Prof G Markets - Did the U.S. Just Hand its AI Edge to China?

Episode Date: December 10, 2025

Ed Elson unpacks the news that the U.S. is allowing Nvidia’s advanced H200 chip sales to China with Chris McGuire, Senior Fellow for China and Emerging Technologies at the Council on Foreign Relations. Then, Alex Heath, author of the Sources newsletter and co-host of the Access podcast, joins to explore Google’s new smart glasses and their implications for the wearables market. Finally, Ed breaks down what a new report on OnlyFans reveals about the loneliness problem in America.  Subscribe to the Access podcast on YouTube Check out our latest Prof G Markets newsletter Follow Prof G Markets on Instagram Follow Ed on Instagram and X Follow Scott on Instagram Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for this show comes from Shopify. With Shopify, it's easy to create your brand, open up for business, and get your first sale. Use their customizable templates, powerful social media tools, and a single dashboard for managing it all. The best time to start your new business is right now, because established in 2025 has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?

Sign up for a $1 per month trial period at Shopify.com slash box business, all lowercase. Go to Shopify.com slash Fox Business to start selling with Shopify today. Shopify.com slash Vox Business. Support for this show comes from Nordstrom. Oh, what fun. Nordstrom has gifts for all your favorite people, all in one place, like beauty sets, sweaters, jewelry and toys, with tons under $100. Need ideas? Check out gifts from Ugg, skims, dipteak, free people, Stanley, and more. Plus, explore their amazing gift shop in stores and

online. Free styling, free shipping, and order pickup, make it all easy. Add Nordstrom. Support for this show comes from Odu. Running a business is hard enough. So why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other? Introducing Odu. It's the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier, CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, and more. And the best part, In part, Odu replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch. So why not you?

Try Odu for free at Odu.com. That's ODOO.com. Today's number 75. That is the percentage of top-grossing movies that are now sequels and reboots. That number is up from 25% into 30. more proof that Hollywood's greatest special effect is copy and paste. Money markets left. If money is evil, then that building is held. Welcome to Prof.G Markets. I'm Ed Elson. It is December 10th. Let's check in on yesterday's

market vitals. The major indices were muted ahead of the Federal Reserve's interest rate decision due today, notably the Russell 2000 hit an all-time high. Meanwhile, the yield on 10-year treasuries was stable, so was the dollar Bitcoin rose, and finally news broke in after-hours trading that SpaceX is pursuing an IPO in 2026. According to reports, the company is seeking to raise more than $30 billion. That would make it the biggest listing ever. Okay, what else is happening? In a sharp turn for US AI policy, the U.S. is greenlighting advanced chip sales to China. President Trump has announced that Nvidia can sell its H-200 chips to China

in exchange for a 25% cut for the U.S. government. He claims that President Xi Jinping, quote, responded positively to the proposal. NVIDIA stock climbed around 2% in response. However, after that announcement, the Financial Times reported that Beijing is already moving to limit access to those chips. By Tuesday morning, Nvidia gave back those gains. and closed in the red. Okay, here to discuss what is going on here

with these H-200s and our AI chip policy, we are speaking with Chris McGuire, Senior Fellow for China and Emerging Technologies at the Council on Foreign Relations. Chris, thank you for joining us on Prof G Markets. Yeah, of course. Thanks for having me yet. So we've gotten this announcement from the president. NVIDIA can now sell H-200 chips to China.

But this is the next development in a story that seems to keep on going in multiple different directions. First, it was that we can't sell the chips. Now we can. Then we can. What is the timeline here? What has actually happened and how has this news changed our policy on whether the U.S. can or cannot send chips to China? Yeah, that's a good question. I'll just walk through quickly the history here.

So it was starting in October 2022, the United States first implemented policies to say the most advanced AI chips that were actually drawn in line the A100's level below this one, the previous generation, anything more advanced than that cannot be advanced to China. It cannot be sold to China. The policy at the time was to maintain as large of a lead as possible over China. And there are basically two prongs to that. One was maximally slowing China down in AI and the other one was maximally investing at home. So that has been the policy. There's been various kind of ways to tighten it and close loopholes over the years. But the other prominent one is at the beginning of the Trump administration, NVIDIA consistently kind of made chips that just worked around. And the Trump administration in April of this year kind of closed all the loopholes, said, NVDI can't be in the China market. But then quickly reverse that policy and allowed the H20,

which was a much less advanced chip to be sold to China. Now they are taking a much more significant step to say that the H-200 can be sold to China, which is the first chip that is over all of the original thresholds. This is the first time that we're really exporting AI chips that are far greater than the intent of the controls. And that really would provide a pretty substantial plus-up in China's compute capability. It's six times better than the H-20. It's nine times over the export control limits. So even though it's the previous generation chip,

It's not the Blackwell chip that's the most advanced. It's still a very, very capable chip, and it's by far the most chip, most capable chip ever set to China. So that's kind of a timeline here of how all this has played out. Obviously, big questions about what does this mean in the future, but also kind of, you know, why does this matter? And what are the implications that we can talk through? Yeah, I appreciate that timeline. Sounds like under Biden, we had restrictions, but looser restrictions. Then we tightened a lot.

then we slightly loosened, now we're slightly loosening again. I guess my question is, why? Why are we now loosening a little bit more? What was the impetus for this? Yeah, I think actually all the changes before now were more on the margins. The big changes, I think, were October 22 when the United States first implemented these controls and I first said AI chips to China are going to be banned, and then the action yesterday where we said, actually, we are willing to export advanced AI chips to China.

So those are like the real bookends. Everything else in the middle, I think, is more the kind of details of the story. The rationale of the control was because large numbers of advanced chips are necessary to make advanced AI models, and China cannot make advanced chips themselves. This is a significant advantage the United States has over China and AI. It's probably the only significant advantage the United States has over China and AI. I think on talent, algorithms, data, electricity generation applications. It's either a watch for China's ahead, but hardware is the area where we are very ahead.

There actually has been pretty significant bipartisan support for this policy historically. But Jensen Huang has argued very vehemently, particularly over both administrations, but particularly effectively in this administration, to lessen those policies. Invalid question as to why. I think from NVIDIA's perspectives, they definitely want to have a more diverse customer base. They have, you know, three, I think three companies probably make, I think make up 50% of their revenue. That poses a understandable strategic issue for anyone who leads a business, so they want to be able to sell to more providers. But that probably necessitates them selling to China.

Up until now, the U.S. government has said that's not in the U.S. national interest. That might be an NVIDIA's interest, but we think that's going to materially. advanced China's AI capabilities, which poses national security threats, and therefore we're not going to let it happen. I think the President Trump has, you know, deciding this has upended that, and is basically saying whatever is good for Nvidia is good for America. Personally, I think I think Nvidia is a fantastic company that produces amazing products as doing great things, but I think that I probably wouldn't make us blanket a statement personally. Yeah, I guess that's the part that is interesting, is that it seemed that this was all about national security. We can't do it. We can't

give sell our chips to China. It's too important. It's too dangerous. And now we're deciding, yes, we can do it. And I guess the thing that's confusing as a viewer, as an observer from the administration is why, why now? Is it that Jensen is now buddies with the administration? That's certainly what it begins to look like when we see all these dinners and maybe we're being, I don't know, too blunt there. But that's suddenly what it appears. I mean, what is it do we think? why is the administration deciding that this national security concern, which seemed like such a big deal, is no longer as big of a deal? I think it's a very good question. And the, I do think the answer to why this happened is like it came down to personal relationships. And I think, you know, Jensen Huang has convinced the president that this is a good thing. I think there are many people in D.C. on Capitol Hill in the administration who are very skeptical of this, who do not believe that we should be sending China. our most advanced technologies and have concerns about how China can use AI in the military

and defense and espionage realms to undermine U.S. national security, it has active plans to do so. So I think, look, there are other arguments that people make for exporting the chips. They'll tell you, well, if we don't export them, Huawei will fill the vacuum. I think that one I disagree with, because actually, if you look at the U.S. NVIDIA and Huawei's AI chip roadmaps. NVIDIA's chips are getting substantially better. They're already five times better, and in two years

they're going to get to about 20 times better. China's chip making capability is very constrained. It is the one thing that they can't make really well. Sificate AI chips, they're the most complicated thing to make in the world. So I don't think they'll fill the gap. The idea that we could get, you know, the country

China addicted to U.S. chips, I also just don't think there's been any technology where China has ever accepted being reliant on a foreign power, particularly, you know, they have been adamant not to be reliant on the United States, in particular, on semiconductors. So I don't think there's any putting the toothpaste back to the tube on this. Yeah. So look, there are arguments, but I personally don't think they, they carry as much water or worn out by the history of the data. I think the reason is because, you know, personal relationships have pushed big policy

decisions across the line. Yeah, it is very interesting, just from a national security, what is best for America perspective, where on the one hand, it's, well, we don't want to be giving China chips to advance their AI efforts. And then on the other hand, well, do we like that we have this leverage? Do we like the fact that they are so dependent on us? And I think what is very interesting is this more recent report that we heard from the Financial Times, which is that Beijing, Xi Jinping, China, is actually actively limiting how many of these H-200 chips their own companies can buy. So, in other words, they're saying,

we actually don't want to buy them. We're going to try to restrict ourselves. We're going to cut ourselves off from this. What do you make of that report? Yeah, that is very interesting. And we've seen this play out multiple times over the last few months. I mean, when the United States initially allowed the H-20, so the kind of less good AI chip to go to China, China has blocked that.

And I think that was, in my opinion, very likely, a negotiating ploy. I think they were trying to push for the more advanced chip, and that ploy worked. I do think there is an element here where China is trying to make sure that they protect their own market, right? They are trying to make AI chips. Huawei is making AI chips. They're not nearly as good. They're not making nearly as many.

But they are trying to do it. And China will make sure those chips get sold. They're not going to let those chips get unsold and just stuck in warehouses. So they will manipulate their domestic market to say, hey, these are the things that we need to use domestic chips for and make sure that the Huawei chips can continue to all get sold and be used. And that will be the case, no matter how many chips they make. But, yeah, the question of whether or not they actually, I'm sure they do have concerns about backdoors and security, but whether or not they would actually be willing to forego

the very substantial plus-ups in compute capability that sending H-200s would represent. I'm a little more skeptical, but, you know, countries make silly decisions all the time, so I don't know. Chris McGuire, Senior Fellow for China and Emerging Technologies at the Council on Foreign Relations, Chris, this is fascinating stuff. Thank you for joining us.

Thank you very much having it. After the break, Google's next product, smart glasses. If you're enjoying the show, give Profi Markets a follow. Support for the show comes from Vanguard. To all the financial advisors listening, let's talk about bonds for a minute.

Capturing value and fixed income is not easy. Bond markets can be massive, murky, and let's be real, a lot of firms throw a couple flashy funds you're wearing, call it a day. But not Vanguard. Vanguard's, been in the game a long time and their scale gives them a serious edge. They're able to invest

across all kinds of sectors, maturities and geographies, which means they can spot and act on opportunities that others might miss. Some managers out there promise big returns, but those usually come with big risks, and that can mean a roller coaster ride for investors. Vanguard takes a steadier approach. It's not always flashy, but it sets the standard for what dependable investing should look like. So, if you're looking to give your clients consistent results year in and year out, go see the record for yourself at vanguard.com slash audio. That's vanguard.com slash audio. All investing is subject to risk. Vanguard marketing corporation distributor. Support for the show comes from public.com. You're thoughtful about

where your money goes. You've got your core holdings, some high conviction picks, maybe even a few strategic option plays on the side. The point is, you've engaged with your investments, and public gets that. That's why they built it. investing platform for those who take it seriously. On public, you can put together a multi-asset portfolio for the long haul. Stocks, bonds, options, it's all there. Plus, an industry leading 3.8% APY high-yield cash account. Switch to the platform built for those who take investing seriously. Go to public.com slash prop G and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com slash prop G. Paid for by public investing. All investing involves the risk of loss,

including loss of principle. Brokered services for U.S. listed, registered securities, options, and bonds, and a self-directed account are offered by Public Investing, Inc., member FINRA, and SIPC, complete disclosure available at public.com slash disclosures. Race the runners. Raise the sales. Raise the sales.

Captain, an unidentified ship is approaching. Over. Roger. Wait. Is that an enterprise sales solution? Reach sales professionals, not professional. sailors. With LinkedIn ads, you can target the right people by industry, job title, and more. Start converting your B2B audience today. Spend $250 on your first campaign and get a free $250

credit for the next one. Get started today at LinkedIn.com slash campaign. Terms and conditions apply. We're back with Profi Markets. Google is taking another swing at Smart Glasses, and this time it is betting that AI will make the difference. More than a decade after the Google Glass, the company has announced plans to launch AI-powered glasses in 2026. It is creating an audio-only model that lets users speak directly with Gemini.

It's also working on a version with an in-lens display capable of showing navigation prompts and real-time translation. The hardware will be developed through partnerships with Samsung, Gentle Monster, and Warby Parker. So, here to help us, unpack what this announcement means for Google and smart glasses and wearables at large. We are speaking with Alex Heath, author of the Sources newsletter and co-host of the Access podcast. Alex, good to see you. Good to see you, man. So these smart glasses, I think the first

question is, Google already did it. We had the Google Glass. It was the first example of smart glasses. Then they stopped doing it because it was a dramatic failure. Now they're doing it again, what's changed here? I think the short answer is AI. I think they see a huge opportunity, and I've talked to their leadership there about this, to build Google for your face, which honestly is a pretty compelling idea. A lot of them inside Google are also obsessed with this idea of super memory of having all your Googly context, which is for a lot of people, it's their work, it's their documents, it's their email, it's their calendar, it's maps, all these touch points. Google has like over a dozen products with over two billion users, I think.

So all these touch points with Gemini as like the orchestrator in a heads up kind of on your face, seeing the world and understanding it, you know, product is a super compelling idea. And that just didn't exist when glass came out. I mean, AI was but a twinkle on everyone's eye. And society has also gotten to a point where people see the meta glasses out and about. There's all these AI wearables. Sam and Johnny are doing their thing. And there's just this growing, I think, social acceptance of wearables and AI. And I think the timing for them feels good. And it doesn't hurt that, you know, meta is seeing early sales traction with the Rayban partnership, starting to actually sell, you know, millions of units a year. Those kind of numbers will get anyone who is a

potential competitor interested in the space. Do we know anything about what they will look like or how they will work? Do we have any specs out? Yeah, so they're adopting the meta approach, and it's actually the Android approach. I do think you could map this to how they've approached Android, where they work with a ton of OEMs. And in this case, the initial products are going to be in partnership with Warby Parker, Gentle Monster, which is a huge eyewear brand in Asia, some others.

and then I do think we will see, I don't know if they're going to call it glass per se, that would be pretty, pretty ballsy. I think they should. I've told them that. But we will see a first-party Google experience, too, in the same way that Google has pixel, but then Android is everywhere,

and Samsung sells the most Android. They really want this platform, this Gemini AR software platform, to be the bet and to be everywhere, which is a real assault on medicine. meta's strategy. Luckily, meta has the Ellsore Luxottica partnership, but Google is going for all the others. And then that just leaves Apple with a fully, you know, classic Apple vertically integrated approach. And I expect to see, you know, the Apple glasses in a couple years. It's so interesting

to see how this market has evolved over time in Silicon Valley because, you know, we had one era where everyone thought glasses were the next thing. And we saw the Google Glass. We saw the snap spectacles. We've even seen, you know, the Vision Pro, we've seen what's happened with the headsets and all of that. Then it seems to get put to bed, and people seem to say, okay, this isn't going to happen. Now it's back, and I wonder why it's back.

Is it, I mean, you mentioned AI is playing a piece of this. Is it that meta also proved that it can work? Yeah. If I guess they look good? Yeah, if they look good. I think, you know, people in tech don't understand. understand this basic concept of like people don't want to wear ugly things. And I think for a long time, it was really hard to get through everyone's head that like the bar to putting something on you

with technology is just super, super high. It's not like a phone. It's not like trying a foldable or something. And Meta finally cracked that with Rayban and also Luxottica and a product that's not bad. You know, it's not, it's not amazing. The AI is not really what people use it for, but for taking photos for listening to podcasts, all that stuff. It's a good product and it looks like glasses and you can't really tell the difference. And that, that is the bar. So showing that and then seeing the early sales traction, yes, I think that kind of quote unquote validates the space. I mean, man, I've been reporting on air glasses for like a decade and they were kind of the original AI in the sense of like all these founders all the way up from like Zuck down to Evan

Spiegel would talk about this thing is the next major platform that's going to change everything. and re-architect how we use technology. And AI ended up kind of being that thing, right, in the last few years. And now I think everyone who's been, you know, the builders in Silicon Valley who have been obsessed with air glasses as a replacement for the phone are finally going like, oh, AI now supercharges this, and we have a path to making this socially acceptable. Just looking at Wall Street's reaction, we didn't really see any reaction in the stock.

We did see a huge reaction in Warby Parker stock up 24%. I mean, you know, this is a far smaller company, so that's why we're seeing that. But what is crazy to me? Because this Warby Parker thing was, this is over a year old. Like, they announced they were doing something with Warby Parker, I think, in the spring. Yeah. I just, it seems a little twitchy to me. Yeah.

What do you make of Wall Street's reaction overall? I mean, just on the Google side, Wall Street doesn't seem to care that much about this. They're certainly not really pricing this in. If this is going to be the next frontier, the next platform, investors don't seem to believe it or take it seriously yet. It's too uncertain. I mean, the timelines are uncertain. Everyone would tell you, they'd tell me in interviews,

that AIR glasses are right around the corner. They're just going to be in three years, and they've been saying that for the last 10 years. So it's just a platform that has constantly been delayed. So I'm not surprised by the reaction or lack of with Google, but it's an AI story, right? There's Gemini involved. So if any, Jim and I is going to touch your stock as a smaller company,

you're going to get that bubble pop that you talk about so much on this show. Those kind of stock reactions are the bubble at. I mean, let's be honest. Like, this announcement does not warrant a 24% jump in Warby Parker's stock. I am not a stock analyst, but I just know the, I know facts and I know just like reality.

And it's ridiculous. And so I think just everyone is so twitchy about AI. And if you can say you're aligning with who is seen right now was kind of objectively the category leader in AI, Google, of course you're going to get that pop. It doesn't mean it's here to stay, but you'll get it. Just as someone who's covered this stuff and studied these technologies for a long time,

what do you think of AI glasses and smart glasses? Do you think that they are the future? Will we be walking around interacting with screens in front of our eyes? I always have. I've loved the idea of it. the sci-fi idea of it and i've used so many prototypes over the years some are good some are bad did you get to use the the meta displays that they just teased or i guess released a few months ago no i i've tried on i've tried on the ray bands and taking some photos and

yeah played music but i've got those um those are a genuinely wow moment when you do the demo um they're not like a product in the sense that they're ready to be like worn all day and used all day and the AI is not quite there. But when you see the interaction modality, the way it feels, the like kind of aha of like, oh, getting this context in my vision, it's just like obvious. It's just obvious, man, that this is where it's going

because it's just so much more natural. It's just a natural way to use technology. Again, it doesn't look natural right now and it's clunky and like they've got to iron the bugs out and there's a lot of those. I'm not actually of the opinion that a lot of other, I would say, like armchair experts are.

that like there's all these fundamental breakthroughs that need to happen for AR glasses to be mainstream. I actually do think it's kind of inevitable at this point when you use the meta displays. It's like, wow, they've got a couple years of iterating on this, and this is a pretty compelling product. Whereas before it was like, they keep saying it's a couple years out, but who knows, I haven't been able to take anything home. And so that was a big moment. And I think we'll have a couple of those in the next couple of years with Google and Apple. But again, I don't, the phone is safe. You know, it's never going to go away. And I don't even know if it's going to be meaningfully disrupted within five years.

You know, if you're trying to, like, short Apple over this, I wouldn't. But I do think it's inevitable just because of the natural use of it. Just on Apple, I mean, the implications here is that this will ultimately disrupt the phone in some way. Maybe it won't replace it, but it will certainly change the way we interact with technology. Apple's got the headset. They've got the Vision Pro. they're now scaling that back because it's been kind of a flop.

Are they working on glasses? Do we know if they are going to do glasses? Yes, they are. I and others are hearing 2027-ish, maybe 28 for V1. Notably, META just hired Alan Die, Apple's head of design,

who oversaw Vision OS, and obviously was intimately familiar with the goals Glasses roadmap, and decided to leave Apple before that roadmap was shipped. So that, I think, says something, doesn't it? Yeah. Well, this Glasses race is something we will continue to cover. Alex Heath, author of The Source's newsletter and co-hosts of the Access podcast,

always good to see you. Thanks, Alice. Always good. Thanks, Ed. A new report on OnlyFans just came out, and it takes a look at how much people actually spent on the platform in 2025. It also breaks down these numbers by region.

So we got a picture of not only how addicted the world is to OnlyFans, but also which countries are most addicted to OnlyFans. As a reminder, for those who don't know, OnlyFans is a creator platform, but it might as well be called a porn platform. The way it works is people, primarily young women, post-sexual and illicit content in exchange for money.

And unlike regular porn sites, which are primarily driven by ads, this is a subscription-driven business. So, primarily young men will pay a monthly subscription to get access to videos and images of primarily young women. Again, little heteronormative, but that is generally what is happening on the platform. Okay. So, let's get to the report. How much did people spend on OnlyFans in 2025?

Well, by country. In France, people spent $237 million. In Mexico, people spent $291 million. In Canada, people spent $355 million. In the UK, people spent $531 million. But the number one spender in the world was, indeed, the United States, which spent $531 million. on OnlyFans, again, in 2025, $2.6 billion. So that is more money than this nation spends on socks or on toothpaste or on phone charges. It is also more money than our government spends on all of American public media. $2.6 billion. That's how much we spent on OnlyFans. Now, there's a reason that business news is important to us. It's not just that it's entertaining. It's not just that it impacts our portfolios and

impact stocks. But sometimes it can also provide something of a window into what is actually happening at the societal level. People can say things. They can write stories. They can go on Instagram and TV and tell you this is what's happening in the world. But money talks for itself. It isn't biased. It's neutral. It is a true reflection of who we are. we care about, and what we value. And so I will tell you this statistic, again, Americans spent in 2025 $2.6 billion on OnlyFans. Now, if that doesn't tell us what is wrong with our society right now, I don't know what does. As I've said on the show before, it's not just that this is porn.

Porn has been around for a long time. Porn isn't new. But what is new with only fans is the monetization and the commodification of what is a fake relationship with a person. It's the fact that young Americans are paying literally billions of dollars a year, not just to look at naked women on the internet,

they can do that on Pornhub for free, but to engage in what they believe is an intimate and private relationship with a woman who, in reality, has no idea who they are and who, more importantly, doesn't give a fuck about them. It is literally a business now. It's something close to prostitution, but not quite, because it's also scratching this emotional itch. It's filling this void that exists not just when you don't have sex, but also when you don't have companionship, when you don't have friends, when you don't have love. And this is how bad the loneliness problem has gotten.

It has literally become a multi-billion dollar industry, and it is ruining the lives of young men literally by the millions. And that's not hyperbole. There are nearly 400 million users on OnlyFans today. Almost all of them are men. So we will continue to track this. I don't see any evidence that the business is going to slow down. And if I had to make a bet, my bet would be that OnlyFans continues to crush it in 2026. But let's be clear, this is about as close to the downfall of society as we're going to get. We went from Playboy to Hustler to Pornhub and now OnlyFans. And from what I've read, people were very concerned about those businesses throughout history. But I do believe we are beginning to approach the end game here. And I don't think that there is one company in the

world that says more about what is wrong with society and what is wrong with young men in particular than OnlyFans. Okay, that's it for today. This episode was produced by Claire Miller, edited by Jill Pathson, and engineered by Benjamin Spencer. Our associate producer is Alison Weiss. Our research team is Dan Shalon, Isabella Kinsel, Chris Nodonoghue, and Mia Silverio, and our technical director is Drew Burroughs.

Thank you for listening to Profi Markets from Profi, Media. If you liked what you heard, give us a follow. I'm Ed Elson. I'll see you tomorrow. Support for this show comes from Odu. Running a business is hard enough. So why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other? Introducing Odu. It's the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, and more. And the best part, O-DU replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch. So why not you? Try O-D-U for free at O-D-O-O-O-O-com. That's O-D-O-O-O-O-com.

Does it ever feel like you're a marketing professional just speaking into the void? But with LinkedIn ads, you can know you're reaching the right decision makers, a network of 130 million of them, in fact. You can even target buyers by job title, industry, company, seniority, skills, and did I say job title? See how you can avoid the void and reach the right buyers with LinkedIn ads. Spend $250 on your first campaign and get a free $250 credit for the next one. Get started at LinkedIn.com slash campaign.

Terms and conditions apply. Ever feel like your work tools are working against you? Too many apps, endless emails, and scattered chats can slow everything down. Zoom brings it all together, meetings, chat, docs, and AI companion seamlessly on one platform. With everything connected, your workday flows, collaboration feels easier, and progress actually happens. Take back your workday at zoom.com slash podcast and zoom ahead.