Pivot - Rep. Adam Schiff on the Capitol Attack Anniversary, The Theranos Trial Verdict, and Adam Neumann is back

Episode Date: January 7, 2022

Kara and Scott discuss the verdict of the Theranos trial, Ben Smith's new global news startup, and Apple crossing the 3 trillion dollar-mark. Also, Adam Neumann is back. Then, Chairman Adam Schiff joins on the anniversary of the insurrection. Plus, a prediction on meme stocks. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for Pivot comes from Virgin Atlantic. Too many of us are so focused on getting to our destination that we forgot to embrace the journey. Well, when you fly Virgin Atlantic, that memorable trip begins right from the moment you check in. On board, you'll find everything you need to relax, recharge, or carry on working. Buy flat, private suites, fast Wi-Fi, hours of entertainment, delicious dining, and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. delicious dining and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. Check out virginatlantic.com for your next trip to London data, and a matching engine that helps you find quality candidates fast. Listeners of this show can get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility at Indeed.com slash podcast.

Just go to Indeed.com slash podcast right now and say you heard about Indeed on this podcast. Indeed.com slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need to hire? You need Indeed. Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Kara Swisher.

And I'm Scott Galloway. Scott, I have some information. My mother wants us to stop talking about her, which means we're talking about her right now. Lucky? Yes. She said, I've become a character in your silly little comedy act. She's also coming to your house, she told me. She's not wrong. She's welcome anytime. All right.

By the way, I just got to do a little revisiting our relationship in history. Probably the most terrifying moment of 2021 wasn't COVID. Yeah. It wasn't the insurrection. It was your very stylish 80-plus-year-old woman after making all sorts of proclamations or declarations about my lifestyle, then decides to like roll outside, like isn't what I'd call highly mobile, and jump in a car in the driver's seat and take off. I'm like, she drives? She doesn't drive anymore. She's trying to, but she's not.

That was terrifying. Yeah, yeah, that was. Are you gay? Are you sure you aren't gay? Oh, sorry. Every other moment. Your wife's so beautiful. Do you have sex with men? Anyway, Lucky, we're not going to talk about you anymore, but we just did. Look, I tried to explain it.

Everybody's a character. There's a golden child. There's Gigantor. There's Bane. You know, there's your diarrhea dog. We love diarrhea. This is the coolest thing. Well, I don't know.

The coolest thing in Lucky's life is those beautiful grandchildren. But I would think she would love that. I'm sure. If my mom were still alive, she'd want me to mention. She would every week be like, you didn't bring me up. You didn't bring me up. Yeah, right. That's true.

So Lucky, it's a compliment. Just remember that. We love Lucky. Anyway, we're coming back down to Florida. Just everybody knows. We're doing another Florida trip, aren't we? Come Just remember that. We love Lucky. Anyway, we're coming back down to Florida. Just everybody knows. We're doing another Florida trip, aren't we? Come on down. We're doing it.

The winter in Florida is very charming. Come and get us, Scott Galloway. Anyway, there's more children to get down there. So today we'll speak with Congressman Adam Schiff about the Capitol insurrection. We're taping on the year anniversary of the January 6th attack on the Capitol and his committee's investigation. Also, Elizabeth Holmes is guilty. We'll talk about that as well as Ben Smith's new big bet in news media. But first, Apple became the first $3 trillion company this week,

just 16 months after it passed the $2 trillion mark. But the new high didn't last. Apple's market cap is at $2.87 trillion at times. But still, it's moving that way. Scott, are you surprised that Apple beat Amazon? Actually, Amazon's not as close. I think Microsoft is closer, correct? Yeah, actually, Amazon was, I think, the worst performing of the big tech stocks.

You thought Amazon would get there first. You predicted it. I thought Amazon would get to $2 trillion first. So, look, what Apple has done is just nothing short of remarkable. It's the first tech company that was able to become an aspirational kind of luxury brand that expressed something about yourselves, which has resulted in the wealthiest billion people in the world willing to pay $1,100 for $550 of chipsets and sensors. No tech company has been able to sustain anything close to those type of margins or any tech hardware company, I should say. And then I just think the march continues

because when I look at the hottest sectors right now, you might say, okay, electric vehicles in the metaverse and people are starting to get excited about Apple's entrance into the EV market. And I think that

they're not a Tesla killer, but they're going to be a big Tesla pain in the ass. When Tim Cook pulls that silk thing off of a car with an Apple logo on it, a lot of people, including myself, are going to get on that waiting list. It won't be silk. It will be reconstituted cotton made of plastic from the ocean. There you go. And then let's talk about the metaverse. I mean, the metaverse is here. What do you want? You want interoperability. You want an economic incentive to leverage other people's human and financial capital. You want a portal that gets you into a metaverse, and that's called

the App Store and AirPods. The metaverse, as Zuckerberg envisions it, is happening, but it's happening through our ears and through a central server called the iPhone. People are going to wake up and realize that probably the company with the best prospects for the EV market and the metaverse are Apple. So, you know, a lot of people are really liking, I'm going to compliment Facebook, a lot of people have noted to me, I think it doesn't, people like those games like Supernatural, I think one is called. The new Oculus, the latest one that just came out, a couple hundred dollars. People really are enjoying it, doing exercise and things like that.

You had noted in a tweet that they didn't sell that. They sold a lot, but not as many as AirPods. You were stack ranking the amount of devices sold. Not as many. Yeah, I know, I know. They sold between three and a half and five million. There were 60 million pairs of Crocs sold last year. Yeah, that was the comparison you made.

I have several. I bought three pairs of Crocs last year. There are 130 million AirPods sold. And the phones continue to be, the iPhones continue to be a very strong market, actually, which is interesting. So you feel like that they will be the ones to dominate here. And that one of the things that people were saying was these stock buybacks that they've been doing. I think it's 400 some whatever billion.

But it's an enormous number is the thing that's keeping it up. I think it's the iPhone and the continued momentum around that. But you're not worried that it's the stock buybacks and the other things that it's doing to boost the stock. There's two ways to look at it. Apple, I think it's, Apple do about $100 billion in EBITDA over the last four quarters, which puts its multiple on EBITDA of about 30. And I'm sure Twitter will calibrate that and tell me how wrong I am. But in some, there's just not getting around it. Apple is at a rich multiple right now, and it's a broader proxy for the market. And that is, the market is just expensive right now by almost any measure. So could Apple stock go down if the

market were to check back and people were to say that a stock that typically trades somewhere between 10 and 15 times earnings is now trading at 30. But if you look at recurring revenue, they've got that with Apple One. Arcade hasn't been a big hit. The thing that you see across all of these companies, whether it's Apple trying to juice up their recurring revenue or their arcade, their games, which is just okay, whether it's Facebook, which is going to realize the Oculus is a giant thud and they need to do something to make good on this promise of the metaverse. The sector that is about to see valuation skyrocket because they'll be the key acquisition is in the gaming sector. And whether it's Epic Games, disclosure,

I'm a shareholder, you're about to see video game companies that are already metaverses that have figured out how to take people into other universes, if you will. All of these guys, whether it's Apple, whether it's Facebook, are gonna try and build and or buy when they realize, I think, quite frankly, I just don't think they have the respect that's required. They're gonna realize that building these metaverses and these characters online is not easy.

And these video game companies that have been doing it for 20 years, I think are about to skyrocket in value because I think they're all in play right now. Well, it'll be interesting to see. There's definitely a lot of room for them to grow in autonomous vehicles. Not easy.

You know, Elon's been at it. Whatever you think of Elon, he's been at it longer than any of them. And he, you know, they've got to catch up to that. And that's hard. It's not easy. Just like it's not easy to make iPads or, you know, I was thinking our discussion about the conservative social networks. It's not easy to create a social network. It's not once you, you know,

people have experience with it. Speaking of experience, WeWork's Adam Newman is calling about the rent again. The Wall Street Journal reports that Newman is buying up apartment buildings in Southern cities for a new venture. He's self-funding this one. He's making fancy. He's taking buildings and then fancying them up, sort of typical to WeWork. He had done WeLive for a little bit, which seemed like dorm rooms for adults, which was odd, I think. We did a – I forget the story. We've done stories on it before.

Why is housing attractive to him, and what do you think about this? Why southern cities, Miami, Atlanta, Nashville, Tennessee, Fort Lauderd? And what do you think about this? Why Southern Cities, Miami, Atlanta, Nashville, Tennessee, Fort Lauderdale? What do you think of this move? I'm doing the same thing. I'm slowly but surely transitioning. I've been selling tech stocks and buying real estate because what I see is the greatest reallocation of capital in history. And that is, there's still this consensual hallucination that we're going to go back to this obsolete thing called the office. And every day that the pandemic goes on, CNN just sent everyone home. Goldman, who made these big

declarations, you can't, you got to be back in the office. They've sent everybody home. And everybody's getting really good at renting their human capital without the enormous expense and hassle of this huge part of the supply chain called the office industrial complex, which is somewhere between a $6 and $12 trillion asset class. Right. And when you make money, you make good money. And all of a sudden, you're spending 24 hours a day at your house as opposed to 10, all of a sudden your house gets really small. All of a sudden that ratty... And in a low-interest rate environment, there are so many conversations among spouses saying, we need to trade up. And the economy is booming. So you're about to see, even if there's a reduction, a net reduction or a gross destruction demand of 20% to 30% of the need for office space, that's a reallocation of the GDP of Germany from commercial to residential and low interest rates.

You think this is a good idea for Adam Neumann? And also, if you look at the Forbes 400 list or the Forbes 500, whatever it is, the 500 wealthiest people in the world, they predominantly over-index around two backgrounds. First, the smartest strategy is to inherit money. That is absolutely the best business strategy. Yeah, that works. But if you don't inherit money, the two groups that populate to the greatest extent that list are, one, entrepreneurs. We love entrepreneurs. They get tax advantages.

First $10 million gain is tax-free. But also real estate. The real estate lobby is so incredibly powerful. Do you know if you own real estate, you get to depreciate it 3% a year and write it off, that 3%, even if it's doubled in value. You can trade it. You can sell it and then trade it into another asset without paying any stocks with an exchange, I'm sorry, without paying any tax. There's no other asset you can do that with. So I think, look, a guy who was able to get a 10% commission off of losing $11 billion may not be a great operator, but he's very smart. And this is also a very smart move. Real estate, and there's some real negative externalities here, because first-time homebuyers are in a word right now, they're fucked. But I have a friend who works

for one of the biggest home builders in Southern Florida. They did this big community. They were going to sell these things at 1.1 million. They're selling them at 2.4 and they're sold out. It's just, anyways, I think it's a very smart move. I think we should call out of them and invite them to pivot MIA. I'd be more interested in just partying with them. I don't want to hear what he has to say about business. Well, you just said he was smart. He is smart. That doesn't mean I have to be on stage with him and listen to all that, listen to him talk about, oh, God. I mean, did you read that? Don't get me started. Don't get me started.

I want to get you started, but let's get to our big story. I'm inviting him. I'm going to go. Adam, call me. Yeah, there you go. Swish. Desk rental Jesus. Bring him on. Yeah, I'm on the Twitter. Find me. Okay, Scott you go. Swish. Desk rental Jesus. Bring him on. Yeah, I'm on the Twitter. Find me. Okay, Scott, time for our big story.

The Theranos trial is over, and Elizabeth Holmes is guilty on four counts, all involving wire fraud. The jury found her not guilty when it came to defrauding patients and couldn't reach a verdict on three charges involving certain investors, deriding certain investors, not all of them. She faces up to 20 years in prison for each count. We'll see. I'm sure her lawyers have said they're going to try to appeal in some ways. Will this change the Valley's fake it till you make it culture? What do you think? Just tell me what you think of this.

I think you should go first here. We both put out sort of similar views. And what I noticed was i got attacked and everyone talked about how insightful you are but anyways that you know why because i phrased it right i phrased it you said phrasing you said isn't it funny she's the only woman it is it is the phrasing i said let's discuss i said i didn't have an opinion i said let's discuss that's how you do you're i'm a professional Twitterer. You are a emotional Twitterer. Let me just tell you that. I'm like, I'm that guy

who just walked off, who's like stripped on the sidelines and just like gets emotional and is like, I'm out of here, but I'm going to take off my clothes first. What is that, Antonio Brand? I am very professional. I did that on purpose. Please comment. I often say, please comment. I think it's an interesting thing. I think a lot of Silicon Valley

is trying to distance itself from her, saying that she doesn't represent tech. I would agree on that part. I mean, as I said before, when she would try to come to our tech things, I was like, you're not tech. But she was, you know, she tried to sort of do the looking like Steve Jobs. She had some tech investors, Tim Draper among them and others. Tim Draper among them and others. But she wasn't a lot of tech, a lot of VCs actually did turn her down, which is interesting, largely because she kept saying she had trade secrets, which I don't like to hear. But nonetheless, you know, the fake it till you make it thing is sort of one of those tropes a little bit.

Most of them don't really fake it. It's just they don't really hide that they don't make money. Like, you know, Adam Neumann didn't really hide anything, right? That was right all there to the investors. Travis Kalanick, some of the stuff he did was hidden from the people involved. But, you know, Elon Musk is a big over-promiser kind of thing. I don't know. I don't know if she was tech. I don't know what it's, I don't know if we have to come to a conclusion about what it means. Maybe she just was fraudulent. I don't know. What do you think? What do you think? Look, I think she broke the law and I think the jury got this right. I will also say that I think her, the reason she's going to prison is because she wasn't able to ship a product that works. She wasn't found guilty of, and also because the

victims here were old, white, rich men, and our law takes very seriously protecting them. There's something, first of all, I think she's a really distasteful character. Someone who constantly pimped her success as a woman and then fell back on this defense of, I was being manipulated by my man. Yeah, she wrote it on the way up, and she wrote it on the way down. Yeah, and I don't know. The timing of her pregnancy seems somewhat sus, but I just find her a really, the sweater, the deep voice, the jobs thing, she's an easy person not to like.

But here's the thing. She wasn't found guilty of crimes of misleading patients, and I do think it's an extra level of just mendaciousness when you do something involving healthcare. But she wasn't found guilty of misleading patients. She was found guilty of committing fraud against investors. And what I would ask is, okay, I just think there's some uncomfortable realities here. And that is, Elon Musk said he was taking his company private at $420 a share and the stock skyrocketed, and it was a total lie. 420, right. Yeah. It was a lie. It's been proven to be a lie. It was a weed joke.

It was a weed joke, too. And it was a lie, but he delivered. He was successful. He got his product out. You know, WeWork, you just brought up Adam Neumann. When you say in a document reviewed by Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan that your EBITDA is called community-based EBITDA, so you take out all the actual expenses, okay, that to me is its own special kind of fraud. But it's not criminal. You're right. But no crimes have been broken. So what I take from this is the jury got it right. But I'm wondering if our laws are just a little bit fucked up because it strikes me that I just wonder if she'd be going to prison if she didn't have ovaries. And I'm going to get a lot of shit for that.

Well, I think one of the things is, look, I think a lot about Martha Stewart. Like how many men have done the same thing she did? Why pick her? Right? Why do the Why pick her, right? Why do the prosecutors pick her? Well, it's a great story. She's a famous person. Prosecutors love ink, right?

Whatever the digital equivalent is right now. At the time, it was ink. And I think she was a great story. Same thing with Elizabeth Holmes. She's a great story for prosecutors. Let's just say prosecutors don't always operate fairly. They just pick whatever they think will cause the most attention, what they can, you know, a big splash, a warning to others. There's all kinds of reasons prosecutors prosecute.

But she's, her story is, obviously, it's also going to Hollywood, right? It's such a Hollywood story with the boyfriend that worked there, the outfit she wore, her weird voice. She's like, she sort of walks right into it. She's a caricature. Others, you know, and in the case of someone like Travis Kalanick, they just let it go. The investors decided not to do anything about it. He's an aggressive go-getter. They got a little carried away. They just were like, well, he put one over on us kind of thing. Or same thing with Elon Musk. I

mean, that is, there is a line though. There is a line. And I have to say, Adam Neumann, whether you think he crossed it, I don't think he did. I think he said what he was doing, and they knew what he was doing, and they let him do it anyway. And in that case, you know, it would be interesting if one of his investors did try to investigate, but they didn't. So that's that, right? It's just so interesting. Each of us is on the different side of the issue here. I just believe there is a simmering reservoir of misogyny in our society. Oh, yeah.

I agree with that. That if a man does this, he's an aggressive go-getter. And the key is you got to make it. If you fake it and you don't make it, you're in real trouble. Yes. I think it's the same thing that affected Hillary Clinton. Yeah. I don't think a man – I don't think people at huge rallies would be saying lock him up if she had been a he.

I think Elizabeth Holmes – I mean, they've got to put this Balwani guy in jail. Yeah. I mean, if they don't put him in jail. Yeah. If they don't – so my tweet was very straightforward. I think they made the right decision. But if she's going to prison— That's Sonny Balwani for people.

He was the number two. He's also her boyfriend, and he's going to be on trial next. But go ahead. No one gets the wrath of the public and gives DAs and juries the confidence to prosecute than a woman who acts like the mendacious fuck that they're used to seeing from men. Yeah. So there's just, I think they made the right decision. I think she should go to prison. Yeah.

There's something very uncomfortable here, Kara. I agree. I don't disagree. I think she, it reminds me so much of Martha Stewart, who did do what they said. She went to prison. She served her time. But God, there's so many. Why didn't they pick 200 other people? You know, I know why. I mean, they could catch her, and she's well-known and this and that. So it is. There is just,

there's a little bit of a stink on it, and it's hard to say that because she's also guilty, if that makes sense. Yeah, and I'm not suggesting she shouldn't go to prison. I'm suggesting more male tech CEOs who have lied should also go to prison. If we've decided that rich white men are the class of people in our society that need the greatest level of protection, well, there's a lot of shit going down from male tech. There's a lot of shit going down from male tech. We're putting, she defrauded rich white guys, but we're allowing tech executives to delay and obfuscate actions that result in greater hospital admissions of our young girls. Yeah, but to be fair, they were really rich white guys and old. I'm teasing.

I think you're right. I agree. It'll be interesting. I would love to talk to her about this. That would be an interesting thing. I don't think that's going to happen. I don't know. I'm going to ask her. I agree. It'll be interesting. I would love to talk to her about this. That would be an interesting thing. I don't think that's going to happen. I don't know. I'm going to ask her.

I'm going to ask her. I'm going to ask her. God, who is – I think I have her emails. Who is that sexy co-host you have? Who, what's his name? I'm not going to say who because we're not announcing speakers yet, but one of the speakers said that she was going to fangirl Scott. God!

Is it Emily Ratajkowski? Don't tell me. Don't tell me. I just want to imagine it's Emily. I texted it to you earlier today. You know who it is. You don't invest in our relationship. Do you know when I do an attachment to a text, Scott doesn't read it. It's like my son. What's an attachment?

It's a picture of the, oh, forget it. Nonetheless. You're sending me photos, so you're texting me photos? You're a saucy little man. I knew that was eventually going to happen. I need to speak to HR. By the way, we've got some great speakers coming on. Six of the seven speakers I've invited have said yes,

and I haven't heard from the seventh. Yes, they are, because we're great. Oh, my God. They're all saying yes. This is not my first rodeo, my friend. All right, cowgirl. All right, brokeback mountain. Okay, get on it. I just can't quit you.

That is what this relationship is. I just can't quit you. That's nice. Anyway, Scott, let's go on a quick break. When we come back, we'll look into Ben Smith's new media venture. We'll talk to a friend of Pivot, Representative Adam Schiff, about the insurrection.

Fox Creative. This is advertiser content from Zelle. When you picture an online scammer, what do you see? For the longest time, we have these images of somebody sitting, crouched over their computer with a hoodie on, just kind of typing away in the middle of the night. And honestly, that's not what it is anymore. That's Ian Mitchell, a banker turned fraud fighter. These days, online scams look more like crime syndicates than individual con artists.

And they're making bank. Last year, scammers made off with more than $10 billion. It's mind-blowing to see the kind of infrastructure that's been built to facilitate scamming at scale. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of scam centers all around the world. These are very savvy business people. These are organized criminal rings.

And so once we understand the magnitude of this problem, we can protect people better. One challenge that fraud fighters like Ian face is that scam victims sometimes feel too ashamed to discuss what happened to them. But Ian says one of our best defenses is simple. We need to talk to each other. We need to have those awkward conversations around what do you do if you have text messages you don't recognize? What do you do if you start getting asked to send information that's more sensitive? Even my own father fell victim to a, thank goodness, a smaller dollar scam, but he fell victim and we have these conversations all the time.

So we are all at risk and we all need to work together to protect each other. In business, disruption brings not only challenges, but opportunities. As artificial intelligence powers pivotal moments of change, Alex Partners is the consulting firm chief executives can rely on. Alex Partners is dedicated to making sure your company knows what really matters when it comes to AI. As part of their 2024 tech sector report, Alex Partners spoke with nearly 350 tech executives from across North America and Europe to dig deeper into how tech companies are responding to these changing headwinds. And in their 2024 Digital Disruption Report, Alex Partners found that 88% of executives report seeing potential for growth from digital disruption, with 37% seeing significant or even extremely high positive impact on revenue growth.

You can read both reports and learn how to convert digital disruption into revenue growth at www.alexpartners.com slash Vox. That's www.alexpartners.com slash V-O-X. In the face of disruption, businesses trust Alex Partners to get straight to the point and deliver results when it really matters. down 36%. App downloads from major publishers, down 33%. And the social media engagement with news articles fell a whopping 65%, according to data from News Whip. But not everyone's looking down this week. The New York Times media columnist,

Ben Smith, announced he's starting a new global news venture with Bloomberg's Justin Smith. Both of them, Justin just left Bloomberg. He's been running that organization, essentially. Ben says the new venture will hire hundreds of journalists. They obviously got some moolah behind them. We don't know who. Most of the new media

ventures are small, Puck, The Athletic. Can the Smith Brothers, you have to be named Smith to work for them, by the way, from what Ben told me, want a global operation with hundreds of journalists? There's been several efforts at this. What was that one? I'm blanking. The one that was international. Can that work? I'm excited. I love Puck.

Tell me why. Well, I love Puck. I love the information. I think journalism and journalists are the most effective cop to ever patrol the beat. And it's discouraging that their numbers have been cut in half the last 30 years while the number of PR executives manicuring the images of their douchebag clients has gone up sixfold. I think it's been bad for the Commonwealth. So the fact they're attracting capital and doing interesting things, and I love it. And I think the work they do,

you know. But is it a business? Like, listen, I started Recode in 2007. It was hard. And you sold it and made money. Yes, I did. But I'm just saying it's hard to get big. Let me, you know, I feel like I was super early pioneering with this, what's happening here. So, I have. I thought I was super early pioneering.

Well, smell you. I was. Come on. Who did that? Who did that but Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg? I think a bunch of people are doing it now. Andrew Sullivan did. I don't know, a guy named Ted Turner. Anyway,

you're amazing. Go ahead. You know what I'm saying? In the digital journalism space, in any way, these are great organizations. You're right, Puck. I read all the time. The Athletic is supposedly up for sale. How about businesses? I know you love journalists because you hang out with them a lot. But what is the – how is this different if people are not reading the news?

Is it people don't want to read the news or people don't want to engage in big organizations? On a relative basis, they're shitty businesses. The New York Times is arguably the most influential organization in the world. businesses. The New York Times is arguably the most influential organization in the world, and it trades at a smaller valuation than open-door technologies, using algorithms to buy condos in Vero Beach. So if you're looking to make money, you can make a good living in journalism, and there's going to be examples that will be very well publicized of organizations that do well. But BuzzFeed or Vox, or consider the leaders in digital media,

were worth hundreds of millions, not tens of billions. I mean, if you're just an economic animal, go into software. But thank God, there are really intelligent people who decide they want to make... I would say they kind of live to work

as opposed to work just for Benjamins. Yeah. But then why would you invest? It's a shady business. You're the investor. They come to you. The Smith brothers come to you. What do you think about?

I know a lot of people, really smart. Not just because you want to do it to hang out with Ben Smith, et cetera. No, I don't. Who I really admire. The majority, I know a lot of very wealthy people who have put serious money into Axios and other things, and there's a big, what I'll call ESG component to their investment. They think it's important. They want to get their money back. They want to make money. But they don't look at this like they look at investing in Snowflake or Ledger. These businesses are notoriously very difficult businesses to monetize. Businesses are notoriously very difficult businesses to monetize. Well, they were talking about a lot of things we had done. Like podcasts, they had talked about events.

I am a pioneer. Don't you insult my legacy. I'm just saying. Come on. I was doing them way back when. Seriously. But why would you invest? Like a lot of the people who I know who have invested, the rich people, I'm not going to go into all of them, are sort of like, oh, this sucks. Like, you know what I mean?

Because they get a lot of attention. Well, the guy from Facebook bought whatever it was, not the Atlanta, he bought, Laurie and Pal Jobs wants out. They all realize running these things. Mark is in time. There's a bunch of people. And not only that, the thing about journalists is they have enormous egos usually. They're difficult to manage. Bezos. with basically a tattoo that's a shirt in St. Bart's with his girlfriend, everyone thinks it's cute. Whereas, I mean, and Bloomberg started a media company. A media company is the ultimate beard for a billionaire. Oh, all right. Well, Bloomberg is pretty profitable, right? That was a different thing. Not Bloomberg Media. Oh, Bloomberg Media. You're right. That's right. That company that Justin, I work a lot with Bloomberg and have been canceled by Bloomberg. Not Bloomberg Media. of heat shield. But anyways, back to these startups. If you're looking to, I mean,

there's some components, these email lists, the company we just bought, Group 9 or Vox just bought. But if you look at the most successful ones in this space, the ones that bring together that alchemy of outstanding human capital, they get traction, they get people to pay, they get people to pay aren't worth the worst company in software. Yeah. Well, we're going to be discussing these issues at MIA. We're going to be discussing these very issues. So one of the things is the decoupling from Facebook and Twitter, you know, in terms of marketing and et cetera, and getting a lot of users share news in private online spaces.

Those numbers wouldn't count as engagement. I've noticed I have bought subscriptions lately because I really like their content. And I know they're not going to be killer businesses, but I bought subscriptions to San Francisco Chronicle, the Los Angeles Times. Yeah, you like local news again. They're good. They're just good. I'm buying them because they're good. I love the LA Times.

But they weren't good before, and I didn't want to buy them. I basically bought them. I subscribed to the Palm Beach Post mostly because someone said, your picture's in there. And I'm like, what? And so I immediately had to subscribe to it. Really? Yeah. Have you gone down to Mar-a-Lago to invite Donald Trump to PivotCon yet?

Oh, no. Mar-a-Lago? Mar-a-Lago. You need to sidle in there in a white suit and see if he'll come talk about Trump social. People will lose their minds if we had him, wouldn't you think? We'd have to have him. I go to Palm Beach to the Brazilian court. My favorite hotel and restaurant are there.

And I can't stand. I take the freeway now because I can't stand driving along A1A and seeing Mar-a-Lago. I literally wince when I see that place. You need to go there. I will never go there. You need to. I will never go there. White suit, a hat.

You'd look like really good if you did that. Go on. Okay, I'm in. I'm in. Never mind. Forget what I said. Get there. You need to. I will never go there. White suit, a hat. You'd look like really good if you did that. Go on. Okay, I'm in. I'm in. Never mind. Forget what I said. Get there. Go ask him.

He holds court in that lobby, I think, apparently. In any case, get back to speaking English. He's going, he has Trump media. Like he has- D-WAC, the ultimate short opportunity. Yes, but in that thing, people ignore, we're looking at Trump social, or truth social, excuse me. I keep calling it Trump social.

But they had media stuff, like cable, podcasts, events, da-da-da-da, the whole thing, the whole nine yards. So you subscribe to The Chronicle? Do you subscribe to Puck? I do. I subscribe to the LA Times. Farrah Tunde, William Kahn, some really talented people. No, I subscribe to LA Times. I subscribe to The Atlantic.

I subscribe to New York Magazine. I pay for it. Jim VanCamp does not give it to me for free. I'm not sure why. But I'm happy to pay for it. I love it. I like it too. I pay for The Washington Post.

I pay for The New York Times. The Post is fantastic. They're all great. So you just, yeah, those are all amazing properties. I've been doing a lot more based solely on quality and efficacy, usefulness for me. Okay, but I'll give you an example. I don't do it for charity like rich people do it. Every company you mentioned with the New York Times, I think it's worth less than a billion dollars.

And supposedly last year, Clubhouse raised money at $4 billion. Right, well, we'll see where that's going. Yes, yes, I get it. So what do you think of this venture? You're just happy that they're doing it? Like, yay, it's back again. Remember there was that big hubbub around content and then it fell off and now it's back? I think it's great.

I think you know them better than I do, but my sense is they're outstanding journalists and I like entrepreneurship. And whatever they do, I'll be supportive and subscribe. And best of luck to them. How about you? You know them, I don't. I think Ben is terrific. I think Ben is terrific. I think he's really a talented reporter. I think he's a scoop monster. I think he's a news monster. And I always like his stuff, whatever he does. He's got a lot of taste. But he also likes the low, too. He's a low-high guy, you know what I mean?

What does that mean? He's not all highfalutin. He also likes a good yarn or, you know, BuzzFeed was sort of a reflection in that way of him. But he's quite a good journalist and very political, smart. Just a smart guy. That's what's supposed to happen. You're supposed to have, and this is what doesn't happen in big tech, is Google, you know, people leave Google and try and start other stuff. And then Google performs infanticide on them. But people are supposed to leave great organizations like the New York Times and start their own saplings. It's the whole point. Yeah, I'm not surprised. He's entrepreneurial. He can't

sit still anywhere. He and I are very similar in that regard. Is he a pioneer like you? Is he a pioneer? Who was doing a digital news site online and then did events and then podcasts? You did get into the podcasting thing early. Early. I got into the digital news thing early. I got into the events thing right at the start. Yeah, but you know where you really excel in podcasting? What? Is finding talent. That's true.

You've just been able to uncover genius. That's true. Underappreciated genius. Not just you, but other ones. Go look at everyone who was at Recode. They're all doing really well. Anyway, let's bring in our friend of Pivot. Adam Schiff has been a member of Congress since 2001. As the chair of the House Intelligence

Committee, he played a key role in the Trump-Russia investigation and a leading part in both Trump's impeachments. He also serves on the House Committee investigating the January 6th attack. Welcome, Congressman. Great to be with you. So we've talked a lot over the years, many years, but this is the, we're speaking on the one-year anniversary of the attack, and you're headed to the floor very soon. So why don't you give us an overview of how the investigation is proceeding and what's the timeline?

I know there's an interim report maybe this spring and a final report in November, but, and possible primetime hearings. Can you give us sort of an overview? Yes. And, you know, I think we've moved with a remarkable speed. Congress doesn't usually move this fast, but in a matter of mere months, we've interviewed 300 or 350 witnesses. We've obtained over 30,000 documents. And I think learned a great deal about the multiple lines of effort to overturn the election.

It wasn't just about January 6th. It was about the run-up to the election, the aftermath of the election, the insurrection itself and what took place thereafter. We do plan to have, I think, beginning in the next few weeks, hearings so that we can tell the story to the American people, bring the American people into the confidence of the committee and learn what we're learning. At the same time that we're doing further finish this year, though, and we're moving with all alacrity because, sadly, the risk of more political violence has gone up, not down since January 6th. And we want to do everything we can to protect the country. And you're also interested in the elections next November, right? I assume you want this before they can be stopped because the Republicans, except for several of them, did not go along with this. I have no doubt we're going to finish the investigation this year one way or another.

We will compile our report based on what we know. It is certainly, I think, the hope of Donald Trump and his enablers that they can delay in court with litigation designed for that purpose of delay. But we're moving forward. We're getting information from as many sources as we can, so we're not completely reliant on any one witness or any one source of documents. So we certainly will finish our work this year, but the sooner the better. Representative, I would love for you just to take us back to the room, if you will, and that is, I think a lot of us have a fear that the outrage and just how outrageous a day and how terrible a day begins to fade with other

news and time. Can you sort of put us in the room and tell us about your day and how it played out and your colleagues' reaction to what was going on? Certainly. I remember like it was just yesterday. I can't believe it has been a full year since then. I was on the House floor during the attack. I had suggested to the Speaker months before the election that we form a small group to try to anticipate all the things that might go wrong with the election,

with the joint session. And as a result, we had been meeting a few of us for weeks to try to anticipate. And we came up with about a thousand different things that might happen except the one that did, a violent attack on the Capitol. But as a result, I was one of four managers on the floor opposing the effort to decertify the results. And I was speaking, I was listening to what the Republicans were saying, I was preparing my rebuttals. I wasn't paying attention to what was going on outside the building. But at a certain point, I started noticing members on their phones watching something. And then I noticed that the speaker was suddenly not in her chair, and she had intended to preside for the whole session. And then I saw Capitol Police officers rush onto the floor and grab our number two, Steny Hoyer, and whisk him off the floor. And then I knew something was seriously wrong. And periodically thereafter, in close succession, the Capitol Police came back on the floor, told us to get out our gas masks, which were under our seats, be prepared to get down on the ground.

There were rioters in the building. And we took out these masks that were, you know, all too well sealed in these pouches under our seat, and we struggled to get them open. And when we did open them, there was a fan that would circulate the air that started buzzing and suddenly sounded like hornets all throughout the House chamber. Just adding to the sense of alarm, you had members starting to scream at each other up in the gallery, a couple of my Democratic colleagues yelling at the Republicans about how their big lies had caused this, Republicans yelling back to shut up. And then finally, Capitol Police coming in and telling us we needed to get out.

And the banging on the doors by the insurrectionists, the breaking of the glass, the palpable sense that we were at risk. And then even more ominous, as we later learned, just how many people were attempting to break in. The realization that this attack, which had come from within, not like 9-11, which I also experienced at the Capitol, which was from outside the country, that this attack was also an attack on our democracy. So when you think about it, one of the things that's famous is Liz Cheney telling, I think, Jim Jordan, you did this. One of the things you're looking for right now is who did this, who is, and there's lots of sources right now, the latest news, and the news have been sort of been dribbling out a little bit. You all also post things on social media. I'll get to them in a second. But your committee is seeking Sean Hannity's cooperation.

What do you want from him and others at Fox News? And do you expect him to provide it? You have requests for information also for Jim Jordan and Scott Perry. There are multiple lines of effort to overturn the election that we were investigating. So it wasn't just that violent attack on the 6th, but it was efforts to use the election that we were investigating. So it wasn't just that violent attack on the 6th, but it was efforts to use the Justice Department, for example, to pressure Georgia not to certify electors or to certify an alternate slate. It was effort to pressure local elections officials to reverse their decisions or state legislators to decertify

or send an alternate slate of electors. We're investigating each of these lines of effort, and we believe that Sean Hannity, based on dozens of text messages we obtained, many from Mark Meadows, that he has particular knowledge about what was going to happen on the 6th. On January 5th, he texted that he was deeply concerned about what was going to happen on the 6th. On January 5th, he texted that he was deeply concerned about what was going to happen in the next 48 hours. He also at one point expressed concern that if they kept up this campaign on the vice president, that the White House counsel might resign. That's at least the purported implication of other messages.

resign. That's at least the purported implication of other messages. And we want to find out, how did he know? Why was he concerned before January 6th? How did he know that the White House counsel, something that wasn't public at the time, contemplated resigning over this pressure campaign at the Justice Department? So we think he has a lot to tell us and a lot to tell the American people that might help us prevent something like this in the future. And we can just, at this point, have to hope that he'd be willing to cooperate and we'll have to determine what recourse we have if that's not the case. But about half of Americans support criminal penalties, including prison time if witnesses refuse to comply. But that's just half. And that's one of the issues is that, you know, Republicans, which had resisted this committee, most Republicans, how are you going to come to a conclusion when half of them refuse to accept the investigation itself? And therefore, will there be any support if your committee finds Trump responsible, which is something that Kevin McCarthy said a year ago, actually, a little less than a year ago. And now he, of course, couldn't be less in that camp.

Well, you're right. I mean, and it's fair to point out Republicans, not only apart from a very few courageous Republicans, most of the Republican conference opposes the work of the committee, but they oppose the work of any committee. They oppose the work of a commission that would be equally divided among the members, where no subpoenas could be issued without the agreement of people on both sides of the aisle. They didn't want January 6th investigated. And look, I can understand why. They don't want exposed to the public light the misconduct of the former president and potentially their own misconduct, their own role in promulgating the big lie or their own role in voting to overturn the election. But nonetheless, in this first attack on the peaceful transfer of power, it needs to be investigated.

People do need to be held accountable and not just the foot soldiers on the ground. So we're going to do our part. You know, what we can expect when we hold our hearings, when we issue our report, you know, we can only do our very best to expose the truth, to legislate, to protect the country. It's not our role to prosecute people. That's up to the Justice Department. And we have to hope the Justice Department will aggressively do its work as well. So you're a lawyer. It feels as if, slowly, or I guess by some standards, in a crisp fashion, that the law is doing its job, that a lot of the insurrectionists or the mob are being prosecuted, and we're starting to work our way up as we find information. What happens if it feels as if we're in such uncharted territory here,

if members of the cabinet or advisors or even representatives themselves were found to have aided and abetted this insurrection? Do they get kicked out of Congress? Do they end up in jail? As a lawyer, where do you think the endgame is here for if and when we find people at different levels participated in this? Well, it'll be up to the Justice Department to determine whether there's sufficient evidence that any member of Congress, for example, or anyone else violated the criminal laws and should be prosecuted. else violated the criminal laws and should be prosecuted. The Congress itself, if we discover sufficient misconduct among our own members, have remedies of our own. Those remedies include censure. They could include something as severe as expulsion. So there are a number of possibilities. I don't want to speculate about whether any of them will be appropriate. We'll have to follow the evidence to see where it leads us. But one thing does concern me, and that is,

yes, as you say, I think the Justice Department is working methodically to hold accountable those that broke into the Capitol that day, those who assaulted police officers. And we have to hope and expect that they will follow that trail of evidence as high as it leads. But there are other, as I said, there are other lanes of effort to overturn the election, some of which may also have included serious criminal conduct. The effort by the former president to get the secretary of state in Georgia to find 11,780 votes that don't exist, that kind of effort on the phone recorded, I think would lead to an investigation of anyone else. But I see no evidence that's happening.

And that does concern me. I don't think the president is above the law or can be above the law while they're in office or out of office. And so I think we need to hope and expect the Justice Department will apply that rule of law equally to everyone and not consider anyone beyond its reach. So, you know, investigation is one thing, but resiliency is another. He's been remarkably resilient. He still remains. I don't know if you saw, there was a long time story about how he continues to be the leader of the party, the biggest fundraiser, and nobody's going to go against him in the Republican Party. The big lie has caught on rather well online.

Are you also looking at the role of tech companies playing in the day of the attack and also misinformation related to elections. Obviously, COVID is another thing. And how do you balance that with, you know, these free speech issues? We are looking at the role of social media, for example, as an organizing tool for those who gathered and attacked the Capitol on January 6th. And we're looking at the role of social media in the promulgation of the big lie and the undermining of public confidence in our elections. And so those issues, we believe, are very much within the charter of our committee. We haven't reached any conclusion in terms of what

legislative recommendations we want to take from our work. In terms of First Amendment concerns, obviously we're going to be very protective of the First Amendment. But, you know, these private platforms obviously have the ability, consistent with the First Amendment, to moderate content on their platforms. It's the reason why they were given immunity, in order to encourage them to do so. If they are not using that immunity to good effect, but instead it is shielding them from responsibility, then that's something that we

need to consider doing away with. But there are other First Amendment issues that have come up. We're very sensitive to them. They've come up in the context of Sean Hannity. And we've made it very clear we're not interested in his political commentary. We're not interested in what he says on his show. We are interested in what he knows as a fact witness, what he knows in his capacity as a advisor to the president, as one of the president's closest confidants, as one of his campaigners. And so we are doing our very best to be respectful of the First Amendment as well as other rights and privileges. Yeah, he's a journalist now. He said he wasn't, but now he is apparently. You don't have to comment. Scott? So, Representative, we've enjoyed incredible soft power around the world, but have you noticed, it just strikes me that we lose a lot of

credibility at the table with foreign powers when there's an insurrection and our elected representatives are under threat of violence from other citizens. Have you noticed a change in our currency globally when we deal with other foreign entities or allies? Without a doubt. I think the last five years have been very difficult for the United States on the world stage. The four years of the Trump administration were utterly disastrous, where we scorned our allies and the President of the United States, propped up dictators around the world. You saw the President, former President, once again, in the form of an endorsement, endorse Viktor Orban and berate our NATO allies. So those four years were disastrous. The January 6th insurrection, though, was the biggest black eye on our democracy that I can

imagine. It is exhibit A, I think, when autocrats around the world, the Putins, the Shis, and others, say that democracy is in decline or that it can't keep pace, as President Biden referred to today. And the fact that one year after that, rather than repudiate what led to that attack, the former president and his enablers continue to promulgate that lie, continue to divide the country the way they have. It certainly has weakened us on the world stage as a beacon of democracy. And that's a proud legacy of ours. There's really nowhere else, I think, for freedom loving people to turn. They're not going to turn to Russia. They're not going to turn to China. Europe has got its own problems. People still look to us from their prison cells, journalists in Turkey in their prison cells, political prisoners in Evin Prison in Iran. In the Philippines, the victims of mass extrajudicial killing look to us. The people

gathered in Tahrir Square in Egypt wanting a more representative government, they look to us. The people gathered in Tahrir Square in Egypt wanting a more representative government, they look to us. But increasingly, they don't recognize what they see. And that is a terrible tragedy for them as it is for us. So one of the things is that Donald Trump has been taken off of social media in the wake of January 6th. He's been off a year. The major platforms, he's allegedly creating another one. But a lot of the lies continue to proliferate. A majority of Americans believe another attack like January 6th is likely in the next few years, according to an Axios poll. And also the people worry about the threat to

these elections because of disinformation and everything else. Do you share that belief? And do you think prosecuting the rioters is enough? My predominant concern is not another attack on the building, not another attack on the Capitol. It's certainly possible. But my greater concern, frankly, is insurrection by other means, that they have taken this big lie and used it to usher in a series of laws around the country in different states that undermine the authority of independent elections officials and give their duties to partisans. They have been running these local technocratic elections officials out of town, literally with death threats. That, to me, is the more pointed danger to our country. Also, the broad acceptance among an increasing number of Americans of this idea

of political violence. It's not just members of Congress who are threatened. It's school board members, city council members, and others. So this is my paramount concern. And, you know, in terms of is there a way to break through and why is it that so many people continue to believe in this big lie of the former president when he doesn't have his Twitter account? Fox in its primetime most viewed hours, peddles the big lie constantly that Rupert Murdoch and others at Fox have decided they would rather have the money their network makes than a country that is whole and accepts the truth about something as important as our own elections. And now there are imitators, the Newsmaxes, the OANs

that peddle even bigger lies. And people live in that ecosystem. They don't get exposed to other sources of information. And when they do, they shut it out. And this is a huge challenge, I think, facing the country. It's not just the social media phenomenon, but also the growth of this right-wing ecosystem that allows people to live in an alternate world. There's this sort of conventional wisdom that when you're in a foxhole and you're being fired on, that you're not red or blue, you're just American. And we take comfort in that. And the military has been a fantastic vehicle for creating connective tissue. Those images of our leaders huddled in the rafters of the chamber, it just felt like you were in foxholes under fire.

And yet it doesn't appear as if there's been any sort of connective tissue that the partisanship among you and your colleagues hasn't gotten any better. Do I have that wrong? partisanship among you and your colleagues hasn't gotten any better. Do I have that wrong? You know, look, there are some, I think, reasons for optimism. Yes, leave us with optimism. Yeah, please. In the work of Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger and a handful of others, you see people of courage stepping up in the Republican Party to try to reclaim their party. The work of our January 6th Select Committee is the most

nonpartisan work going on in Congress. And that's, I think, a tribute to our members and to that spirit that you mentioned, being in the foxhole together. But it is a terrible tragedy that so many of my Republican colleagues, after seeing the destruction January 6th, continue to embrace that big lie. What we've learned in the last several years is that while courage is contagious, so is cowardice. And there's been a contagion of cowardice among the GOP leadership and membership that still marches in lockstep with the big lie and the big liar, Donald Trump. And, you know, what ultimately gives me confidence that we're going to get through this, and we will, is that the millions and millions of Americans who love and cherish our democracy vastly outnumber those who are trying to tear it down right now. And they are the ones who will see us through this.

All right. On that note, it's sort of hopeful, kind of. Thank you so much, Representative Schiff. I really appreciate it. And keep up your work. Thank you, Representative. Thank you. Well, Scott, that was depressing, don't you think?

Yeah, you feel two emotions. You feel grateful that there's thoughtful people like Representative Schiff that are kind of at it. I mean, this can't be easy work. I imagine it's a lot of long hours and a lot of—it's got to be just stressful and constant agita from the other side. But I find it incredibly depressing and disheartening that— Yeah, I have to say, he gets wildly attacked online as a liar on the Russia stuff that he over-prosecuted. Well, this just happened. No, I'm talking about the Russia stuff. It's a lot in the impeachment, shifty shift.

You know, he's got all those nicknames. But what's most disturbing is something I tweeted yesterday, which is that all these people who denied the election and who tried to overturn it are running for election offices around the country in critical states. Yeah, as if that's qualification. It was only like three people who stopped it in all these three qualified election officials who stopped a lot of this stuff. That's what's really disturbing to me. Anyway, thank you, Adam Schiff. Yeah. All right, Scott, one more quick break.

We'll be back for predictions. Thumbtack presents the ins and outs of caring for your home. Out. Procrastination, putting it off, kicking the can down the road. In. Plans and guides that make it easy to get home projects done. Out.

Carpet in the bathroom. Like, why? In. Knowing what to do, when to do it, and who to hire. Start caring for your home with confidence. Download Thumbtack today. As a Fizz member, you can look forward to free data, big savings on plans, and having your unused data roll over to the following month.

Every month at Fizz, you always get more for your money. Terms and conditions for our different programs and policies apply. Details at Fizz.ca. Okay, Scott, predictions. Give us yours, please. Well, I did my predictions event a couple weeks ago, and I just want to check in. I said that Francis Haugen would be Times First of the Year, so right out of the gates. 24 hours later, I got my first one wrong. Okay. But I also said that open seas would skyrocket in value. I think NFTs are actually more enduring than cryptocurrency because the new way you meet people is going to be online or even more so.

One or two relationships are going to be online and our means of signaling similar to Chanel handbags or Ferraris are going to be NFTs. And OpenSeas, I've gotten that looks like that's headed in the right way. I've gotten that looks like that's headed in the right way. It just announced a rounded evaluation of $13.3 billion, which is 33% greater than they raised, I think, four months ago. I said that meme stock, specifically AMC and GameStock, were about to, the bubble, if you will, was about to pop. I pulled up, I did some research. Here are Google's top 10 global news searches for 2021. Okay. I thought this was really interesting.

Number one was Afghanistan. Number two was AMC stock, three COVID vaccine, four Dogecoin, five GameStop stock, six stimulus check, seven Georgia center race, eight Hurricane Ida, nine COVID, 10 Ethereum price. So GameStop and AMC are challenged and shitty companies, respectively, trading at valuations that would imply that they're amazing companies with amazing prospects. And companies trade for three reasons, fundamentals, their earnings or their growth, or technicals, there's a short squeeze. Or, and this is a new third one, is that somehow they represent a movement. And a lot of the companies, I believe this is the year where the movement trade unwinds.

And if you read the prospectus for Rivian or Lucid, they claim that they're changing the world and emboldening a new generation and all this yoga babble bullshit. And then AMC and GameStop, this notion that it's a movement, this mythical young man- Did you love how that CEO embraced it? What a cynic. Oh my God, it's got to be. Oh my God. You want to talk about the most overpaid person in the world, but they're taking cryptocurrency if you want to go see the Avengers. Yeah. Anyways, this notion, this mythical person of a 24-year-old whose parents lost their house in 2008, and this, if you buy GameStop, you're investing in young people's future and you're sticking

it to the man. I think that myth is coming to a fast end. And you are about to see, and it's already happening. Did you see, what stock did I say was going to get crushed and represented everything bad about SPAC three months ago? You don't remember? You said, well, what SPAC's going to get hit hard? All right, I forget.

I'm going to give you one name. I don't know. Virgin Galactic. Oh, yes. You I don't know. Virgin Galactic. Oh, yes, you've been going on. Virgin Galactic's 52-week high was 60. 90 days ago, it was 32. Do you know what it is today? I don't know, three?

It's 12. Oh? It's 12. Where's it going next? I think Virgin Galactic is what I call, you know, it's a Mach 3 train wreck. I've never seen a company more supply constrained. They have to execute perfectly. Wait, no, a Mach 3 train wreck? There's not a Mach 3. it's a Mach 3 train wreck. I've never seen a company more supply constrained. They have to execute perfectly. Wait, no, a Mach 3 train wreck?

There's not a Mach 3. It's a Mach 3 plane wreck. Well, a train wreck, and I'm using the analogy of fast. Oh, okay, so you're mixing planes and trains. I'm a pioneer in mixed metaphors. I'm assuming. Anyways. I would like some credit.

I think it's, I think, okay, let me put it another way. I think it's a shitty company. Okay, good, okay, got it. And I think it should have never been public. And it's being used by an ATM by a guy who's trying to bail out his airlines and cruise ships. I think this is literally just, this is the ultimate pump and dump vehicle, the ultimate market employee. But he did go into the sky in a cool suit. He did. AMC and GameStop stock are not going to be the most searched stories this year.

And if they are, it's going to be for all the wrong reasons. All right. In addition, you're going to see, and I'm doubling down here, the automobile market. Toyota just became the best-selling car in America. Yes, they did. It's the best-run automobile company in the world. And Honda gets $10,000 in market cap per car they produce. BMW, an amazing company, gets $30,000. Toyota, which investors love, the market gives them $120,000 in market capitalization for every car they produce.

But wait, what do they give Rivian? $1.9 million per car. Tesla, $2.3 million per car. You want to talk about a stock that's going to get kicked in the electric nuts over and over the next six to 12 months? Investors love him. You keep trying to resist the love of Elon Musk by his fans. But go ahead. Lucid has a market capitalization equivalent to $5 million per car ordered right now versus

Toyota. They're betting on the future. Betting on the future, Scott. So Lucid's getting 40 times the market cap per car. I mean, OK. And they try to do this. Anyways, my prediction, meme stocks, movement stocks, whatever you want to call this, companies claiming to be solving climate change so they can cash out. All right.

The Reckoning is here in 2022. The Reckoning by Scott Galloway. Okay. All right. Okay. I like that. I like that prediction. Do you have any?

I predict. Well, you know, it's interesting. I have all these anti-streamers on my ass because they're like, see, Spider-Man. I'm like, but all the rest didn't do well. Like, there's going to be a bunch of tentpoles that are going to hold up theatrical. And I don't dislike theatrical. I went to see Spider-Man in theater. But for mid-level movies, as Ted Sarandos said at Code, are finished, except online.

Like, it's really going to be hard. And these people are like, it's not good for this. It's not good for that. See, it's not working. It doesn't matter. Years ago, as I said, when I wrote that mobile was going to take over everything and everyone was like, no, phones are home, you know, this and that. It's a trend that is so, everyone will be watching at home.

100%. Sorry. I get it, and it's not good for artists right now. 100%. It's great for consumers. And anytime something's, you know, Steve Jobs said something, you start with what the consumer wants and go backwards. You don't start with the technology and go forwards. And consumers like it.

They also like going to theaters for tent poles. They do for one or two of them, and it will sustain and hold it, especially as they raise prices, as they should if the experience is better. Nonetheless, most movies will be streamed. Thank you. We talked a lot about Dune. I think it's a perfect example.

They were saying because they released the day and date that messed it all up and the second weekend drop off. It's bullshit. For a while it will sustain. You can't force consumers into a behavior. You can't. Thank you. It was, first off, one of the great books of, I think it was the 80s, Frank Herbert. A fantastic book that brought together politics and science fiction. The movie, okay, maybe even

good, not great, not enough to get people to go into the movie theaters. If they had taken most of the edits and strung it out into eight 40-minute episodes, it would have been the talk of the water cooler or the virtual water cooler for eight weeks running, either how bad it was or how good it was. This format does not work. You want to get a group of people in denial together, have a dinner party with people who own office space and movie theaters. They are both- They just go crazy at me. They're like, you're wrong. I'm like, oh my God, I'm talking about a secular trend shift. The same thing with work and home. When I was saying that like years ago, they were like, no, it's not. I was like, oh, it is. That's where it's headed. And now of course, you and Adam Newman are co-investing in apartment buildings, which is very exciting.

Me and Adam. I'm glad you're together because as my mom says, aren't you gay? There we go. I interviewed him on stage. He is very handsome. You never know. You like his hair. Few beers.

Few beers. His hair. You could stroke his locks. He's a beautiful man. He is. I interviewed him on stage at J.P. Morgan. Oh. And he wasn't wearing any shoes.

And in case movie people, I'm right, and eventually you will see. Back to movies. Back to movies. Anyway, we'll see. We'll see. I'm now arguing with 20 people on it. It's not good for artists. I'm like, it didn't say it was.

Didn't say it was. Well, you know what, Cara? You know why you're in all these unproductive arguments? It's your phrasing. Boom! That's the kind of humor people come here for. You're the one that got in trouble for Holmes, and I'm the one that developed an incredible discussion about the issue. But Stephanie Ruhle was mad at both of us, you know, for that.

She was mad at us? Stephanie was like, blah, blah, blah. Anyway, she doesn't believe that's the case. She thinks she's just guilty, while Stephanie, she is. And she's maybe going to jail. Okay, Scott, that is the show. We'll be back. This is a very lively show and also depressing with Adam Schiff, but we'll see how that goes.

We'll be back on Tuesday for more. Please read us out. Today's show was produced by Laura Naiman, Evan Engel, and Taylor Griffin. Ernie and Jatot engineered this episode. Thanks to Drew Burrows. Make sure you're subscribed to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or frankly, wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media. We'll be back next week for another breakdown of all things tech and business. Let's not forget that the greatest deliberative body in history,

our representatives, us, were forced to hide in the rafters. Let's hold people accountable. Let's make sure that America continues to be the greatest experiment in history, a terrible one-year birthday. Have a good rest of the week here.