14:17
Hello and welcome back to Equity Techrunch's flagship podcast about the business of startups. I'm Kirsten Corsac, transportation editor here at TechCrunch and I'm joined as always by our weekend editor Anthony Ha and senior reporter Sean Ocaine. I'm wondering if you have watched Obsession or Back Rooms. I have seen Obsession and I am hoping to see back rooms this weekend. And I think the reason that you're mentioning them is because those were the two biggest movies last weekend at the box office and they were both directed by people who first made their names on YouTube. Movie Time is a pretty hard one to line up with a 5-year-old uh when you require a babysitter to get out for a
few hours. I haven't so I haven't seen either of them. I will say uh boy the YouTube ad rev share must be so low these days that you have to go out and make a movie to make some money. I think I mean it's interesting because um well for a variety of reasons but you know I was trying to describe this to my wife a couple of days ago and she was like wait YouTubers you mean like guys who just like you know like do essentially I guess what we're doing now except for a much bigger audience on YouTube and no um it's people who use YouTube as a distribution mechanism for stuff that kind of looks more like traditional film making like I mean backrooms started as sort of like a short film on YouTube that was like almost like a special effects demo real
had this kind of real retro vibe. The director of Obsession, Curry Barker, also like posted like a 60minute horror film, like found footage horror film on YouTube. So, it's not what we would think of as kind of typical YouTube, but just people who like found it an easy way to like get their, you know, early film making efforts out to a wide audience. The logical end state here clearly is YouTube buying a bunch of aliling movie theaters, creating its own movie studio, and locking these creators into 10 film deals. And uh and we find ourselves back in the early 1900s Hollywood.
Uh that is the true horror film. Thank you for that scary look into the future. We should get into the rest of the show today. We have deals from a climate fund from Gigascale and rocket engine startup Impulse. Then we're going to get into talking about AI scale versus governance and the culture shift towards in real life interactions. So let's get started with the first deal. And I love the headline that uh one of our reporters had. Zigging when most are zagging ex meta CTO raises $250 million climate fund. everyone is not investing in climate right now. And so I thought it was pretty cool and interesting that they raised so much money.
My reaction to this when Tim Dashant was, you know, first writing about this the other day was sort of like, you know, a little bit of surprise. It's it's hard to imagine a ton of money going into a new climate fund these days in particular one that is being sort of specific about that. you know, we've seen a kind of rebranding of sorts of like quote unquote climate tech over the last year or two to like resilience tech or, you know, throw in other buzzwords there. So, you know, I found it interesting that this was more specifically angled at that we're dealing with a fund that's going to be sort of investing in energy generation, critical minerals. I mean in some respects that's not surprising because
there is so much action on that end both in the private sector and coming from you know support with the from the federal government. So like you know it makes some sense but it was a little bit of a surprise and uh to see in 2026 I'm going to say that I'm not surprised because there's so much interest in activity around data centers and then the energy and power and questions about grid infrastructure as well as critical minerals. So, I'm going to take the opposing view on there. Um, I think that more funds should be raising money and putting money towards these types of energy generation and to support um the type of infrastructure that is actually depleting water and natural resources
and you know causes some real questions. Yeah, I think it's also telling that, you know, even though it seems like this is sort of unapologetically a climate fund, I think the sort of the tagline is not climate the tagline is like um the physical economy and so even there's some effort to rebrand a little bit. So because I do think there is a certain amount of investor resistance to the idea of climate tech right now. Um, which to your point, you know, Kirsten, it is like seems a little off because the energy needs are only growing right now and it's, you know, frankly kind of horrifying to see like how, you know, these like massive, you know, natural gas projects to fund data centers and
and it just seems obvious that like the necessity for like clean energy is only going to grow. But I, you know, that's it's one thing to understand that in the abstract, one thing to raise $250 million to fund that. So I found this very encouraging. I think that moments like this when so much money is being piled into sort of the data center piece, there is real opportunities there. And you know, I'll probably be wrong, but I do think and I sort of hope that there are some other investors out there that see the opportunity to invest in climate tech as a result of so much growth around AI. It doesn't mean that you have to pile all of your money into AI. you can put your money elsewhere in support of you know the extreme power
um grab that is necessary to support you know training models and inference and just sort of the use cases around data centers. I also wonder to what extent, you know, because investing not in every AI startup, but in certain kinds of AI and certainly some of the big companies that we're going to be talking about later in this episode, it involves like to a certain extent a kind of like uh comfort with like real serious capital expenditures, you know, a degree of patience and all these things that I think made climate tech scary in the past that maybe like the idea of okay, like putting, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars were more into like, you know, solar farms and things like
that. Like something like, oh, well, that doesn't seem quite as like hard to swallow as it did maybe a decade ago. Well, I think that we want to talk about something other than climate tech, which is rocket engine startup Impulse. This is a company that just raised 500 million. And again, this was another headline that really caught my eye because, you know, when we see these big raises, I think we're very much used to on this show and for our listening audience to see stories that generally it means that they're related to AI, maybe defense tech, and they're spending on things like compute, but this CEO and founder went out of their way to talk about how they're going to be hiring people.
Yeah, this is impulse space. They're one of a number of I mean there are a lot of companies out there that are founded by former SpaceX people but uh in particular there are a handful of them from very early SpaceX employees. This one is from Tom Mueller and you know they're doing a couple different things which I feel like is interesting. You know, there are companies out there like Stoke Space or, you know, to a certain extent, you know, Rocket Lab that are trying to like directly compete with SpaceX uh and others in, you know, in the sort of space launch world. Uh Impulse Space is trying a couple different things. One of the most interesting things I think they're doing is uh they have a sort of a spacecraft
that would kind of like shuttle payloads to higher orbits. So, like you could, you know, you're basically using less fuel and spending less energy and spending less money to just get it off Earth and then they'll take you the rest of the way there, which is uh, you know, a fun idea if that math pencils out. Uh, this is certainly, I think, not the last company we're going to see raise a whole bunch of money heading into and out of the SpaceX IPO. I think there's just so much attention and excitement around what these space companies are working on and the idea of an economy in space. And to your point, like that is going to require just a ton of people working on this stuff and engineers are in really high demand. These folks
are located in Los Angeles. Their original headquarters was actually right next to uh my brother's old production company. Uh and there was like a funny moment once where I remember him saying, "Oh, you know, one of the early SpaceX employees may be enriching uranium next door to where I work." And he was like, "Never mind, never mind. It's the one that's working on rockets and stuff, not the uranium company. Uh, never say that to a reporter, right? I know, right? I was like, hm, interesting. But yeah, I mean, they're in a hotbed area for engineers, not just because of SpaceX, but a lot of EV companies are located there and California's not cheap. So, they're definitely going to need this kind of
money to attract a lot of people and build up this capability uh as they scale. It was funny that the way like at least the way we wrote it up in a sense I'm guessing this is kind of the way they were pitching it was this emphasis on the idea that it's sort of counterintuitive that they're going to be hiring you know hundreds of new employees because you know you think five or 10 years back like if you were writing about a lot of funding announcements there would always do this question where you're like okay what are you spending the money on and they would kind of give you this high-minded ambitious answer but the real answer really is we're going to hire people and so it's funny now in 2026 that can
feel like a slightly counterintuitive answer. Although, of course, yeah, it certainly makes sense here. And I should say that, you know, both my parents were aerospace engineers. My mom is still an aerospace engineer, so I'm biased, but I would imagine that this is an area where automating everything is probably really dangerous and a risky move because you can, you know, you can put out like a vibecoded mobile app and fix things on the fly. That really is less likely to work in space. And not just dangerous, but like possibly ineffective. I'd encourage people, you know, if they're interested, go read the story that Tim Fernholes wrote for us. Uh, but in large part because he spoke to COO Eric Romo, uh,
who, you know, was pretty blunt with him about how they've tried a lot of that kind of stuff in the past and you can do all of these simulations and they could be like the best simulations in the world and there's still just no substitute for putting the hardware through the kinds of forces that they need to be put through on a test stand and learning from that. I mean like the approach or not, but like the way that SpaceX does things is the reason they've been able to create, you know, the most reusable, reliable rocket system in the world and the Falcon 9 and you know, there was no way they were ever going to simulate that into reality. And so I think that's the right approach here.
Yeah. You know, you mentioned something a little bit earlier and I don't want to get too far field, but I will just for a minute. Um, and you talked about sort of this the follow-on effects of the SpaceX IPO, and we've already seen sort of a lot of folks who have left SpaceX to create their own companies, some within space, some outside of it. And there has been um some momentum because of the company and its success. But I do think that the IPO is going to give, you know, a lot of folks more um I guess encouragement to start their own companies. um or to get into the field altogether. And I'm talking about like the next batch of young people who are graduating high school and going into college because it does to Anony's
point earlier and I did not know your parents were by the way aerospace engineers. That's very cool. um that this is a very people focused industry and that is an area that in spite of everything that's happening sort of chaotically in the economy right now with jobs that is a job that is probably not going to go away anytime soon. So I wonder if we're going to just see like just a huge wave of you know aerospace engineers jumping into the fray but also startup founders as a result of the SpaceX IPO. I think not only because there's so much interest in the space, but also, you know, to your further to your point, like people are going to have a lot of money to play with, right?
It's just going to be easier to like noodle on an idea that's been, you know, in the back of your head when all of a sudden you have a little bit you maybe have a lot of spending money. Uh, and you don't need that angel or these, you know, a lot of these people are probably going to go out and start their own sort of angel funds and do their own kinds of investment. Um, you know, to me then the question is like how saturated can this market get? Like how big is the space economy really? What sorts of ideas will take hold? There's just so many questions that we're going to spend the next couple years answering uh in a way that we haven't had a chance to before. So speaking of IPOs, anthropic
confidentially filed for an IPO. What did you guys make of the story? I know that there's not a lot of numbers out there yet, but what are you going to be looking for? Well, I ended up writing this story, which was kind of fun for me because oftentimes I play in the world of transportation, but I jumped in on this one. Um, I think to me what was most interesting is that, okay, one, yes, we don't have any of the numbers, but we do have some information, which is that they just raised a huge amount of money. They're valued at close to $1 trillion, and this is a company that was founded what, five years ago. So, the scale is certainly has my attention. Um, and what I'll be waiting and watching
for. I mean, Sean, we luckily we have you on the show because you're really into S1's even more so than I am. and you're very good at finding like little footnotes and things like that, but I know that like the first things I'm going to look at is who's got the voting power here, who's got the control, who's going to be making, who's going to be the big winners, uh what their risks are um in terms of like legal matters or anything like that, and any kind of uh deep dive into their financials. Those are all the like sort of topline things I'll be looking at. And then Sean, you're usually pretty good at finding all the weird obscure things that uh no one's paying attention to.
Yeah, I would say I'm there's part of me that may even be more excited to read this filing than the SpaceX one in large part because I mean Anthropic by the reporting that we've seen is maybe in a better financial position than the other leading AI labs uh as far as the money that it's bringing in and how it's spending against that. you know, they're they're supposedly sort of like looking pretty good in the operating profit area. We'll get be able to like test that, you know, in these filings when we see them in, you know, a month or two, whenever that might be. But also, you know, they're one of the first big they're they're a company that I think of when we think about like a lot of the
reporting that's happened over the last like three or four years around ARR as like this important metric uh to understand that how quickly a business is growing. And so like getting under the hood and seeing what that has looked like for them over the last couple years and what it looks like sort of currently is really interesting to me. Whereas like compared to SpaceX, I think we all had a good idea roughly what the business looked like. You know, the specifics we didn't really know heading into the their IPO filing, but we kind of had an idea of what it looked like and it wasn't really built in the same kind of way that an AI lab like Anthropic or OpenAI are built. So, I
that's one of the reasons why I'm very eager for this and also we just weren't I think expecting this to happen so soon. I think there had been some reporting this was going to happen by the end of this year, but uh this popped up maybe a little bit sooner than folks imagined. Yeah. And then to remind our listeners, we're also expecting OpenAI. So, I'm wondering, Anthony, what you are interested in comparing the two? Like, what are you gonna look for first when you it once the um OpenAI IPO drops, which we're expecting, right? I'm I'm boring. I'm going to look at profitability because I'm curious uh you know, I again, yeah, I don't have a great sense. Obviously, we don't know for sure because to the extent that we
know it's from reporting, it's from leaks, it's not from official filings. Um, but yeah, it'll be certainly be interesting to see if anthrop I don't think any of the big AI companies are like hugely profitable yet because that's not really what they're going for. But if especially if Anthropic is profitable and OpenAI, I'm pretty sure is not. Um, that'll be an interesting contrast. And then it'll also be interesting to see how much that matters. Like is, you know, our Wall Street investors going to be like, we don't care about profitability for these companies. We just care about growth. which also, you know, could be a significant issue for these companies.
Um, or are they actually going to reward one company over the other? Yeah. You know, against this backdrop of uh, you know, privately held VC backed companies filing for IPOs, we're also getting a sense of this scale of spending around AI by looking at what's happening with publicly traded companies. And this is what I'm speaking to specifically is Alphabet just had an $85 billion stock sale and Julie Bour, our venture editor, wrote, you know, that it signals investor appetite. And I was like, yeah, no kidding. Yeah, it signals investor appetite for AI related offerings. U which I thought was pretty hilarious.
Yeah, that's more than SpaceX is going to raise in its IPO. I would say that's a pretty big appetite. To be fair to Julie, actually, her headline was also that it was a hell of a good signal, which to me was also just delightful because maybe this is too inside baseball, but like the amount of profanity in Techrunch headlines has gone down over the years. So, I felt like hell of a spelled hell UVA was a good way to kind of get that back in there. Um, but I yeah, I think it was it was interesting because it both shows that there's a tremendous amount of appetite to use the same phrase. Um but also the fact that uh that you know how high the expenditures are again like the fact that Google is going out and
raising more funding this much money specifically for this purpose is also just a sign that they need to spend a lot of money or at least they think they do. I mean this is what I'll be looking for in this you know in an anthropic IPO and in an open AI IPO which is like how does this stack up against what a company like Google can do. It was not that long ago that Google was seen as the one that was behind these startups. Now they have you know matched or exceeded in a lot of places uh the capabilities of what those AI labs have put out and on top of that is you know they're going they're doing it in sort of omnidirectional way going for
enterprise going for consumer rolling out all this stuff into Google search they have sort of exposure to people in a way that these labs you know really don't even just despite how popular chatgbt has become and so to me the question is like yes this is on some level good for companies like anthropic to show that there's so much appetite for this but there's also the question of like Google's already or Alphabet's already spending nearly $200 billion in capex this year on AI and has said now with the perspectus like along with this raise that's going to significantly exceed that next year anthropic could have the best IPO in the world and like you know they're just not going to be
able to match that financial might now Anthropic, as we've talked about, like seems to have a more coherent business that it's working on. So, it may not need that kind of financial firepower and maybe this is a bigger question for the Open AIs of the world. But, I mean, that's just that's what comes to mind when I see Google go out and do this and Alphabet go out and do this and you know, set it against these IPOs. But also I think it's worth mentioning before we move on and talk about other things related to AI scale that I thought it was really interesting that Birkshshire Hathway was one of the buyers which you know they are known for value investing and so to me when a company like that is part of this
stock sale to me it is a signal that they see stability in this which is really interesting and that they want to get in on it now. So, I think that's an interesting indicator to me. Um, and then to your point, Sean, $85 billion is so far outside the imagination and that they have so much capital to throw at this. It's hard. It's really hard to like not imagine them coming out on top. Like, if they don't absolutely blow this out of the water, that is that's saying something.
I mean they're they're the expected winner right out of all this. One thing I think sort of that leads into um sort of the next kind of chunk of this big kind of AI scale discussion is as companies are going public as you know all this money is flowing into the system presumably at some point it's not going to be flowing in at the same rate there's going to be expectations around profitability and you're starting to see some of those levers already get turned. Um, so you know, when we were planning for this, I think Sean, you called this token apocalypse that some companies are, and I want to hear obviously more about what you think about it, but like my sense is that there are companies
like there was an example of um, you know, Microsoft deciding with like uh, GitHub Copilot that they're going to start charging more per token because like this whole ecosystem is heavily subsidized by investor money. And so stuff that seems like it has no cost, in fact, is incredibly expensive. And now we're going to get to a point where more of that cost is going to get passed on to the end consumer to the customer. And so how is that going to change behaviors? Um I don't think we know, but I think there's going to be a lot of pain. How many token related risk factors do we think are going to be in the anthropic S1, right? Like this is a big question. And it's something that
I've mentioned a lot on this show and we seem to just keep running into it where you know Uber has done like the full arc in the span of like a month and a half, right, of saying, "Oh boy, we kind of blew through our budget on this stuff way quicker than we thought this year and then oo like maybe this is going to be a little too expensive to us to like this week. Oo, we need to put caps on this and we need to limit people's usage inside the company." like that's just a that's a little worrying I would imagine if you see that happen so quickly at a company like Uber uh that you know is sort of using this stuff a lot and it's just a question of you know can these companies these AI labs sort
of collapse that cost like progress the tech enough in a way that it sort of eventually meets in the middle with you know where people's appetite for spending I mean like customers appetite for spending you I think a funny thing to think back on is like I don't think there was really any strategy involved in OpenAI charging $20 a month when Chat GBT originally came out. It was just sort of like let's spit out a number and like we've all been reckoning with that kind of ever since, right? Like clearly people pay more for this for the more advanced models, but like uh even that still isn't enough to kind of close that gap to the true cost. And so uh that's that's clearly the biggest question
here. All of this to me um illustrates how quickly things are moving. I mean when you really think about it like the whole token maxing thing has like become a thing peaked and now is seen disfavorably within six months. I mean the scale of this the whole pricing mechanism um to your point was put in place before business models were really shaped and solidified around AI labs. And then at the same time, you have the government sort of trying to catch up. I mean, also this week, President Trump signed an executive order designed to give the government a chance to review powerful AI models. So, you have all of this happening at a pace that I don't think I've ever experienced. Um, and that's why I'm kind
of really looking forward to some of these um S1 IPO registration statements because of the risk pieces. like how do you even write these risks in because they are evolving like before our eyes and day by day. Uber is an interesting example, Sean, that because you mentioned their AI spend, but I feel like they've also come up in the AI discourse because sometimes people who are like very skeptical about this comp these companies think there's like, you know, this bubble, they'll bring up the fact just sort of how wildly unprofitable um you know, presumably, you know, these tools are, you know, these companies are and then people will bring up Uber as sort of a response like
people like, you know, talked about how unprofitable Uber was, but eventually, you know, you get to scale and then you close that gap. And I think that's true, but also like for Uber to do that, it had to really transform itself as a company in a lot of ways. And like what Uber was at the beginning and what it is now, all the different areas of business that it's had to expand into, the different ways that customers and drivers have gotten squeezed. I think those are things that have had to happen to get to the point where it could be, you know, a profitable company. You know, leaving aside the question of how it's adopting AI. And I think you're going to have to see similar transformations for a lot of these AI
companies if they're going to survive. Yeah. Is there any way that these labs can squeeze pennies like Uber has squeezed the drivers over the years? You know, like is there something squishy enough there for them to do that? I don't know. This seems like harder, more straightforward costs in a lot of ways. So, it'll be interesting. Anthony, you mentioned the word transformation and uh a moment ago and I think that it's worth talking about another interesting cultural transformation that is happening as a result of AI scaling, the change of business, the change of industries, and that is not just the backlash, which we've talked about, we actually talked about it a couple weeks ago, last week, you know, the booing
happening at the graduation ceremonies, but actually opportunities to start new companies, businesses, products that are all about in real life. Yeah, I really liked reading all the TechCrunch coverage uh that our producer Teresa rounded up about this because I think I'd missed some of these stories and it like is very exciting and encouraging to see, you know, startups pursuing different avenues. Like one of the most recent ones was um Bin Putnham who was the founder of Mirror has a new startup called Board that she's raised money for and it's supposed to be about kind of um even though I think there's a digital component but there's also like it's about like kind of playing games in
person and I wouldn't necessarily say that any of the ideas that I've seen you know so far maybe I could be wrong. I don't know that any of them is going to be like a huge company but in aggregate I find it like really encouraging that it's not like it's not like every startup is going the same direction because sometimes I think when we like talk about AI deals it can just feel like there's essentially one thesis and everyone in the tech industry is betting on it and I mean I think to a large extent that's true but that it's good to see people swimming in different directions because I'm I'm hopeful that there are opport there are different kinds of opportunities to your point of like swimming in diff different directions. I mean, I think
this is being these opportunities. This sort of tech together idea is a reflection of what is happening of that singular thesis towards AI. It's just that there's a group of people out there who see an opening of what people might want or a shift culturally and what people might want, which is, you know, to get together. I mean, you've seen dating apps changing to reflect this and not just be about swiping and getting away from that idea of only interacting with your phone or doom scrolling, swiping left or right and really kind of creating um apps or other products that bring people together. Um, and you're also seeing that actually how people are using search. I mean, we had a long
discussion uh recently about how Google search has changed, but now we're seeing all these other different companies pop up that are offering a very different experience, I think, all in reaction to, you know, to that singular thesis around AI that you mentioned earlier. The encouraging thing to me is that there's a really big spectrum, right? There are startups that are more traditional like board in some ways where you know this thing is you know certainly meeting a moment now but it's also not something you could imagine being too strange to have existed 10 years ago. um you know setting aside some tech limitations but there are also like creators who are finding their own ways to do stuff like Amanda Silverling
wrote this really awesome story this week for us about these people who are creating this I had to like read it a couple times as I was like oh man I'm out of the loop on this cyber decks where like you know they're people are creating like all these interesting little kind of like Raspberry Pi or like Pi adjacent computers and like building them into really fun form factors. One of them, you know, looks like that sort of clam shell phone from It Follows that I think everybody wanted when they saw that movie 10 years ago. And uh there's one that somebody made where you can like literally touch grass while you're using the computer. Like just really fun stuff. To me, the question is like out
of all of this, what becomes durable, right? like is there is are those cyber deck things something that is just the trend of the moment and every creator on Tik Tok or reals is doing it and so you do it because you want to get you know the views too. I don't think that's the case. Clearly a lot of these people have some like real technological capabilities that allows them to do this stuff that they're not just sort of following like paint by numbers and like hacking the latest trend. But like I am that's what I'm kind of looking out for is like is there something in all of this that will actually be around for the next five to 10 years. Uh I think it's too early to really know that for
sure. But you there is so much of it happening kind of all over the place which is really fun. I do worry that I think similarly that especially if some of this stuff turns out not to be durable or not popular that will lead people to kind of react a little cynically of like well no one really wants this and so it's not worth producing these a avenues. But, you know, first of all, it's just worth remembering that most startups fail anyway. So, if some of these fail as well, that's just normal. Um, and I do think that, you know, sometimes it is when you're trying to solve these kinds of issues like our discomfort with um like how much screen time we might have like, you know, we don't we can all agree maybe we might all have
that discomfort, but like hopefully different startups are experimenting with different ways to solve that. And again, most of those ways might fail. Like I mean, I'm reminded also, you know, a year or two ago, we were talking about Humane, which was like somebody that was talking about like, "Oh, so we don't like screen time, so we've instead we've invented this like voice AI assistant that's also kind of a surveillance device and has, you know, like really janky UI." Um, and so just because you've diagnosed the problem doesn't mean that you're going to solve it. But I'm glad at least that a number of startups have diagnosed a number of problems that I also have like unease about. bold of you to bring
up Humane at the end of the podcast where now all I want to do is talk about that company for 40 more minutes. Leave him wanting more show. I thought that you wanted to talk about that, but we're going to not talk about that another show. I will say that, you know, it's not about whether, you know, cyber decks are going to become a thing. I think it's really reflective of like a wave like a real cultural shift that's happening where people are looking for things that are whimsical and I predict and I'm really all about predictions in the show.
I really see this um probably going to be reflective in fashion, in design, in interior design, in literature, things like that, and in our tech where it is going to reflect this where it's not just about a negative backlash, but also people propelling towards things that are feel lighter and more authentic, even crafty. I think consumers ultimately do have a say in the direction of these things. So there, who knows? There may be some breakthrough products. I don't think that it's going to be wearable uh AI assistance. Um I think it's going to be something a little bit different than that.
One other thing that I find very cool about it is that I think a lot of these are aimed at younger users. And of course, as soon as you to talk about them that way immediately is to age yourself, out myself as an middle-aged man. But like I do think sometimes we think about these technologies as if like oh like all like things like AI are being sort of embraced by uh by like young people and if you're resisting it you're sort of a fuddy duddy. But like in fact, I think there are portions of the younger audience, younger consumer base that like have again some of these same questions. And also like you were saying like this thirst for authenticity, for whimsy and so like I'm really hopeful that
actually you're going to see yeah some of these counterveailing trends among you know a new audience and probably only accelerated by the fact that this is apparently the whole thesis of the new Toy Story movie coming out this summer. Right. So, like here comes a whole new world of kids who might think twice about it uh until they see the lily pad toy in a Target store after they see the movie. So, that is a movie that you will be able to see. You won't have to get a babysitter for it, right? Yeah. Sean, do not see Obsession with your child. That would be a very, very bad decision. And that goes for fives. Yeah. Well, uh let's wrap things up there. So, uh Equity will be back next week. Until then, you can follow us on
social media, EquityPod X and Threads.
