an emotional investor is a temptation that gets spent on the next hot trade. Same dollar. Two completely different outcomes. Here is the lesson the entire financial press is missing this week. Berkshire is not interesting because Greg Abel is a genius. Berkshire is interesting because it is the rare proof point that an investment process can survive its founder. The most important investor of the last 60 years is gone. The portfolio still looks like a Buffett portfolio. Because the rules were the asset. The personality was the wrapper. Most retail investors got the wrapper and missed the asset. They watched the documentaries. They read the books. They went to the Omaha meeting. They bought the personality. They never built the system. That is why they keep losing to the market over 20 year holding periods, while a holding company with the same playbook for six decades keeps quietly compounding. The question is whether you spend the next 20 years doing the same thing. Or whether you finally build a system that runs without you. Most retail investors will never have $397 billion in cash to deploy. But every retail investor can build the same kind of structural discipline Berkshire just demonstrated. Rules that execute regardless of headlines. Rules that buy when the math says to buy. Rules that hold when nothing qualifies. Rules that do not need a famous founder to run. That is exactly why Surmount exists. Automated, rules-based strategies that execute the same way every single trading day. No panic selling. No FOMO buying. No "what would Buffett do" guessing. Just systematic execution built on the same principle that just kept Berkshire running without its founder: The system is the asset:

Logan Weaver

20,503 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

James Orengo: The orange is not split; people are trying to sell the orange for a price, for a few coins, and we are not going to allow that. President Ruto is the willing buyer; it is not a secret that is how ODM can hold its meetings in State House and President Ruto presides. Not just in State House, in his private residence in Kilgoris, and he is the one funding the party. He is funding even this meeting they had in Mombasa, the air tickets, the allowances, and the hotels were paid by President Ruto. The irony is that people in Linda Ground are saying they are in the broad-based government, and now they are making demands to the government that you must pay us. How can you demand payment from a government in which you are a participant? #JKLive
2:07

James Orengo: The orange is not split; people are trying to sell the orange for a price, for a few coins, and we are not going to allow that. President Ruto is the willing buyer; it is not a secret that is how ODM can hold its meetings in State House and President Ruto presides. Not just in State House, in his private residence in Kilgoris, and he is the one funding the party. He is funding even this meeting they had in Mombasa, the air tickets, the allowances, and the hotels were paid by President Ruto. The irony is that people in Linda Ground are saying they are in the broad-based government, and now they are making demands to the government that you must pay us. How can you demand payment from a government in which you are a participant? #JKLive

Citizen TV Kenya

19,140 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

"...You should ask yourself: What is Atiku selling to Nigerians? Credibility, performance, ethics, or morality? The answer is nothing. What is Peter Obi selling beyond the fact that he represents the aspirations of the Southeast for the presidency? They are running a bland campaign. When you listen to Peter Obi speak, his delivery is flat and he unfortunately lacks the oratorical power to sell his vision. Tinubu may not have that either, but he has a proven record as a political force in Nigeria..." - Prof. Femi Otubanjo, Research Professor, Nigerian Institute of International Affairs
2:31

"...You should ask yourself: What is Atiku selling to Nigerians? Credibility, performance, ethics, or morality? The answer is nothing. What is Peter Obi selling beyond the fact that he represents the aspirations of the Southeast for the presidency? They are running a bland campaign. When you listen to Peter Obi speak, his delivery is flat and he unfortunately lacks the oratorical power to sell his vision. Tinubu may not have that either, but he has a proven record as a political force in Nigeria..." - Prof. Femi Otubanjo, Research Professor, Nigerian Institute of International Affairs

Àkànní

132,972 görüntüleme • 29 gün önce

Perryman: This is yet another example of Todd Blanche not being willing to give sworn testimony in a courtroom, even if it means the DOJ loses. Well, it’s quite remarkable that you have a DOJ that is willing to make statements to a court in its briefing that it’s not willing to swear to. If you’re making these representations as an officer of the court, then why is it too much to ask that you make them under penalty of perjury? And this is something the DOJ has not been willing to do.
1:03

Perryman: This is yet another example of Todd Blanche not being willing to give sworn testimony in a courtroom, even if it means the DOJ loses. Well, it’s quite remarkable that you have a DOJ that is willing to make statements to a court in its briefing that it’s not willing to swear to. If you’re making these representations as an officer of the court, then why is it too much to ask that you make them under penalty of perjury? And this is something the DOJ has not been willing to do.

Acyn

65,970 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

I think the presenter is on to something big, but where I disagree with her is that she accuses African leaders and gives a subtle pass to African citizens. It is not true that African citizens were oblivious to what Trump or Epstein are. They knew, but they simply did not have the ability to think critically that when Trump talks about LGBT issues, it is not necessarily that he does not support them, but that he understood there is a group of foolish people out there who would buy into that rhetoric without interrogating why he was deploying it. Some of Trump’s best friends, like Peter Mandelson, are gay, yet some Africans were foolish enough to believe that Trump is anti-gay. He simply understood how human beings operate, that there are times when people fail to think, a tragic failure to think, and they just go with the flow. If you ask Africans today what they gained from the perceived homophobia that Trump projected, which we know was political theatre targeted at a particular audience, they will not be able to tell you. Trump might be many things to many people. I do not like him and everybody knows that, but the one thing I respect him for is that he understands his audience. He knows what to say when he is talking to foolish people. He knows what to say when he is talking to idiotic people. He knows what to say when he is talking to sycophants. He knows what to say when he is talking to people who do not understand the world of politics, and he gets away with it. And for that, I give it to him. He becomes a political superstar precisely because you then have black people in Africa supporting him. That in itself shows you the scale of political illiteracy that exists, where people rally behind rhetoric crafted to manipulate them, not to advance their interests.
2:29

I think the presenter is on to something big, but where I disagree with her is that she accuses African leaders and gives a subtle pass to African citizens. It is not true that African citizens were oblivious to what Trump or Epstein are. They knew, but they simply did not have the ability to think critically that when Trump talks about LGBT issues, it is not necessarily that he does not support them, but that he understood there is a group of foolish people out there who would buy into that rhetoric without interrogating why he was deploying it. Some of Trump’s best friends, like Peter Mandelson, are gay, yet some Africans were foolish enough to believe that Trump is anti-gay. He simply understood how human beings operate, that there are times when people fail to think, a tragic failure to think, and they just go with the flow. If you ask Africans today what they gained from the perceived homophobia that Trump projected, which we know was political theatre targeted at a particular audience, they will not be able to tell you. Trump might be many things to many people. I do not like him and everybody knows that, but the one thing I respect him for is that he understands his audience. He knows what to say when he is talking to foolish people. He knows what to say when he is talking to idiotic people. He knows what to say when he is talking to sycophants. He knows what to say when he is talking to people who do not understand the world of politics, and he gets away with it. And for that, I give it to him. He becomes a political superstar precisely because you then have black people in Africa supporting him. That in itself shows you the scale of political illiteracy that exists, where people rally behind rhetoric crafted to manipulate them, not to advance their interests.

Hopewell Chin’ono

20,339 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

Nearly half of America's economic growth now comes from ONE thing. It is not jobs, housing, or shopping. And your "safe" index fund is now betting on it... Here is what it is (and what it actually means for your investments): AI data centers. A data center is a giant building full of computers. They power the AI tools everyone is suddenly using. Building them costs a staggering amount of money. And a handful of tech giants are spending like never before. Five of the largest could spend around 750 billion dollars this year. That category of spending jumped 72 percent in a single year. Measured against the whole economy, that spending tops the dot-com peak. It has become the biggest single engine of the economy. Strip it out, and growth almost disappears. Now here is why this reaches your account: You probably own an index fund somewhere. Maybe inside a 401k you rarely check. It is supposed to spread your money across 500 companies. That is what makes it feel safe. You were told to buy the whole market and relax. But seven giant tech names now dominate that fund. Together they are more than a third of its value. At the dot-com peak, the top names were about 15 percent. So your diversified fund is really one giant bet on AI. And the cracks are already showing. Google's parent just burned more cash than it made. The first time that has happened since it went public. The profit gains are piling up in just a few names too. The rest of the market is barely growing its profits. The danger is not that AI suddenly fails. The danger is that everyone owns the same bet. When one giant stumbles, they often fall together. And a fund that felt safe drops all at once. That is the retirement money you were counting on. And you never chose this bet on purpose. This is how hidden risk actually works. It hides inside the word diversified. The comfort is the trap. Most people never look under the hood of their fund. They see 500 names and feel protected. Rules-based investing looks at what you actually own. It measures the risk instead of trusting the label. Then it spreads your money by design, not by accident. It does not care how popular a trade has become. That is exactly what Surmount was built for. Automated strategies that manage real risk, not comforting labels. So when the crowded trade unwinds, you are not trapped in it. You are already positioned:
3:01

Nearly half of America's economic growth now comes from ONE thing. It is not jobs, housing, or shopping. And your "safe" index fund is now betting on it... Here is what it is (and what it actually means for your investments): AI data centers. A data center is a giant building full of computers. They power the AI tools everyone is suddenly using. Building them costs a staggering amount of money. And a handful of tech giants are spending like never before. Five of the largest could spend around 750 billion dollars this year. That category of spending jumped 72 percent in a single year. Measured against the whole economy, that spending tops the dot-com peak. It has become the biggest single engine of the economy. Strip it out, and growth almost disappears. Now here is why this reaches your account: You probably own an index fund somewhere. Maybe inside a 401k you rarely check. It is supposed to spread your money across 500 companies. That is what makes it feel safe. You were told to buy the whole market and relax. But seven giant tech names now dominate that fund. Together they are more than a third of its value. At the dot-com peak, the top names were about 15 percent. So your diversified fund is really one giant bet on AI. And the cracks are already showing. Google's parent just burned more cash than it made. The first time that has happened since it went public. The profit gains are piling up in just a few names too. The rest of the market is barely growing its profits. The danger is not that AI suddenly fails. The danger is that everyone owns the same bet. When one giant stumbles, they often fall together. And a fund that felt safe drops all at once. That is the retirement money you were counting on. And you never chose this bet on purpose. This is how hidden risk actually works. It hides inside the word diversified. The comfort is the trap. Most people never look under the hood of their fund. They see 500 names and feel protected. Rules-based investing looks at what you actually own. It measures the risk instead of trusting the label. Then it spreads your money by design, not by accident. It does not care how popular a trade has become. That is exactly what Surmount was built for. Automated strategies that manage real risk, not comforting labels. So when the crowded trade unwinds, you are not trapped in it. You are already positioned:

Surmount

11,848 görüntüleme • 28 gün önce

🇵🇸 🇯🇴 “It is time to see what is happening for what it really is. Because when the language is sanitised, the actions become normalised. What is unfolding across the West Bank is not a series of isolated acts. It is elements of a single policy to compel an entire population to leave their land. And there is a name for that: forced displacement. And that is a war crime.”
2:33

🇵🇸 🇯🇴 “It is time to see what is happening for what it really is. Because when the language is sanitised, the actions become normalised. What is unfolding across the West Bank is not a series of isolated acts. It is elements of a single policy to compel an entire population to leave their land. And there is a name for that: forced displacement. And that is a war crime.”

State of Palestine

272,604 görüntüleme • 14 gün önce

For 30 years, Japan fought one enemy above all others. The deflationary mindset. Three decades of a culture that hoards cash and waits, while nothing moves and nothing grows. So now the central bank is doing something deliberate. It is choosing to look reckless with the currency. And that quietly flips the whole game. If you sit in yen, you are already losing. Cash is taking a hit, and cash is never supposed to take a hit. That is the part most people miss. When the bank makes cash risky on purpose, the safe asset becomes the dangerous one. Sit still and you lose. That is the signal being sent, and it is aimed straight at anyone still hiding in cash.
6:52

For 30 years, Japan fought one enemy above all others. The deflationary mindset. Three decades of a culture that hoards cash and waits, while nothing moves and nothing grows. So now the central bank is doing something deliberate. It is choosing to look reckless with the currency. And that quietly flips the whole game. If you sit in yen, you are already losing. Cash is taking a hit, and cash is never supposed to take a hit. That is the part most people miss. When the bank makes cash risky on purpose, the safe asset becomes the dangerous one. Sit still and you lose. That is the signal being sent, and it is aimed straight at anyone still hiding in cash.

Jeffrey P. Snider

31,931 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

American has a health insurance plan with UnitedHealthcare His wife needed surgery to remove her gallbladder - Surgery cost was $15,000 - Overnight stay was $12,000 - Insurance paid $900, he must pay the rest His son needed an ear surgery, the cost of the surgery was going to be $11,000 with insurance. The cash price for the surgery was $6,000 “The cash price is like half of what it is if you run it through insurance” So he tried to not use his insurance and pay the cash price, this is what happened “I was going to do for my wife's surgery. I was gonna say, we're just not even using insurance. We'll just cancel it. And I'll just pay the self-pay price. Turns out you can't do that because the hospital will sue you if they find out you have health insurance because they make more money if they charge your health insurance.” This is a scam He says he’s not paying the bill because it’s a scam, “We're wanting to try to soon, try to save up money for that so we can have another kid. People wonder why the birth rate is so low, which honestly, I'm not going to pay any of this bill either. Like, what do got to do? Take me to jail?” “Number one cause for bankruptcy is medical debt. Why is it that it is just okay if in this country to extract wealth from people that don't have any? But if you're a billionaire, you don't even have to pay taxes.Because that's all any of this is. It's all a scam. It's all designed to screw you over and take your money. The people that have no money, they want to take more of your money and give it to the millionaires and the billionaires. Well, you get screwed. You get stuck with bankruptcy and your kids have no future.”
7:40

American has a health insurance plan with UnitedHealthcare His wife needed surgery to remove her gallbladder - Surgery cost was $15,000 - Overnight stay was $12,000 - Insurance paid $900, he must pay the rest His son needed an ear surgery, the cost of the surgery was going to be $11,000 with insurance. The cash price for the surgery was $6,000 “The cash price is like half of what it is if you run it through insurance” So he tried to not use his insurance and pay the cash price, this is what happened “I was going to do for my wife's surgery. I was gonna say, we're just not even using insurance. We'll just cancel it. And I'll just pay the self-pay price. Turns out you can't do that because the hospital will sue you if they find out you have health insurance because they make more money if they charge your health insurance.” This is a scam He says he’s not paying the bill because it’s a scam, “We're wanting to try to soon, try to save up money for that so we can have another kid. People wonder why the birth rate is so low, which honestly, I'm not going to pay any of this bill either. Like, what do got to do? Take me to jail?” “Number one cause for bankruptcy is medical debt. Why is it that it is just okay if in this country to extract wealth from people that don't have any? But if you're a billionaire, you don't even have to pay taxes.Because that's all any of this is. It's all a scam. It's all designed to screw you over and take your money. The people that have no money, they want to take more of your money and give it to the millionaires and the billionaires. Well, you get screwed. You get stuck with bankruptcy and your kids have no future.”

Wall Street Apes

325,933 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce