Morning Brew Daily - The 10 Drugs Getting Medicare Price Cuts & Bitcoin's Big Win Over the SEC

Episode Date: August 30, 2023

Episode 136: Neal and Toby discuss which 10 drugs President Biden is looking to slash prices of with his Medicare cost cuts. Plus, Bitcoin is up after a court ruling that sides with Grayscale over the SEC and 3M reaches a $6 billion settlement over earplugs. Also, Eminem takes legal action over Vivek Ramaswamy rapping his music and AI written sports articles about high school football are not nearly as accurate as you think. And finally, the lawsuit against Burger King over the size of the Whopper. Listen to Morning Brew Daily Here: https://link.chtbl.com/MBD Watch Morning Brew Daily Here: https://www.youtube.com/@MorningBrewDailyShow Listen to Founder's Journal Here: https://chartable.com/podcasts/the-founders-journal Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Many employees can't afford a hefty medical bill that pops up out of the blue. But it happens. And employees who are financially stressed are, understandably, more likely to be distracted at work, costing their employers greatly in lost productivity. Luckily, AFLAQ plans help with out-of-pocket expenses not covered by health insurance and can be offered at no direct cost to businesses. Learn more at aflac.com slash morningbreedaly. That's aflack.com slash morning brewdaily.

Good morning brew daily show. I'm Neil Fryman. And I'm Toby Howell. On today's pod, Biden dropped his list of drugs that will be subject to negotiation by Medicare, and Big Pharma is big mad about it. Then we'll tell you about a high school football game in Ohio that caught the entire country's attention. Then Bitcoin is showing signs of life again after a crucial court ruling paved the way for it to scoge into the traditional finance world. Plus, the real Slim Shady is real fed up with a certain candidate rapping his songs on the campaign trail.

It's Wednesday, August 30th. Let's ride. All right, Neil, to start off the show today, we have an update on the live in-person screening of dumb money we're hosting. As a quick reminder, last week on the show, we put a call out to any local MBD listeners to come watch an exclusive preview of dumb money with us on Monday, September 11th. It's the movie chronicling the craziness of the GameStop saga, starring the likes of Pete Davidson, Seth Rogan, and Paul Dano. It looks incredible. tons of emails from you guys expressing interest in coming to hang with us, which

was awesome to see. If you did email us, please make sure to check your inbox later today because we're sending out a link for you to confirm your tickets. And if you're still interested, we still got space, so send us an email. Neil, I'm so excited for this movie, but I'm also just really

excited to meet people in person for the first time. I can't wait. I can't wait. Just to reiterate, we want you to be in person in New York City. Make sure you can actually come to this. Definitely check your email later today. And if this is the first time you're hearing about it, also send us a fresh email, Morningbrood Daily at Morningbrood.com. I actually memorized it this time. I know our email address. It's a lot of words. But I will also say the email again at the end of the show in

case you forget that. So if this is the first time you're hearing about this movie screening with us, definitely send us an email. And at some point today, we will send you the link. We got a busy morning, but hopefully we'll get it to you by the afternoon. Yep. I'm pumped for this. We are really We are real people, people. That's the big takeaway from that. I mean, why wouldn't they think that? People, I don't know. With AI generation, yeah, you never know these days. Kobe bought 3,000.

All right, let's begin in the world of pharmaceuticals, where unlike Elon Musk, President Biden followed through on a cage match he promised to participate in, and that is his battle with the pharma industry to lower prescription drug prices for Americans. Yesterday, Biden dropped his highly anticipated list of the first 10 prescription drugs that will be subject to negotiations with Medicare, the government's health program covering 65 million Americans. These drugs include major bestsellers that cost tens of thousands of dollars per year, like the blood thinner eliquis from Bristol-Myers-Scribman Pfizer and the diabetes pill Jardians from Eli Lilly. Maybe they should start by making these easier to pronounce. Anyway, this is a

historic move and one of the most aggressive actions ever taken against the pharma industry. Until now, Medicare has not been able to negotiate drug prices directly with pharma companies, but that changed last year due to a measure in the Inflation Reduction Act, one of the few initiatives in the bill that actually aims to reduce inflation. The goal here is that by empowering Medicare, which is the largest buyer of health care in the country, to sit down at the table with pharma companies, it'll save billions of dollars for both the government and consumers. But this is far from a done deal, because big pharma companies are seething over this plan and are making a lot. of lawyers rich to stop it from happening.

Yeah, obviously they are not thrilled about this. Last year, the industry as a whole spent $400 million in lobbying fees to try to stop the IRA, the Inflation Reduction Act from passing. But it did pass. But here's the thing that I feel like the government may have seen coming is that now drug makers are already starting to increase the prices of new drugs that they release in order to offset these negotiations that are going to happen. So it's always the second order effects of these things where even with the best intentions, and this had the best intentions, it had like pretty universal support when it comes to Congress, both Republicans and Democrats were on board with this because who's against lowering drug prices?

Well, I think Republican voters were on board. I don't think Republican politicians were on board because the IRA passed without any Republican support. But this is a very popular. People hate paying high drug prices. And the U.S. pays double that of its peer nations in terms of prescription drugs. So this is a thing that voters will get on board with. And you're going to hear a lot on the campaign trail. I think they really wanted to get this initiative out before Biden starts campaigning. And you're going to hear it up and down the ticket.

Republicans do say that this is, they agree with pharma companies, that this is government overreach. And they're like, what this amounts to is way too much meddling in the free market. and what you're doing is price setting, you're not, you know, you're not allowing, this isn't like a fair negotiation because Medicare is the largest buyer of healthcare. They have so much bargaining power. Yeah, that was the main argument that these drug companies were saying is that you're putting, you're squashing innovation. Like, we use these profits to innovate and discover new drugs, which, I mean, all while that is true to a certain extent, like, they've been raking in record high profits for years now. So it's not totally, it's not completely squashing the only innovation

and an engine that they have. But the government really thinks this will work. They expect prices to be slashed by half on average. Who knows if that actually, these are all projections at this point because these cuts come into effect in 2026. But generally, the idea of negotiating drug prices to lower is definitely like this movement we're seeing, especially with Mark Cubans cost plus drugs. This is definitely, finally we're reckoning with this moment in America when for so long

drug prices have been so high. Yeah. But I would say expect this to be played out in courts, and I would expect it to make its way to the Supreme Court before these go into effect in 2026. The interesting argument here is that the drug companies are pursuing is that the government is violating the Fifth Amendment, which bans the seizure of private property for public use without, quote, unquote, just compensation. So they're saying that this thing is unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment. Amendment. Interesting. A little constitutional law right here. Thank you for that, Neil. Okay, let's move on. Neil, I can count on pretty much one hand the amount of times we've talked about

the crypto industry since we started this show. That's because outside of celebrities getting sued, it's been a while since there was anything to talk about. But that changed yesterday after a federal appeals court ruled that the SEC must reconsider its ruling on a popular Bitcoin trust. Now, the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust was supposed to be a game changer for crypto, giving less crypto-savvy investors easy access to the space via an ETF that more or less track the price of Bitcoin. But the problem is that the ETF wasn't an ETF at all on the eyes of the SEC. It denied investment firm Grayscale the permission to convert that trust into an ETF, and

things have been hanging in limbo ever since until the ruling yesterday. Now, the ruling didn't explicitly give Grayscale permission to make the source. switched into an ETF, but it did at least tell the SEC that it was wrong to deny it in the first place. Even still, pretty much anything related to the crypto space from Bitcoin to Coinbase's stock spiked yesterday in reaction to the news. Neil, could this bring crypto back to life a little bit? I don't know. This reminded me of a basketball team that is down 20, right? You're at home, but you're down 20. Everyone's kind of down. And then you go on this 15-0 run and the other team calls a timeout and everyone's hype and because you're still losing you're still losing okay

you're still losing but there is some life in you there is some hope because over the past few years we've seen SEC chair Gary Gensler wage this war on crypto there have been so many lawsuits so much action so many crackdowns so many exchanges going belly up and the crypto industry was like this guy is trying to run us out of town he doesn't want a crypto industry in the US. And then finally, they get this big win that gives them a little hope. And so I think they're, they want to use this and say, look, the SEC can crack down all it wants, but the courts will finally decide. And the SEC needs to provide some sort of justification for why they want to, right, for why they want to, you know, squash us out of existence. So expect other crypto industry

companies and individuals to kind of take action and learn from this experience that like, you can go after the SEC and maybe win some cases. Yeah. And so just to paint a broad picture here, like, why do people want a Bitcoin ETF so badly? Because a lot of people say, like, well, I can just go buy Bitcoin. But for others, people want exposure to Bitcoin, but they want kind of the added protections you get from an ETF wrapper. So you don't have to deal with crypto exchanges.

You don't have to deal with actually owning Bitcoin yourself. You simply buy a fund that holds, quote unquote, shares of Bitcoin. instead of, for instance, like Apple or Google. Like, that's the same. It's the same principle. And so people just want to enter it via the traditional finance system with a couple added protection layers. That's why this is so bullish.

And honestly, financial institutions are lining up to create these Bitcoin ETFs. You got Fidelity, BlackRock, Wisdom Tree, Vanek, Investco, and others all have put in filings with the SEC to have a Bitcoin ETF. So you can see why this could create a domino effect. If Grayscale gets them through, then suddenly there's tons of things. of Bitcoin ETFs out there. And like when BlackRock filed for Bitcoin ETF in June, that was like the last time Bitcoin had a big spike because people were like, well, Black Rocks. Yeah, these are like the biggest ETF companies in the world. It's so, it's so interesting to me like how, I guess for on the

company side, they know that this can attract like a bunch of new inflows. It's a very buzzy thing. So I can see why they are pushing for it. But it is interesting to see the who's who's of traditional finance trying to get in on the Bitcoin ETF game. And before we go, we should just, clarify that there there exists Bitcoin futures ETFs, but this would be a Bitcoin spot ETF, which tracks the real-time price of Bitcoin, whereas the other ones in existence track Bitcoin futures and the SEC did not think, thought that a spot Bitcoin ETF. I know this is a lot of jargon, but an ETF that tracks the current price of Bitcoin would open up individual investors to a lot more risk, but they lost that case. All right, let's move on. All the two L's

listening to this are about to get goosebumps because I want to talk about the largest single mass tour in U.S. history. It comes courtesy of 3M, the manufacturing giant out of Minnesota that makes everything from Post-it notes to scotch tape to dental products to crucially, earplugs. Yesterday, 3M agreed to a $6 billion settlement with about 260,000 plaintiffs to resolve claims that its earplugs, it sold to members of the U.S. military were defective causing hearing damage. It's the conclusion of a long process that saw 3M try and fail in a ploy to send a subsidiary into bankruptcy saddled with all of these liabilities. And you're probably thinking that 3M execs might finally get a good night's rest, having settled up 260,000 lawsuits. But no, lots of

legal headaches remain on the horizon. 3M previously reached a $12.5 billion settlement over claims that it's forever chemicals used to make firefighting foam, contaminated drinking water in U.S. and lawyers say that these forever chemical lawsuits are just getting started. Toby, this litigation over products health risks is breathtaking in its scale, only rivaled by other huge agreements in the past reached by companies that make cigarettes and opioids. Yeah, I mean, this is actually the single largest mass tort in U.S. history. And just to define what a mass tort is, it's a case where many people are wrongfully harmed in a similar way by a similar product. And so it's a large class action lawsuit. And yeah, so 3M tried the old Texas two step as it's called to try to

wriggle its way out of this. That's when you basically take a solvent company. In this case, it was Arrow, which is a subsidiary of 3M. And you create a new subsidiary. You transfer all the liabilities into it and then declare that company bankrupt. It allows the company to kind of manage liabilities without using the assets of the original company. A lot of people have tried this. actually some people successfully did it. Georgia Pacific pulled it off successfully for an asbestos lawsuit where they won the court's approval to pause asbestos lawsuits against it

and instead saddled this other company with liability. So we've seen it pulled off before. In this case, though, the courts were like, nah, no, no, no, you can't get away with it. There's been a couple recently. So 3M wasn't allowed to do this. And then Johnson and Johnson over its baby powder lawsuits, definitely tried this Texas too.

step. I love that name. It's a great. It feels like a dance move. It sounds like a dance move, but it's actually a bankruptcy maneuver for a healthy company. So the courts have ruled against Johnson Johnson and now three. I'm now two. So the strategy is maybe on its last legs. And I know a lot of lawmakers are trying to make sure that companies can't do this because they should face up, face up their liabilities that they get with their actual company. Yeah. I mean, this is just so big. Like just, I mean, not just for earplugs, but like when you see earplugs in the $6 billion lawsuit, it is truly huge. But that's just how far spreading and far reaching that this lawsuit actually was. All right, Neil, before we jump into our next story, we're going to take a quick break.

It's time to refresh your yard during spring backyard days at the Home Depot. Get low prices guaranteed on propane grills starting at $179, like the next grill three burner gas grill. Or get $50 off a select Weber Spirit grill and bring big, flavor to your backyard, then set the scene with Hampton Bay string lights that bring it all together. Shop spring backyard days for seven days at the Home Depot. Now through May 6th, Exclusion supplies to homedipo.com slash price match for details. Study and play. Come together on a Windows 11 PC. And for a limited time, college students get the best of both worlds. Get the unreal college deal, everything you need to study and play with select Windows 11 PCs. Eligible students,

get a year of Microsoft 365 premium and a year of Xbox GamePass Ultimate with a custom color Xbox wireless controller. Learn more at Windows.com slash student offer. While supplies last, ends June 30th, turns at aka.m.m.m.com slash college PC. Now, Neil, I'm not much of a singer like you,

but one thing is for certain, I've never sung so badly that someone filed a cease and desist against me. But fringe GOP candidate, Vivek Rameswami, can't say the same after, Eminem hit him with a C&D for incessantly rapping the song, Lose Yourself whenever someone puts a mic in his hand on the campaign trail. Now, a video went viral recently of Rameshwami,

belting out the song at the Iowa State Fair, and apparently that was the last straw for Slim Shady. Now, politicians technically don't need direct permission from artists to use their work. Their campaigns can buy licensing packages from organizations that give them legal access to a catalog of more than 20 million songs. But many artists, including the Real Slim Sadie, have gone on to polar catalogs from those music rights organizations after they've seen them used by politician whose views they don't necessarily agree with. And Neil, believe me, there are quite a few instances of this actually happening. Yeah, so I will run through them.

The first one I can think of, and Toby, I know you're not expecting this. But in the early 1800s, oh gosh, wow. Beethoven wrote a symphony, his third, his third. symphony for Napoleon because he loved Napoleon and he wrote the symphony for him called Eroica. And I played the symphony. It's a really good one. And when Napoleon turned out to be maybe not the Democratic leader that he's posed, Beethoven was so pissed and he scribbled out Napoleon's name on the symphony and was like, I hate this guy. He does not stand for anything. I don't want him playing my music. I don't want anything affiliated with him. So to me, that might be the first

instance of a musician, kind of breaking off ties with a politician and did not, did not want them playing this music. Let's fast forward a few hundred years to something that may be a little more relevant to people in the United States. Bruce Springsteen did not want Ronald Reagan playing born in the USA in his 1984 election campaign. That may be the first instance in modern history where we saw a singer say, say you can't use it. Then there's a funny one. McCain, John McCain in 2008 and Abba. This is a, I mean, I would use this song.

This is a great song. Take a chance on me. McCain wanted to use that for, he used it a couple times for his, for his rallies. And Abba said, no, thank you. We, uh, or please do not do that. And so McCain was like, yeah, it gets expensive in a big hurry. And if you're not careful, you can alienate some Swedes. We have Dr. Dre telling a Marjorie Taylor Green not to use, uh, his music. And also a lot of these examples are kind of musicians, not wanting Republicans to use their, uh, their music. And that's maybe because musicians are maybe more liberal, but there was one instance of this R&B singer Sam Moore telling Obama to knock it out

with one of his songs. Yeah, I mean, you can really go throughout history. And any time any candidate has used any music, usually someone can chafe or have a little bit of pushback on that. It is crazy to see just go through. Obviously, like Donald Trump is facing at least 16 musical acts and their heirs, ranging from the Beatles to Rihanna, have said, basically don't use our songs anymore. I also think that this is funny that it's all kind of backfired in Vivek Ramoswami's face because his whole point of his campaign is basically like, I'm younger, I'm hip, I'm cool, like look at me, I rap Eminem, and everyone just kind of universally derided his performance of it and basically said it came off as Grinchy and trying too hard. And then now he has Eminem who he's

publicly said he loves like, that's my anthem. And literally he called it his life's theme song back when he was at Harvard in 2006. Now he's got his hero saying, dude, cut it out. Like, I don't want to be associated with you. It might be good for him if he doesn't stop laughing. Honestly, he's a blessing in disguise. But to me, the most interesting part about this entire story is I didn't know that these

performing rights organizations like BMI, global music rights and ASCAP exists. And they negotiate directly with event venues and stuff. So when, you know, a basketball team plays like rock and roll part two or something, they don't always have to negotiate directly. They don't have to negotiate directly with artists themselves, and these groups hand the event venues a library of millions of songs that they can use, and the artists don't need to give their permission. There's a separate library of 20 million songs for politicians, and it seems like there's not

really – it seems like there's a legal gray area here where musicians can ask their songs to be removed from this politics list. But it seems like the most effective thing you can do is what Eminem did, and what. what all these other artists do and just like publicly shame politicians and they'll usually back off. You don't, you only have to threaten a lawsuit because it's not clear whether this lawsuit will have any legal grounds. But all you have to do is like get up on your, you know, you're extremely popular. You say, I don't want you using my, my music and you tell all your fans and typically the musician or the politician just backs off. What do you think your, your like politician walkout?

All right. Yeah, I was going to ask you, okay, my, so if I was a politician, I was running for president, my rally song would be Never Gonna Give You Up by Rick Astley Because first of all, it's an upbeat song With a good message And it signals to voters That I will never Rick roll you Into making a promise I can't keep

I feel like you're Rick rolling voters though, right? By using the song every time. I'm not promising anything different. Okay, what about you? I would do Cottonide Joe. It's a little different Because I swear, the only thing people want to do when they're at these rallies

is just have a good time and dance a little bit and just like get fired up. And Cotton Eye Joe gets the people going. If you hit the Cotton Eye Joe to on stage with that like high kicking maneuver, that would go viral for sure. So Cotton Eye Joe, baby. That's my platform.

If you don't dance, listening to it sucks. Yeah. So it's literally all or nothing. Yeah. All right. Let's move on. Toby, there was an electric high school football game in Ohio a few weeks ago. And I desperately want to tell you what happened, but I cannot do it justice.

I'm going to read a few excerpts from the write up in the Columbus Dispatch newspaper so you can get a sense of really feeling like you were there, okay? Here's, I'm reading the article now. The Westerville North Warriors defeated the Westerville Central Warhawks 21 to 12 in an Ohio high school football game on Friday. Westerville North edged Westerville Central 21 to 12 in a close encounter of the athletic kind at Westerville North High on August 18th in Ohio football action. Skipping a few paragraphs to the end.

Westerville North jumped to a 21 to 6 lead heading into the final quarter. The Warriors chalked up this decision in spite of the Warhawk-spirited fourth-quarter performance. Okay, on second thought, that made absolutely no sense. And the reason is that it was written by artificial intelligence as part of a project by the paper's owner, Gannett, to have AI write local sports recaps. This hilariously bad article and others like it from other newspapers around the country went viral on social media this week. And after everyone roasted them to a crisp, Gannett decided to pause its AI sports writing tool

because it's clearly not ready for prime time. To me, this embarrassing episode shows how media companies are still figuring out how to integrate generative AI tools into their reporting process without losing trust from readers. These high school sports write-up show that it can go bad in a hurry. These were hilarious. I mean, you read a little bit of it, but you have to read like the full story in just how bad. Close encounters of the athletic kind is almost so bad. It's funny.

But the fact that AI thought like, oh, I'm throwing some spice into this. close encounters of the athletic kind. It also just makes me a little sad for kind of the future of reporting because a lot of reporters were kind of chiming in and saying, like, yes, this is funny. But it's also, this is where a young reporter's cut their teeth. This is how you hone your craft. And I actually distinctly remember Stephen King has this book called On Writing, which is like a very famous book about the craft of writing.

And he said literally, like, I wouldn't be who I am today without learning how to write badly in these seemingly insignificant sports write-ups, but they have a big long-term impact of kind of seeding the industry with talented writers. So I think that it truly, it did make me sad deep down. Like we're losing a part of like the industry that is where a lot of people get their starts. Yeah, no, I remember when I played tennis in high school

and I became kind of friendly with the local newspaper reporter who would always write about our matches. And it was kind of exciting. But this is AI writing, like local high school sports. Recaps and and sort of quick hitting articles like this, really short articles that kind of just present the facts, is nothing new. Like in 2016, the Washington Post started to write AI, AI articles about the real Olympics results, local football games, election update.

So this dates back years. And then now they say Bloomberg's, a third of all Bloomberg's articles are AI generated. So things like earnings report and really quick hits are going to be AI generated. And I'm sure there's nothing we can. And I just don't think there's anything we can do about it because people are expensive and a bot can turn out an article about Microsoft's earnings super quickly. I think the case with this Gannett thing is that it was just really bad AI. Like I don't think they used open AI's tools. They used a startup called Lead AI.

And frankly, just the program was crappy. But I think maybe if they used more advanced tools that have come out recently, then it wouldn't be so bad. because AI articles are flooding the web right now. Yeah, they're not going anywhere. I mean, there is, and experts have estimated that AI generated content could account for as much as 90% of information on the internet in a few years' time, which to me sounds like a hellscape of certain sorts, but there's just, we're going down this rabbit hole and this is like the way the world's going. Yeah. Sorry. Unfortunately, Neil, we got to move on here to our final story of the day.

and I know many of our listeners have probably understood this feeling of swiping right on someone on a dating app only to meet in person and have them look nothing like their picture. But more and more frequently, that's happening in restaurants across America as fast food places from Taco Bell to McDonald's are being sued for false advertising when it comes to their ads or menu boards. The latest lawsuit comes against Burger King who must defend its whopper against the claim that its depiction of whoppers on in-store menu boards, misled reasonable customers, according to a U.S. district judge. In total, consumers have filed at least 200 class action lawsuits from 2020 to 22 alone over false advertising in food products. Neil, I feel like this is easy pickings for lawyers, because of course the food you get from fast food places doesn't look like the pictures.

Yeah, but you can, there's several distinctions that constitute false advertising, and some of them, the food companies can essentially. Basically, in the law, it says that around false advertising lawsuits, there's a clause that says product statements that are general, vague, or clearly subjective, that are understood as opinions, like Puffrey, like saying a company, like a random coffee company saying they have the world's best coffee like an elf. Those kind of are like, okay, this is we we're like the key phrase is reasonable consumer. Like we all are kind of smart enough to know that this is just generally vague than boasting. But then there are specific product claims that are measurable, factual representations that are actionable, and that can be tried in a court of law. So I don't know. I guess it's up to the court to decide whether a wopper being a different size in a picture constitutes like a measurable difference.

But what I thought was funny in a separate lawsuit over McDonald's and Wendy's was that these plaintiffs claimed that they used uncooked burgers in the picture because they shrink by 25 percent when you cook. them as everyone who's cooked a burger knows. So they used uncooked burgers in the picture. Oh, gosh. The whole industry of food photography is super interesting. But also, this is not just a Burger King thing at all because there was actually a very famous lawsuit against Subway for their footlong subs, not actually being footlong. There's another case against Subway that argued that their tuna wasn't 100% tuna, but a mixture of various concoctions. That one was eventually settled. And then Taco Bell was sued literally last month in New York over claims that its crunch wraps and Mexican pizzas contain only half as much filling its advertised. So again,

there's been 200 in the last two years alone. These lawsuits are going to keep coming in because, again, there's always going to be a little bit of a disconnect from those perfect pictures you see with the fluffy buns and like the really full beef patties and the actual reality of when you are handed your burger, you handed your crunch wrap Supreme. You're like, all right, this is this is not exactly I got catfished a little bit. And reasonable consumers know this. I don't know. I think most of these lawsuits get dismissed.

I agree. Okay, that is our show for today. I hope you all managed to get over the hump that is Wednesday. And we're also thinking about everyone in Florida in the path of the hurricane, which looks like it's going to make landfall as a massive category for storm in Florida. As always, you can write to us at the email address, Morning Brew Daily at Morningbrew.com. See, I kept my promise.

And don't forget to let us know if you can come to the dumb money screening so we can send you a link to grab your tickets. Let's roll these credits. Emily Milliron is our editor and producer. Uber Batista and Raymond Liu are our associate producers. Eugenua Ogu is our technical director. Billy Manino is on audio. Hair and makeup stayed home after a close encounter with the cosmetic kind.

Devin Emery is our chief content officer and our show is a production of Morning Brew. Great show today, Neil. Let's run it back tomorrow. Hey, Mama. Thanks for making all my favorite recipes. Hi, Ma. Thanks for your unfiltered advice. Hi, Mom. Thanks for always being by the phone. Hey, Mom. Happy Mother's Day. When you ship UPS Air at the UPS Store, your items arrive on time or your money back. Guaranteed at no extra cost, exclusively at the UPS Store U.S. retail locations.

Visit the UPS Store.com slash air shipping for full details. Terms and conditions apply. Send your Mother's Day gifts at the UPS store and we'll get your gratitude there on time.