Podcasts about First Republic

THIS IS A PREVIEW. GET THE ENTIRE EPISODE ON PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/lionsledbydonkeys/posts/history-of-life-167750770?pr=true

Keith breaks down why global crises, geopolitical shocks, and nonstop "doom" headlines haven't stopped stocks and real estate from reaching near all-time highs, and what that means for investors focused on inflation-resistant assets.  He also discusses Memphis as a surprising cash-flow market poised to benefit from the AI boom, sharing details on an upcoming webinar with Mid South Homebuyers.  Keith is joined by real estate investor and educator Jared Garfield to unpack the "Seven-Figure Solution," a strategy that combines cash-flowing rentals with tax-advantaged life insurance to create liquidity, reduce risk, and support long-term retirement income.  Together, they explore how disciplined portfolio growth, smart leverage, and coordinated tax planning can help real estate investors better align their assets with their long-term financial goals. Episode Page: GetRichEducation.com/619 For access to properties or free help with a GRE Investment Coach, start here: GREmarketplace.com GRE Free Investment Coaching: GREinvestmentcoach.com Get mortgage loans for investment property: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Invest with Freedom Family Investments.  For predictable 10-12% quarterly returns, visit FreedomFamilyInvestments.com/GRE or text  FAMILY to 66866  Join Mid South Home Buyers' one-time, free live webinar featuring Keith Weinhold on September 30 at GetRichEducation.com/MidSouth to learn how Memphis' economic expansion could create new real estate investment opportunities, and have your questions answered in real time. Will you please leave a review for the show? I'd be grateful. Search "how to leave an Apple Podcasts review"  For advertising inquiries, visit: GetRichEducation.com/ad Best Financial Education: GetRichEducation.com Get our wealth-building newsletter free— GREletter.com  Our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/GetRichEducation Follow us on Instagram: @getricheducation Complete episode transcript: Keith Weinhold  0:02   Welcome to GRE. I'm your host Keith Weinhold. The world is about to end again. It's the economic disaster that never arrives. I'll break it down. Then you've been earning money and investing well all these years. How does it all go together? It can culminate in the seven-figure solution, it's about seeing your future today on Get Rich Education. What if I told you that one of America's strongest cash flow real estate markets is also becoming the new brains and brawn behind AI? That city is Memphis, believe it or not. And September 30th, we're going to show you why the smart money is paying attention now, along with an investing opportunity you won't want to miss. Join me, Terry Kerr and Matthew Van Horn of Mid South Homebuyers, the largest turnkey company in Memphis with more than 6,000 homes under management, for a free live webinar, the likes of which I've never done before, we're going to look at what billions in new investment could mean for jobs, housing demand, neighborhood appreciation, and your portfolio. Everyone who attends live will also get exclusive access to the best deal terms Mid South has ever offered. Reserve your free seat at getricheducation.com/midsouth again that september 30. Don't say we didn't tell you. Save your spot at getricheducation.com/midsouth.   Speaker 1  1:39   You're listening to the show that has created more financial freedom than nearly any show in the world. This is Get Rich Education.   Keith Weinhold  1:55   Welcome to GRE from Kankakee, Illinois, to Cherokee, Iowa, and across 188 nations worldwide. I'm Keith Weinhold. This is Get Recid Education, and the world is about to end. Even if you survive, your portfolio surely won't. Oh, jeez. At least that's the impression you get from mass media and what I'll call the Doom Scroll Industrial Complex. Fear creates urgency. Urgency attracts eyeballs. Eyeballs attract ad dollars. And I guess that using a slogan like "everything will probably be fine" well, that's never been a great ratings strategy. Now, can what has happened since 2020. Just this cheery little sequence: COVID, then Ukraine, Israel, Gaza, tariffs, and then the war in Iran. All that just since 2020. I mean, that right there sounds less like an economic timeline and more like a movie plot, or that the world is repeatedly spinning the wheel of misfortune. Yet after all of that, what is the result? Both stocks and residential real estate are near all-time highs. Apparently, the apocalypse has been postponed yet again-at least economically speaking. Now let's zoom out and break down these threats and a few more, all just since 2020, because 2020 is the year where, of course, you had the COVID-19 pandemic, economic shutdowns, the fastest major stock bear market in history, supply chain breakdown. You saw empty shelves, and there was unprecedented government intervention from the Paycheck Protection Program to stimulus checks to mortgage loan forbearance. Then, in 2021 and 2022, you had post-COVID inflation and supply shortages. Now, this was more of a result, not strictly geopolitical, but a major investment threat, and that led to aggressive interest rate hikes. From 2022 to the present, you have Russia's invasion of Ukraine, energy and food shocks came from that, sanctions, instability over in Europe, and really a heightened nuclear risk in 2023. You had the U.S. regional banking crisis. Remember SVB, yes, Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, First Republic. They raised fears of a financial contagion that would spread like fat. Than a secret in a small town, it actually made me buy some gold. From 2023 to the present, you had the Israel-Hamas war and this broad Middle East instability, Hezbollah attacks, Houthi attacks, Red Sea shipping disruptions. It's almost like a geopolitical group project. And then from 2025 to the present, you have renewed U.S. tariffs and a global trade war, and this year you have the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran and the Strait of Hormuz disruption. That is the biggest current geopolitical investment threat because it combines all of these things: war, oil disruption, inflation, higher interest rates, and a recession risk. So it's a lot like this particularly unpleasant smoothie that's been blended together.   Keith Weinhold  5:55   All right. Well, all of that-that is just an absurd amount of uncertainty and disruption only since 2020, and though major markets are at all-time highs in the face of this, let's acknowledge that some were hurt here, like apartment building owners vulnerable to interest rate resets, and certain commercial sectors like office. Even worse, let's be sensitive to the fact that COVID in wars have resulted in a real loss of life. GRE's enduring strategy of primarily owning long-term residential rentals with fixed-rate debt has been comparatively really resilient. In fact, these calamities-they probably made you better off from the inflation that it has spurred. More people work from home. Well, that means that they're consuming our product while higher inflation debased our debt and jacked up our property values and our rents. And you know somehow every. single generation thinks that their collection of crises is uniquely terrifying, and it is not. And what do I mean by this? Well, in the 1980s, people feared war with the Soviet Union, the Cold War. A global population explosion so bad that millions or billions of people would surely die from hunger. You had the AIDS crisis. You had a hole in the ozone layer. Well, all those things. Virtually zero investors make decisions based on that stuff: an imminent Soviet attack or mass starvation from overpopulation. There is one thing that is 100% certain here, and that is that more shocks are coming. In case you don't want to sleep well, you can get worked up over the certainty of future calamities, artificial intelligence is making cyber attacks faster and more scalable. AI has even created entirely novel viruses. A confrontation between China and Taiwan that could create risk in the semiconductor space.   Keith Weinhold  8:18   A blockade that might disrupt the world's advanced chip supply, creating more inflation and more uncertainty. Here is what's changed, though, for what investors care about. You know what has changed with today's set of calamities versus those of the 1980s and earlier, because there is something, and it's a big deal for investors. Here's what's changed: recent history shows that the government does more to intervene during disasters, stimulus checks, liquidity programs where they're printing trillions, bailouts, pushing interest rates down to almost zero, quantitative easing. How about a foreclosure moratorium? Anything you know during COVID, it was a lot of these things, and it was the CARES Act, and it was a student loan payment pause. I mean, the Federal Reserve even set up emergency credit facilities. We now know that when the economic building catches fire, policymakers they rarely stand around admiring the flames. They just flood the place with currency. So the best investors they keep prudently building real estate portfolios in the face of risk, not the absence of risk, because the latter does not exist. This incessant government intervention, whether you agree with it or not, it gives you more safety cushions the next time that things fall apart. That's why what appears risk. Is still risky, but less so. So there is more incentive to take on prudent risk than I've ever seen. You know, no politician wants America to fall apart under their watch. So increasingly, they'll just paper over the problem by printing, printing, printing, and then, therefore, the resultant inflation, the consequence of this, that can be dealt with under the next president's watch, not theirs. In fact, future calamities they almost make you want to own scarce real assets that benefit from inflation, not a hedge, a benefit. Trying to time every war, election, banking crisis, tariff announcement, virus, and Fed decision. Trying to time all of those things-that is usually ineffective. You either own more assets, or you get left behind in everything that's happened since 2020. That just underscores this. In fact, Berkshire Hathaway, the closely watched company that Warren Buffett ran for a long time, but he still has influence in.   Keith Weinhold  11:16   You know, they recently began moving out of cash and into assets, they ended their long net selling stretch. In fact, in the latest quarter ended, they've now done the most buying that they've done since early 2022. They have jumped back in the game. It appears that Berkshire Hathaway got tired of sitting on the sidelines and seeing others make gains, and they're pretty bullish on housing too. They bought a home builder. The bottom line here is that shocks are going to keep arriving, and yet productive assets and well-financed residential real estate has repeatedly survived them and just continued appreciating. Don't wait for a risk-free world because you'll wait forever. When you evaluate all these calamities, just since 2020, again, COVID, Ukraine, Israel, Gaza, tariffs, and war in Iran, and then you realize that both real estate and stocks are near all-time highs anyway, and the government keeps backstopping asset owners like never before. This is just a fresh angle on how much better off you are when you prudently own more inflation-benefiting assets sooner. I want to tell you about something called the seven-figure solution. You've been here listening to me weekly since 2014. You've been earning money. You've been investing well, and now you're going to see how it all goes together. It's about making sure that your real estate and your other assets appropriately fund your retirement in a way that gives you protection against market downturns, a tax advantage pool of liquidity, the death benefit of a life insurance policy, and actually introduces you to a new form of leverage all at the same time. Now the liquidity here is key because this is where a 401(k) or IRA limit you, they have taxes and penalties if you want to use those funds early. This doesn't, but the seven-figure solution-it's not just for retirees. In fact, our own in-house investment coach Narayish uses something like this, and he is in his 30s. Let's discuss it, and then you'll see where I have an invitation for you, where you can get involved. I'd like to welcome in a guest we last had on the show a few years ago.   Keith Weinhold  13:54   He's a frequent guest on popular shows, including our friends over at the Real Estate Guys Radio Show, and this guest has also been a terrestrial radio show host himself. He's a long-time real estate educator and an active investor, just like you and I. So he speaks from experience and not a textbook. He's the creator of what we'll discuss today, called the Seven Figure Solution. Welcome back to the show, Jared Garfield.   Jared Garfield  14:21   Hey, it's great to be with you again. Thanks for having me.   Keith Weinhold  14:25   It's so good. Now you're with the Haven Bridge Group, and you help people, especially real estate investors, with what's called the seven-figure solution. Tell us about it.   Jared Garfield  14:37   it. Well, Haven Bridge, we get the name for that because people are really looking for a haven of safety, and the bridge is kind of what crosses the gaps that could kind of destroy your wealth, and it's the path to get there. So we want to take people on a path to safety, and the seven-figure solution is the idea that if you're going to be drawing out even 4% per year to not outlive your money, because people are living now. To 8590, 95 years old, and so that means you could have 35 years in retirement. And with inflation and different things like that, you really have to have a lot bigger nest egg than what most people realize. So a seven-figure solution is how to get to more than a million dollars liquid that you can draw on in a tax advantaged manner for the rest of your life, while also having living benefits. And we pull real estate in with it because we want people to have 10 or 15 or 20 rental properties by the time they retired. That they 1031 exchange regularly, so that they're always keeping tax advantages. So that even in retirement you have strong tax advantages, and ultimately we think that when you're 65 or 70, you might want to go from 30 single-family houses to 1031 exchange into one institutional asset that's a little bit less management intensive.   Keith Weinhold  15:57   Okay, so this is a tax advantage vehicle that real estate investors can use during their investing career, and those tax advantages then really convert into something that you can use in retirement as well.   Jared Garfield  16:11   Yes, what it does is it's a vehicle that instead of saving the money from your cash flow from your rental properties in the bank, we say, well, why wouldn't you rather invest in something where it grows tax-free, number one, and then number two, you don't have the penalties like you would with a 401k, where you get taxed and you get penalized 10% if you pull it out. It's liquid, usually about 80 to 90% liquid, so you can pull from it whenever you like, and you can use it for down payments to grow your real estate portfolio. But you can earn sometimes between five and even seven or 8% in a tax advantaged manner where you're not taxed on it, but you're earning a much higher return than if you put the cash flow into a bank.   Keith Weinhold  16:51   All right, so you're building this tax advantage pool of capital that grows over time, and this is important to have some liquidity. You know, Jared, I've often talked to our audience, about three to 5% of your portfolio value ought to be kept liquid. Maybe with a vehicle like this, you would want to put in more of that because real estate investors we have expenses, so you have this liquidity to cover things like vacancies and major repairs, or perhaps you could even use this account for future down payments on additional investment properties. Is that how it's utilized?   Jared Garfield  17:27   Yeah, absolutely. And I get it partially this way because in my early 20s, I got up to where I had about six rentals, and at the time, I also owned a real estate brokerage, and I was doing very well. I was making a six-figure income and things. And what happened is, I back when a   Keith Weinhold  17:41   six-figure income was a big deal.   Jared Garfield  17:43   Yeah, back in the early 2000s, it was a little bit better money. But the funny thing was, I had four rental properties that all went vacant at the same exact time, and so now all of a sudden, I was paying like 4500 bucks a month in mortgages, not counting the house I lived in, but I had to cover four mortgages on four of my rental properties all at the same time, and I hadn't saved the cash flow, so I didn't have a huge emergency fund. All my liquid capital went into down payments and into renovation money to rehab the properties. Okay, and so it put me in a real bind, and I was out driving a Volvo S80 around throwing two paper routes in the mornings, and then going to my real estate brokerage after my paper routes to cover those rental properties. And so this was basically meant as a way to say, okay, this is a way that I have the liquidity. I'm getting a higher return, but now my tenants are not only buying me the houses, but they're also giving me a couple million dollars in life insurance, and they're wrapping my investment component or the cash value of that, the cash value part of the policy. They're wrapping that in a way that it grows tax-free, so it just accomplishes a lot of things. But the other thing that's a beautiful thing about it is there's a lot of things that we call living benefits.   Keith Weinhold  19:02   All right, so you have the living benefits and the tax advantages, and I know how you have pointed out that this can save an investor 10s of 1000s of dollars in taxes per year and hundreds of 1000s or more over time. Can you tell us more about that?   Jared Garfield  19:20   Yeah, because what happens is the money that goes in is growing tax-free, so you don't get taxed on any of the growth. But what we really like about it is, let's say that you're cash-flowing $2,000 a month off your rental properties, and you're putting 2000 a month into this policy. Usually, after the first year, if you're max funding, 80 to 90% of that's liquid. So if you've got 24,000 sitting in there, you've got access to 89 to 90% of the money. So it's pretty liquid. But what happens is over a 20 or 30 year period, that money could turn into three or 400,000 a year that you can pull out in the form of policy loans. And by doing that, it's not taxed. And you can pull that out throughout your retirement tax-free. So if you were paying 25% in taxes and you're pulling out 200 grand a year, that's $50,000 a year in retirement that you're saving in taxes. But that could be over a 20 or 30-year period. So over 20 years, that 50,000 could end up being a lot of money. I mean, 500,000 over 10 years, a million over 20, and so that means you don't have to accumulate as much. But a lot of our investors love it because they'll save it up with discipline, and then that way it's there if the furnace blows. So it makes your real estate safer, but it also becomes your down payment funds to expand your portfolio.   Keith Weinhold  20:40   Okay, the seven-figure solution is the vehicle that we're talking about here, and what part of the IRS code, just briefly, is it that gives this tax advantage?   Jared Garfield  20:51   It's Internal Revenue Code Section 79 that allows it to grow tax-free. In the 1980 s, doctors and a lot of very wealthy people were using this to the point that IRS changed the laws. They went and sued the insurance companies because doctors would go in and dump $2 million in, and they would buy a $2 million life insurance policy. So they were self-insured, which meant that they didn't have any cost of mortality on it. So they basically got all the benefits of the tax-free growth and the tax-free pullout. And the IRS said, "Wait a minute! We think you're doing tax evasion. So what they did is they came around and they said, "We're not going to let you use this loophole anymore for the very wealthiest people to have this. So they came to a compromise, and the compromise was that if you wanted to put in 2 million, you had to maintain a corridor where there had to be a little bit higher amount of life insurance. So you might have to buy a $2.3 million policy, but then you could still dump, say, $2 million in and have all the tax advantages. It's a strategy that's been used for over 100 years by families like the Rockefellers and the Hunts and J.P. Morgan. The very wealthiest families have always used these strategies to grow and protect their wealth.   Keith Weinhold  21:59   Okay, so it's a part of the tax code that allows cash value to accumulate within and be withdrawn from a life insurance policy tax-free.   Jared Garfield  22:11   Correct, and it gives you living benefits, which I alluded to a minute ago. And the living benefits are if if you end up having to go through things like long-term care, disability, if you can't perform, you know certain functions for a certain period of time, chronic illness, critical illness, terminal illness. If any of those things happen to you, you can borrow against the policy and have access to money during those things that would normally decimate your wealth, because you can actually access the death benefit in advance.   Keith Weinhold  22:42   Now I know a little about the six risks. Tell us about that.   Jared Garfield  22:47   Well, Keith, there are six risks that all investors face regularly. The first one is inflation erosion, and that means that your purchasing power often ends up leaking out of your balance. And the balance might look fine, but inflation can eat away at it. So even if you've raised a lot of money, if inflation means that you can buy half as much five or 10 years from now, then you know your wealth isn't as big as you thought. The second is the volatility setback, and that's sequence of return risk. That means that if you retire on a bad year where things really bad, stock market drops, you could end up using your money at a time where it really weakens your wealth because it may have dropped by 50% So if you had a million, now you have a half a million, and you're spending 100,000 a year. At the end of year one, you might only have 400,000 left. So sequence of of return risks from volatility setback, tax drain. That's just the compounding cost of an uncoordinated tax picture can really be a problem, and then the next one is liquidity. If you don't have liquidity and you've locked up all your money and you can't access it until you're 59 and a half without significant taxation and 10% penalties, the liquidity lock is a problem. There's the longevity paradox. What happens if you outlive your money, you know. So living longer is a benefit, but it exposes you to where you might not have enough money to live on in your latter years. The last two are care avalanche, and that is if an unexpected health event happens at the wrong time, it could really destroy your wealth because medical costs have spiraled out of control, and then the last one is the line to land, and that's only one of the six that's really about growth.   Keith Weinhold  24:28   Right, only one of the six of those was about growth. I can't stand the longevity paradox. Yeah, we think we all want to live a long time, but then it's more difficult to fund living a long time, and if you outlive everybody, nobody shows up at your funeral either. The longevity paradox-one of the six risks that the seven-figure solution can really help you with. Now, tell us more about funding it, so you can get a good cash value balance in. There, I know that one way you do it is actually with short-term rentals instead of a paycheck.   Jared Garfield  25:06   We love short-term rentals, especially for our highest net worth clients, because the reason is is the bonus depreciation of the big beautiful bill. Oh, right! You could take up to like 150 or even $200,000 in year one, they take that depreciation that they used to spread out over a whole lot of years, and they make it to where if you get with your CPA and you analyze your short-term rental, you could potentially take all of the furnishings, all of the artwork, all of the dishes and things that are in the property. Sometimes they'll let you take components like the appliances, the air conditioning unit, the furnace, and they'll let you take it all in year one instead of having to line item it and spread it out over you know 27 and a half years. So what this means is, if you have a short term rental, then you you might get like 150 to 200,000 tax break in the first year on the right property, but it's better than that because instead of having to have like 750 hours to hit full-time real estate professional status, it cuts the hours that you have to have significantly down. I think it's more like 150 hours or something like that, or 300. It's like half the hours, and so you can hit the benefits of taking unlimited passive loss much easier if you have a couple of short-term rentals.   Keith Weinhold  26:24   You're listening to Get Rich Education. We're talking with Jared Garfield about the seven-figure solution, something that takes some time to understand, but it can give you a tax-advantaged pool of capital that grows over time, and it also creates this overall tailwind, not just during your investor life, but then it provides tax advantaged retirement income at the same time. More on this when we come back. You're listening to Get Rich Education. I'm your host Keith Weinhold. What if you got your mortgage loans the same place I get mine? You sure can at Ridge Lending Group and MLS 42056. They provided GRE listeners with more loans than anyone because Ridge specializes in investment property. They'll help you build a long-term plan for growing your real estate empire with leverage. Start your prequal and even chat directly with President Caeli Ridge while it's on your mind. Start at ridgelendinggroup.com, that's ridgelendinggroup.com.   Keith Weinhold  27:25   Let me ask you something: If you've worked hard to build wealth, is your money positioned to actually support your goals? A lot of accredited investors leave capital sitting in cash because it feels safe, but inflation and missed income opportunities can quietly erode its value. Freedom Family Investments offers freedom notes for investors seeking structured income backed by real estate. It's a straightforward approach built on real assets, not speculation. And full disclosure, I'm an investor myself. What I like is that their team walks you through how it all works, so you can decide if it aligns with your portfolio and income goals. Every investment carries risk, and nothing is guaranteed. But with a track record of consistent, on-time investor payouts, they built real credibility. Go to freedomfamilyinvestments.com to book a clarity call, or text family to 66866. That's family 266866. This is the   Speaker 2  28:28   Real Wealth Network's Kathy Betke, and you are listening to the Always Valuable Get Rich Education with Keith Weinhold.   Keith Weinhold  28:46   Welcome back to Get Rich Education. I'm your host Keith Weinhold. We're talking about the seven-figure solution with Jared Garfield. Something that can be a particular benefit to real estate investors both during your investing career and then once you're in retirement as well, and this can take the form of either an indexed universal life policy or a whole life policy. There are a lot of wrong ways to do this and wrong things to get into. We're talking about the right way. Part of that is funding it as best you can. Can you tell us more about that?   Jared Garfield  29:20   Well, there's a lot of different ways to fund it. A lot of our clients will come in. We have some people who will use rollovers if they're nearing the end of retirement. Some people will roll over a 401k into a cash value life insurance policy because they can do it over a five or seven year period, and they pay the taxes when they roll it over, so their taxes go up a little bit for five or seven years of retirement, but then what happens is that means that during their retirement they're not taxed on the income all the way through retirement, so that can save really significantly. But a lot of our clients will do a flip and dump 40 or 50,000 a year in by just saying I'm going to do one flip a year and use that to. Fund the whole thing, or they'll take the cash flow and dump the cash flow into here instead of the bank, just so that they get the living benefits and they get the much higher return with still 80 to 90% liquidity. So could be cash flow from rentals, could be money from a flip, or sometimes some of these short-term rentals can make 20 to $30,000 a year, and if you get $100,000 tax break, you have more money that's not going to Uncle Sam, and then because that's your discretionary income now, because of the tax break, you could use that money to for down payments to grow your portfolio or to do a flip.   Keith Weinhold  30:35   Now, Jared, I sort of think of the cash value that you're accumulating in this policy as safe money that grows at a slow to moderate steady rate, but if it rarely or ever loses value, can you tell us more about that and the rate of return expected in the policy?   Jared Garfield  30:52   Yeah, absolutely. With the IULs, it's going to depend a little bit upon the carriers and stuff like that, and whether you go with a mutual company and stuff like that. It can vary, but a lot of times people are going with things that are what we call indexed. So you can actually index it to the S and p5 100 if you think that we're going to have a bull market and the market's going to really go up strongly. You can index it to the market, and sometimes they'll have a participation rate where they'll say, "Okay, you can participate up to 12% So if the stock market does 17% the most you can make is 12% So you're giving up a little bit of upside, but that's still not nothing. I mean, that's not three or 4% You can still make you know 10 or 12% that year, but you're giving up the part above the participation rate. And the reason that you do that is if the market tanks and drops by 30 or 40% The worst you can do is 0% return. Zero is my hero because you didn't lose anything. So if you had a half a million sitting there, you don't go down to 250 and then wait eight years to get back to break even. Instead, you're still at half a million. And if the market goes up next year by 20% and you had a 10% cap. Then your half a million, you know, is now at 550,000. When everybody else, if it went up by 10% they're at half the amount that they had.   Keith Weinhold  32:13   You have a story or example of how you've helped somebody with this, because I know a lot of investors that are passionate about utilizing the cash value inside an insurance policy tell us.   Jared Garfield  32:28   Well, I've got one friend who's a developer, and he did like a $5 million policy. And every time he flip a subdivision or flip a house, and let's back   Keith Weinhold  32:36   up. Does a $5 million policy mean that's the death benefit?   Jared Garfield  32:40   Yeah, that's the death benefit. Thanks for catching that. That's the death benefit, but that also has a correlation to how much money you can dump into it. So if you have a $5 million policy, you can dump a lot more money in for the tax free growth. And the quicker you hit that death benefit amount, at that point you're self-insured, and so at that point you really don't have cost of insurance on administering the policy hardly at all, and so at that point, when you're what we call self-insured, the return on the investment becomes a lot better. But this particular developer was able to use this policy because he had so much cash value in, and if he sold a house, he'd take 40,000. If he sold 10 a year, he might take you know 400,000 and dump it into this policy, and so it made him bankable. And he was able to use the money to go out and do new subdivision developments because the bank would actually use the policy as the collateral to be able to give him loans at much lower interest rates.   Keith Weinhold  33:38   That's valuable. Tell us about that. I don't want to use the wrong words here, but then effectively with this example, are you borrowing against the funds in the policy? So therefore, you can get those dollars working for you somewhere else, all while simultaneously the cash value continues to compound and grow. Sort of another form of leverage.   Jared Garfield  34:01   Correct. What they basically do is they basically freeze part of the amount and say, okay, we're using this as the collateral and stuff like that to be able to do the loan. But if it grows and and makes 7% you're still making the money off of the money that's sitting in there. It's just collateralized as part of the loan. And some people will even use it to like go buy a car, like instead of buying a car and going getting a bank loan and paying 7% to the bank, they might borrow money out, go pay cash for the car from the life insurance policy loan, and pay 2% instead of 7% But they're paying it to themselves, and as long as they're paying the interest to themselves, if the money that they borrow out could potentially still earn the same money and earn 7% even though you had borrowed out. So it's doing two things for you at the same time, as long as you're paying that loan interest. But and that depends on the option that you take when you do your loan.   Keith Weinhold  34:54   We love leverage around here. Leverage trumps compound interest. In so many ways. Oh, I'm really glad that you told us some more about that using the funds in more than one way at the same time. Tell us more about what it costs for the investor, the costs of setting this up, and then what some of those trade-offs are, Jared.   Jared Garfield  35:18   Well, that really depends on the individual. I mean, everybody has to sit down and be able to decide what is acceptable for them. You know, a lot of times people will want to max fund the 401k that they're doing at least just to the amount that's matched. But then after that, this could be a great place instead of putting a whole bunch more money into a 401k. Some people will elect to say, "I'm going to put the matching portion into my 401k, but then I'm going to take my cash flow from my real estate and money that I could have contributed to other alternatives and put it into this because I want the liquidity. I want to be able to leverage this money and pull it out without any restrictions. That as long as I can pull out 80 to 90 percent, I could go buy a car wash, or I could invest in a business, or I could, you know, do whatever I wanted to. I could loan it to my kids for their college and make them pay me loans back to my policy. There gives you a lot of flexibility to do it. But the thing that we love about it is we'll do what's called an illustration, and it may end up if you start at the right time, it could be a six-figure passive income stream at retirement, and then if you have the real estate, because this helped you grow your portfolio, where without doing the strategy, you might have ended up with say 10 properties. We might be able to get you to 20 or 30 properties working together as a team with your real estate coaches and stuff like that. Then we can potentially grow your real estate portfolio, and what we want to do is 1031 exchange every seven to eight years. I don't believe in holding properties for 30 years.   Jared Garfield  36:47   I believe in exchanging them every seven to eight years because when the tax benefits have been used up, if you exchange to twice the size portfolio, you have better appreciation on a portfolio worth twice as much. But that new value, you still get the depreciation advantages, where the old value that was half, you know, the depreciation is used up. So you're you're getting new depreciation on the higher value assets, and then our goal would be that by the time you don't want to be involved in managing the property managers, that at some point you're going to have a 200 unit apartment complex with on-site management, and at that point you don't have any financial worries really because you're 1031 exchanging into those apartment complexes, but you have so much equity that you're still maintaining depreciation during your retirement years. When most people who have lesser plans don't have the tax advantages,   Keith Weinhold  37:41   I love that you said so much of that, and to you, the listener, Jared is licensed to do this, and our own in-house investment coach. You mentioned coaching. Naresh has the proper licensing as well to holistically help integrate this into your investor life. And for example, yes, we are rarely of the mindset that you would hold a property for all 30 years because after seven to 10 years, your leverage ratio gets worn down, and then additionally, if you're buying turnkey properties, oftentimes that's when capex expenditures start to enter into the picture. So yes, oftentimes we do these seven to 10 year holds.    Jared Garfield  38:23   I love that. Yeah, that's a really really good strategy, and and it always makes it to where you can grow so much bigger portfolio by not being taxed through that exchange. And you know, believe it or not, there's actually even ways when you have extra cash boot, they do allow if you notify them in advance. Sometimes you can take some of the cash boot on the exchange and roll it into some of the products that we utilize.   Keith Weinhold  38:47   For more specifics, I know you said it's based on one's individual situation, but how much does it cost to set up a policy? And then, are there any ongoing maintenance fees? Can you give us more specifics there?   Jared Garfield  38:59   So, there's small fees to administer the policy because you have people who are trading and doing different things and working within the policy for the funds. But usually, you can set policies up as low as 100 or even $200 a month. We don't usually recommend that because you want to max fund it. Usually, when you're doing these strategies, if you're just doing $100 or $200 a month, you're basically buying life insurance, but you're missing a lot of the benefits because what you want to do is to be able to max fund it. So what we like people to do is get as minimum life insurance. That's not in our advantage because we get paid based on the premium of the amount of life insurance you get. But you get the smallest amount of life insurance for the amount that you can max fund. I would much rather have somebody get a $500 a month policy that, let's say, they could put you know a thousanmd a month in or something like that, than to have somebody get $1,000 a month policy where they're paying a thousand a month but they can't max fund it because by max funding it you're maximizing the growth component of the cash. Value, and so it depends on how much you want. But you can go anywhere from $100 or $200 a month to we have clients that will dump $20,000 a month in because they really want to shield as much money as they can from tax growth.   Keith Weinhold  40:15   Tell us more about who the seven-figure solution is for and who it's not for.   Jared Garfield  40:20   Well, if you're living month to month and you don't have discretionary income, it's probably not a good solution. In that situation, you probably want to get term insurance and just make sure that you cover catastrophic things. But if you've got discretionary income and you've got an extra four to $500 a month that you could use to max fund, we figure most people need life insurance anyway, and the way that we teach it, when you mix it with real estate, rather than pulling it from your monthly budget, doesn't it make a lot more sense to let your tenants buy the houses for you, but also pay for a half a million or a million dollar life insurance policy for you, where the tenants are covering the savings for anything that happens at the property with capex or vacancy or damage, and at the same time covering life insurance and potentially a six-figure passive income that's tax advantaged at retirement. So I pull the money out from other assets and let the assets cover this asset.   Keith Weinhold  41:18   Oh well, Jared, this has been great. Before I ask you if you have any last things to tell the audience about the seven-figure solution, I invite you, the audience, to join us. It's going to be Jared and our own in-house investment coach, Nareesh, bringing you a live online event that you can join from the comfort of your own home next Thursday, the 27th at 8 PM Eastern. You can register now; it's free at grewebinars.com because there are a lot of moving parts, and it does take some time to wrap your head around this, benefiting from the cash value of an insurance policy. And this way you can have a Q and A, and you can get answers in real time at this event. It's called the Seven Figure Solution: Build wealth, reduce risk, and create tax advantage retirement income through real estate. Again, it is next Thursday, the 27th at 8p.m. Eastern, you probably have generated some questions inside your head while you're listening to this, and you can sure have them answered there as you're going to learn a whole lot more about it next Thursday. This could help a lot of people. Jared, do you have any last thoughts?    Jared Garfield  42:38   I think the only thing is that we like to work with the team. We like to work with your CPA. We like to work with your real estate investment coach. I used to be a coach and trainer for Robert Kiyosaki, who wrote Rich Dad Poor Dad, and he always talked about power teams. And so we want to be able to be a part of your power team and work with your other advisors to help you implement something. We're not here to give you tax advice. We want you to be able to work with your investment advisors and your CPAs, and just be a part of the team. But I would point out that over my career, I've owned hundreds and hundreds of single-family cash flow rentals, duplexes, fourplexes, apartment complexes. I've done some land development, and I implement these strategies myself. I had 17 Airbnbs, and so these are the strategies that I implemented as a full-time real estate professional. I felt like that this strategy of having a seven-figure solution could help you to avoid some of the pitfalls that I experienced in my 20s.   Keith Weinhold  43:32   So much all comes together for one pretty comprehensive solution. It's the intersection of growing your portfolio, getting tax advantages and having the death benefits of insurance and more all coming together next Thursday, so that you can learn more. Jared, it's been great having you back on the show.   Jared Garfield  43:52   Thanks, Keith. Always glad to join you.   Keith Weinhold  44:00   Integrate the seven-figure solution the GRE way, where we have this conscientiousness about leverage and cash flow. In this case, it's how to prudently leverage a life insurance policy. When it's time to tap your cash value, you take what is a policy loan, not a withdrawal, because you're borrowing against your cash value, hence using the funds in more than one place, and the IRS does not tax loan proceeds. This reminds me of a billionaire and how they borrow against the value of their stock. That way, they don't have to sell their assets. This is similar to what you can do with this. Another thing is that you know real estate investors are not used to a volatile ride because our asset values stay stable. You heard Jared mention the acronym IUL there. That's an indexed universal life policy. It's a real benefit. That says you tie yours to the S and P five hundred. Well, that index was down 18% in 2022, and that your cash value can have an upside ceiling and loss protection on the downside-an option that you'll care more about as you get toward retirement. In 2008, the S&P was down 37% so the math is cruel on value losses. In fact, it's even worse than it sounds because if you're down 30%, then you need a 43% gain just to get back to even. That is just math.   Keith Weinhold  45:39   There are some mistakes to avoid here, and you don't just want to set up your seven-figure solution off of a website. And it is based on products that you might have heard of from companies like Nationwide and Mass Mutual. I strongly encourage you learn more, see how it all goes together, learn how the seven-figure solution compares to other vehicles like a Roth IRA, 401k, 721 exchange, and 1031 exchange. This is very much about seeing your future. You've been listening to me here every week for almost 12 years, earning money from your day job, building your real estate portfolio, either from our investment coaching or on your own. This is how it all goes together. Next week with Jared and GRE investment coach Naresh. By attending live, you can have your questions answered in real time. One last time, you can sign up for the event for next Thursday, the 27th at 8 PM. Eastern, 5 PM. Pacific. Learn about something that's potentially really valuable to you: the seven-figure solution at grewebinars.com. Until next week, I'm your host Keith Weinhold. Don't quit your daydream.   Speaker 2  46:59   Nothing on this show should be considered specific, personal, or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, financial, or business professional for individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own. Information is not guaranteed. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. The host is operating on behalf of Get Rich Education LLC exclusively.   Keith Weinhold  47:26   The preceding program was brought to you by your home for wealth building, getricheducation.com  

GET THE ENTIRE EPISODE HERE: https://www.patreon.com/lionsledbydonkeys/posts/history-of-life-164568292 TICKETS TO OUR LIVE SHOW IN CORK, IRELAND ARE NOW AVAILABLE! https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/lions-led-by-donkeys-podcast-live-in-cork-26th-september-tickets-1993823733459 CAN'T MAKE IT? NO PROBLEM! WE'RE STREAMING IT (WITH VOD) https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/livestream-lions-led-by-donkeys-podcast-live-in-cork-26th-september-2026-tickets-1993900928351 GET JOE'S BOOK! Ebook, Audiobook, and Paperbacks now available! https://www.amazon.com/Highlands-Burn-Foundling-Brigade-Saga-ebook/dp/B0GSG5CNXX/ Or you can buy the ebook and audiobook directly from us: https://www.llbdpodcast.com/products/

A Special Industry Update, With Jason Diamond and Mindy Diamond Jason and Mindy Diamond revisit how advisor due diligence is evolving—from AI and enterprise value to firm stability, ownership, and optionality—and why those questions matter more than ever. In Summary Due diligence has always been about finding the right fit. But what advisors are evaluating has expanded considerably. In this replay of an Industry Update, Jason Diamond and Mindy Diamond revisit The Advisor Transition Playbook to explore how advisor priorities continue to evolve. Beyond the traditional reasons advisors consider change, they discuss newer factors shaping decisions today—from artificial intelligence and enterprise value to ownership structure, firm stability, and long-term optionality. The conversation reinforces that while every advisor's motivations are personal, the evaluation process has become far more strategic. Today's advisors aren't simply comparing recruiting deals or platforms. They're considering how today's decisions may influence the value, flexibility, and future of the businesses they're building. The Storyline For years, advisor movement was largely driven by familiar themes: bureaucracy, management changes, technology frustrations, and the desire for greater independence. Those factors remain important. But the conversations Diamond Consultants has with advisors today increasingly include questions that rarely surfaced just a few years ago. How should AI factor into firm selection? What is the long-term value of building enterprise value instead of simply maximizing a recruiting package? How important is a firm's ownership structure? And how should advisors think about stability in a marketplace where acquisitions, recapitalizations, and private equity investment have become commonplace? Jason and Mindy revisit the transition framework introduced in Part 1, focusing less on the mechanics of making a move and more on the evolving criteria advisors are using to evaluate their options. The result is a broader discussion about due diligence—not simply as a transition exercise, but as an ongoing strategic process for advisors seeking to build their best business life. Topics Covered Advisor due diligence Traditional vs. emerging drivers of advisor movement Artificial intelligence in wealth management Enterprise value and advisor ownership Recruiting deals versus long-term economics Reverse due diligence Firm ownership and stability Private equity in wealth management Advisor optionality Building a long-term advisory business Blubrry Player > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors Why are the traditional drivers of advisor movement still relevant? (4:00) Jason and Mindy revisit the longstanding push-and-pull factors that continue to influence advisor decisions, from bureaucracy and management frustrations to the desire for greater ownership and control. How has AI become part of the due diligence process? (13:50) The discussion explores why advisors increasingly expect firms to demonstrate a clear AI strategy—and why investment, integration, and vision may become meaningful competitive advantages. Why should advisors care about enterprise value, even if they don't technically own their business? (24:30) Jason and Mindy explain why more advisors are evaluating decisions through the lens of long-term business value rather than solely short-term economics. What does reverse due diligence really involve? (37:15) The conversation highlights why advisors should evaluate prospective firms with the same rigor firms use when evaluating advisors. How does firm ownership affect advisor optionality? (38:00) Private equity, acquisitions, and changing ownership structures have made it increasingly important to understand what happens if a firm's strategy changes after an advisor joins. Why has due diligence become more strategic than ever? (45:30) The episode concludes with a broader discussion about defining one's “best business life” and making decisions that align with long-term goals rather than reacting to short-term frustrations. Key Takeaways The reasons advisors evaluate change have expanded well beyond traditional frustrations such as bureaucracy and compensation. AI has become an increasingly important component of firm evaluation, not because it replaces advisors, but because it can enhance productivity and client service. Enterprise value is becoming a consideration even for advisors who currently work within employee models. Reverse due diligence is just as important as a firm's evaluation of an advisor, particularly when assessing ownership structure, capitalization, and long-term stability. The most effective transition decisions balance immediate economics with long-term flexibility, ownership, and optionality. Every advisor's definition of success is different, making clarity around personal goals the foundation of any due diligence process. https://youtu.be/WZbUZJZK1yc Quotable Moments “Every advisor deserves to live their best business life.” “Just because you're frustrated doesn't mean you should move. You need something worth moving toward.” “The question isn't simply what you're paid today. It's what you're building over time.” “Knowledge is power. Understanding what your business is worth should be part of every advisor's decision-making process.” FAQs Why are more advisors expanding their due diligence beyond compensation? While transition economics remain important, advisors are increasingly evaluating technology, AI capabilities, enterprise value, ownership opportunities, and long-term flexibility as part of the decision-making process. How should advisors evaluate a firm's AI strategy? Rather than looking for finished products, advisors should assess whether a firm has a clear vision, meaningful investment, and an integrated approach to using AI to improve advisor productivity and client experience. What is reverse due diligence? Reverse due diligence is the process of evaluating a prospective firm as thoroughly as the firm evaluates the advisor. It includes understanding ownership structure, financial stability, culture, technology, leadership, and long-term strategy. Why does enterprise value matter for employee advisors? Even advisors who do not currently own their businesses may benefit from understanding how different business models create opportunities for ownership, long-term value creation, and future monetization. How has private equity changed advisor due diligence? Private equity has introduced new opportunities for growth and capital, but it has also made it more important for advisors to understand ownership structures, investment horizons, and what future transactions could mean for their business. What does Diamond Consultants mean by an advisor's “best business life”? It refers to aligning an advisor's business model, goals, client experience, compensation, flexibility, and long-term vision in a way that best supports both the advisor and the clients they serve. While transition economics remain important, advisors are increasingly evaluating technology, AI capabilities, enterprise value, ownership opportunities, and long-term flexibility as part of the decision-making process. Rather than looking for finished products, advisors should assess whether a firm has a clear vision, meaningful investment, and an integrated approach to using AI to improve advisor productivity and client experience. Reverse due diligence is the process of evaluating a prospective firm as thoroughly as the firm evaluates the advisor. It includes understanding ownership structure, financial stability, culture, technology, leadership, and long-term strategy. Even advisors who do not currently own their businesses may benefit from understanding how different business models create opportunities for ownership, long-term value creation, and future monetization. Private equity has introduced new opportunities for growth and capital, but it has also made it more important for advisors to understand ownership structures, investment horizons, and what future transactions could mean for their business. It refers to aligning an advisor's business model, goals, client experience, compensation, flexibility, and long-term vision in a way that best supports both the advisor and the clients they serve. NOTE: The views and opinions expressed by the guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Diamond Consultants. Neither Diamond Consultants nor the guests on this podcast are compensated in any way for their participation. Related Resources The Advisor Transition Playbook: The Latest on Due Diligence, the Move, and Everything In Between – Part 1 Annual Advisor Transition Report Top 10 Tips for a Strategic Due Diligence Process Should I Stay or Should I Go? View the transcript of this episode… The Advisor Transition Playbook: The Latest on Due Diligence, the Move, and Everything In Between – Part 2 A Special Industry Update with Jason Diamond and Mindy Diamond. Jason Diamond: Welcome to a replay of one of the most popular episodes from our podcast series for financial advisors, The Advisor Transition Playbook: The Latest on Due Diligence, the Move, and Everything In Between. It's Part 2 of a 2-Part Industry Update with Mindy Diamond. I’m Jason Diamond and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner, well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at 908-879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our Annual Advisor Transition Report. It’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Jason Diamond: There’s been a noticeable shift in how advisors are approaching decisions about their business, not necessarily in whether they’re exploring change, but in what they’re focused on when they do. Mindy is back with me for a continuation of our earlier conversation on the Advisor Transition Playbook. Last time, we spent time on the mechanics, how due diligence works, what a move actually entails, and how to think through the process. What’s become more apparent since then is that the inputs into that process are evolving. The traditional drivers are still there, but layered on top are a set of considerations that didn’t carry the same weight before. AI is one of them, and not just as a tool, but as a differentiator that advisors are starting to diligence more seriously. Enterprise value is another. Showing up in conversations, even for advisors who don’t technically own their business, but are thinking more critically about what they’re building over time. And then there are questions around stability, ownership, and flexibility. What happens to the firm itself and whether advisors retain the ability to adapt again if circumstances change. None of this is theoretical. It’s showing up in real time conversations. What we want to do here is unpack those new triggers of advisor movement and what they suggest about how decisions are being made today. So let’s get to it. Mindy, the legend, thank you for joining me. So glad to have you on. Mindy Diamond: Thank you. I’m so happy to be here. Jason Diamond: Great. Let’s dive right in. I’ll set the stage really quickly one more time. When we spoke about this topic last, we talked about the drivers of movement, what we’ll call in this conversation as the old or the legacy drivers of movement, and we spoke about the mechanics of the move. Before we get into the new drivers of movement, which I want to be the meat of the conversation, remind us, when we talk about the legacy drivers of movement …. And by the way, by saying legacy, I by no means want to suggest that they’re not valid today, because they’re equally valid, if not more so today than they were then. But when you think of the classic drivers of movement in our industry, what are they? Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So I would say, first of all, let’s start by saying that for every advisor, they’ve got a unique set of needs. So the first thing to say is that while you and I can talk about the categories of frustrations or things that might bother an advisor, they show up differently in each advisor’s life. So it’s important to note that everyone is unique. But generally speaking, if I had to package them, I’d say it’s number one that shows up most of the time is too much bureaucracy. A feeling that a firm or a model is just too hypervigilant in terms of compliance and it’s too bureaucratic and too hard to get things done. Number two would be some sort of change in or frustration with management. Something is going on that the person or persons that are responsible for managing the business are just not … They’re not the wind at their back. They’re obstreperous. They’re causing difficulty and frustration. And probably the third one would be less about a pain point and more about the desire to be something that they couldn’t where they were. The notion that they want to be more independent, they want to be a business owner and they just can’t do that. That doesn’t exist within the model where they work. Those probably have been the three ones top of mind, but I bet you’ll have some … You’ll add to that. Jason Diamond: I’ll add a couple. But before I do, I’ve heard you talk about this topic, maybe said another way as pushes and pulls. Can you explain what you mean by that? Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So I think that we think about the pushes, the frustrations, the things pushing somebody out the door, the factors that make it less easy or less fluid to do business. And there’s almost always pushes that exist when somebody comes to us, where they’re frustrated to some degree or another about certain things. But we tell people all the time that just to be frustrated should never be enough, because if all you’re doing is running from one set of problems, you’re very likely to run into maybe a different set, but still problems elsewhere. So a move needs to be driven in equal part, if not more, by pulls. Being pulled toward an opportunity that can be needle moving enough or better enough than where you are now. Pushes and pull. Jason Diamond: I love it. So let me ask you a little bit of a pointed question. Is a recruiting deal a valid pull factor? Mindy Diamond: So look, it’s different for every person. We’ve had advisors come and say, “I just went through a divorce and the most important thing to me is to recapitalize. And so a recruiting deal is really important.” And while I would never be one to say that’s not valid, it can be … And by the way, any advisor should want to and expect to better their financial situation. There should be economic gain. But it shouldn’t be the only or the primary reason for the move. So you want to monetize. The notion of wanting to monetize in the short term should be a factor in what model you pick, but it shouldn’t be the primary driver for a move. Jason Diamond: I agree with that wholeheartedly. I was going to say something I think maybe would’ve surprised you a little, which is like, yeah, I think recruiting deal is a very valid pull factor because what we’re saying is, it shouldn’t be the only pull factor. And sometimes it is and it makes us a little bit sad, I think, when that’s the case. But all of these factors you mentioned, and the ones I would add, I think that maybe technology would be another kind of factor that drives movement, all of these factors are not one specific reason. If you did the exit interview, either actually conducted the exit interview with advisors or thought exercise exit interview, I think they would point to a confluence of all of these factors. Compliance was a headache. I wanted to launch a podcast. I wanted to be able to send a timely communication to my clients. We used to hear that one during COVID a lot, right? By the time compliance approved something to send to clients, it was already stale. So do you agree with that, that it’s generally a confluence or a combination of these? Or in your experience, is it advisors are like, “No, compliance or the tech is so bad, I’m out”? Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So most often there’s a straw that breaks the camel’s back incident or thing where they’re willing to put up with a series of minor paper cuts, if you will. And then almost always there’s something that happens. You and I got a call the other day from a team that said that they had split from their partner and the management of the firm was favoring the ex-partner, making it harder for them to stay or making it less fun or feel good for them to stay. So while they gave me a laundry list of things that were imperfect, I don’t know that any one of the things that were imperfect up until then would’ve been enough to drive them out. But when that one thing, that feeling that they were a second class citizen came up, that was the straw that breaks the camel’s back and went from a minorly frustrated to, “I’m out of here.” Jason Diamond: Yeah. And there’s probably a hundred examples you could walk us through. And I wanted to just highlight too, this concept is not limited to the wirehouse or employee or captive firm world, this is equally relevant for independent advisors. Granted, some of the pushes and pull factors, some of the triggers are not necessarily the same, but the idea that advisors outgrow a broker dealer or an RIA or either need or want or desire in some way, shape or form, greater autonomy, flexibility, freedom, control is certainly not limited to the employee space. I just wanted to make that point. Mindy Diamond: And I think that’s absolutely right. I think the notion of that frustrations or limitations or bureaucracy only existed if you were a W2 employee at a bulge bracket firm. That went out the window. As the industry landscape has expanded and there’s more and more valid ways to be a financial advisor, there’s more and more ways for a firm or a model or an infrastructure to frustrate an advisor. And that’s not being overly negative. It’s just to say there is no perfection anywhere. Jason Diamond: Yeah, 100%. And by the way, to play a little bit of devil’s advocate on that, and then we’ll move on, I would just say there are pain points that might come from a firm being small and subscale as well. My firm doesn’t have efficient technology. They don’t invest enough in the business. They don’t provide a lead mechanism. They don’t have a robust banking and lending or investment solutions platform. So this stuff cuts both ways. An advisor can be frustrated or limited and an advisor can be excited. Pushes and pulls I think touch on, we’ve heard from advisors in every single pocket of the market, this is a relevant concept. Mindy Diamond: The theme of this is that every advisor deserves to live their best business life. That’s what people are in search of when they reach out to us or when they engage with us. What they’re looking for more than anything, and this is irrespective of where they work or how long they’ve worked or how much they manage, every advisor is in search of their best business life. And what defines their best business life is having the best quality of work life, but also the best ability to do what they want to do with their business, to serve their clients without limitations, to grow the way they want, to be paid a fair wage, and ultimately set up to maximize the value of the business they’ve built. Those are the definitions of one’s best business life. Jason Diamond: I used an even simpler definition of best business life and I stole it from you, which is the true north concept, which is if your true north is maximizing enterprise value and chasing the dollar and trying to build something that’s scalable and saleable, then great. If your true north is to build a lifestyle practice, there’s plenty of advisors who are successful and happy and content in that regard as well. And I think that’s what we’re talking about, is finding your true north and then it’s possible. I mean, that’s the beauty of the landscape. We’re talking about this, a lot of this is pain points or things that advisors experience. The exciting part of this is there’s never been a better time to be an advisor because of the breadth of choice they have and the ecosystem that’s been born to support advisors, to your point, across the spectrum. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. And it’s also, I think, worth saying that it starts with really good crystal clear clarity around not only what’s frustrating you, but what you want ideal to look like. Because I can’t tell you, or I can tell you because … I can’t tell our listeners, I can’t stress enough how often we get calls from advisors that tell us where they think they want to be or tell us they want to move. They have clarity about what’s frustrating them or what they want to change, but they don’t really have clarity about what they want it to look like. And the less clarity you have, the less likely you are to be successful in finding the exact right solution. So our work, the thing we probably do best is really work with advisors to help them. It doesn’t take long. In an hour conversation, we can help them to really get crystal clear on what they’re looking to solve for. Jason Diamond: Absolutely. All right. Great appetizer. We set the table. Let’s dive into the main course now. I want to talk now about what I’m calling the 2.0 triggers or the new triggers of movement. And to be clear, it’s not that these are more important or better or more significant drivers of movement. In fact, you could argue they’re probably at present less significant than the ones we just listed. But I think what we’re saying is these are triggers that are starting to come up more and more in conversations and we expect them to only proliferate further. And in that regard, they’re noteworthy and important for advisors because advisors should be reconciling not just what are the things I need to be worrying about today, but also what are the things I need to be potentially worrying about five years from now. So with that in mind, let’s dive in. I think the first one we have to start with is AI. And I always chuckle a tiny bit when we mention AI, we used to have to specify what are we talking about. Are we talking about artificial intelligence or alternative investments? And now it’s very clear. Everybody knows we’re talking about artificial intelligence. So the direction of the industry, no over-dramatization to say is at stake here. It’s that important of a topic. Let me ask you just very simply first, is this coming up in conversations with advisors? Mindy Diamond: Oh, all the time, but it’s almost table stakes. So I think the way it comes up is that people assume, advisors assume, and by the way, have the right to assume that AI is part of the tech stack. The notion that if I’m evaluating a firm and part of what frustrates me or part of what’s really important to me is cutting edge, really robust technology, part of what I am expecting is that a new firm is going to have really robust technology. And part of that is really robust access to AI. And has honed the AI in a way that’s user-friendly, that really answers or delivers on making me a better … Not replacing me as an advisor, but making me a better, more efficient advisor. Jason Diamond: 100%. And I would also add, so as I think about this AI topic, I don’t want this to become a conversation around, is AI going to replace advisors, because I think we both agree that’s not going to be the case. Especially at the top end of the market for quality advisors, I think they’re not going anywhere. But in my view, when we think about the trigger of movement, AI has the potential to be transformative because a couple kind of use cases or trigger cases come to mind, and I’d love to hear your thoughts. One is, do you think advisors will potentially consider a move because they’re worried about this? So in other words, play this logic out with me. I’m 55 years old and I’m like, “Oh man, AI might be coming from my job.” And there’s firms offering 400% of revenue to move my book. Maybe I should take that check and kind of de-risk and monetize while I can. What are your thoughts on that? Mindy Diamond: I absolutely think we’re already working with that fall into that category, but to say that is the only reason for the move would be wrong. I’m grateful that people trust us enough to be transparent with us. So they let us know that underneath the notion that they want to better serve clients, they ultimately want better access to A, B, and C, they want to be able to do D, E and F with less restriction, is really the main reason for the move. But underneath it, the notion that my book, I want to protect myself. My book may well be the biggest it’s ever going to be. It is going to be worth more today than it could be in the future if things don’t go my way. And if I know I’m going to move and one of my goals is to monetize, I might want to do that now. Jason Diamond: I agree. And that’s where the top deal story comes in also. Firms paying a top deal is a part of that story. It’s what you just said, plus advisors know firms are willing to pay incredible multiples. I mean, as we speak, UBS is in market with one of the largest deals in history. So those two narratives side by side, I agree. I think this becomes more of a kind of catalyst or driver movement. It’s come up in my conversations on both sides of the spectrum. It’s the tech savvy, AI savvy advisors who are excited about this, who are like, “I want to be the most AI enabled version of myself I can be. It’s going to make me a rockstar and it’s going to widen the gap with my peers,” but it’s also come up with the people who are, I think, rightly scared and fearful about what this might mean for their job. Mindy Diamond: Let me ask you, what are examples of the way you’ve seen some of the best firms who have embraced AI? What is their narrative? What is it that they’re saying to advisors that if you come here from a tech or AI perspective, you’ll be better because we’re able to do … Fill in the blank. Jason Diamond: Yeah. So a couple that come up. First of all, I want to make the important point. Advisors do not expect that firms, either their current firm or firms that they are diligencing prospectively, have this figured out or solved. Everybody understands this is a fairly new area that firms are still very much kind of developing their strategies in. What advisors want to see is a few things. They want to see though leadership, they want to see investment, and they want to see a strategy, right? Effectively, they want to see a step in the right direction, really. So I’ll give you a couple examples. There are a number of tech savvy RIAs, very tech-enabled, AI-focused RIAs, because I think this is easier to be nimble. I think where you’ll see this quicker probably is in the independent space. That what they’re doing is things like this. An advisor logs on to their workstation in the morning and their system queues them proactively, Mr. and Mrs. Smith may be good candidates for a Roth IRA conversion. And then if the advisor decides to contact the client in some way about it, the system will of course help them draft the communication, but then it’ll take it a step further and actually help them to process and transact that conversion. So soup to nuts, ultimately driving efficiency. That’s the name of the game. That’s why firms, I think, are excited about AI, at least the good firms. Because what I think they realize it will do is, the stuff that’s a waste of time that could be automated that advisors, and probably even more so their associates, client associates are spending time on, that should be a massive time saver for advisors. And I think if you play that story out, what does that mean? It should mean bigger books of business and therefore more productive advisors because they have more time to prospect and focus on their clients. Thoughts? Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So I think you said it perfectly, but it raises the question then. You say that the RIAs can be more nimble. You’re right. I mean, the big story around the biggest firms was like moving a battleship, it takes a long time to turn it. It’s not as nimble. So what and how are the bigger firms competing against the RIAs with respect to AI? And second question, we still always get questions, and rightly so, about Morgan Stanley has more money to invest… Jason Diamond: That was going to be part of my answer. Mindy Diamond: … than fill in the blank RIA. So how does that all work? Jason Diamond: That is absolutely going to be part of my answer, is that I have heard this question posed almost presumptively both ways. “Oh, it’s got to be that the RIAs are going to be the clear winners in this.” And I’ve also heard, “Oh, it’s got to be that the wirehouses are going to be the clear winners in this.” I don’t think it’s going to be channel specific like that. I think it is going to be firm specific. I think there’s going to be firms that are going to do this well and firms that are going to not do this well. But there’s going to be winners in the wirehouse space. There’s going to be winners in the regional firm space, with firms like Raymond James who are clearly trying to be on the cutting edge of this. There’s certainly going to be winners in the broker-dealer space. LPL is investing heavily in this, as are many of their broker-dealer competitors. And then of course the RIA space, where sometimes they may not have the budgets, but they have a couple things. They have private equity backing, sometimes. They have the custodians that they’re built on, right, or the tech vendors that they’re built on. So Schwab and Fidelity or Orion and Addepar. They have other ways to access these innovations. One of the things that comes up with this that your question I think gets at is, a similar question that was raised around technology stacks, which is strength of offering versus integration. And that’s where I think a firm like Morgan Stanley really will shine, is they should … Because they don’t put anything out that’s not well integrated. The big firms have generally done a pretty good job of that. Versus the RIAs. Sometimes we’ve heard feedback where, yes, you have access to you name it, right? You dream it up, you can go and buy it. But the left hand may not speak to the right hand quite as well. Mindy Diamond: Yeah, that’s actually a really good point. And integration is probably one of the biggest … If you ask an advisor when they talk about technology as either being one of their pushes or pulls, probably what they’re referring to more than anything is not only having the capability, but having the integrated capability. So that’s a great point. And I think your point is right, that the final chapter on this has not been written. Nobody thinks that it has. And so whatever answers you and I can talk about today about who’s winning this race, or this tech race or this AI race, will be totally different tomorrow. We all know that. But I think for purposes of this conversation, to say that an advisor having an expectation that their technology be outstanding and that AI be on the table, that a firm is embracing it and heading in the right direction, if you will, has the right thought leadership and the right willingness to invest in it is what advisors are really looking for right now. Jason Diamond: Absolutely. And this is a question too from the firm’s perspective, if you are a firm of any size, you must be able to answer that. This has become question 1A. And again, I don’t mean to suggest that I think AI is the number one most important factor driving advisor movement today. It very well might be at some point down the road. I don’t think we’re there yet. But I do think it’s the topic du jour or the hot topic, where every advisor is asking about this. So that means if you’re a firm, you need to be prepared to tell the story or at least have the vision. And I think what we’re hearing from both advisors and from firms is this, AI is going to … What is right now a gap between the good and the bad, the quality and the non, is going to become an absolute chasm, right? An absolutely mountainous gap between the best firms and the firms who are able to adapt this technology or this AI. And the same thing at the advisor level, between the AI-enabled superpowered advisor versus those who are in the dinosaur ages, for lack of a better term. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. And we’ll move on, but it is worth saying that the day of the standalone independent, the one man or one woman band who hangs out a shingle, and to use your term, running a lifestyle practice, nothing wrong with that, but it would be near impossible to imagine a world where a standalone independent can compete with a private-equity-backed RIA or an RIA that has a big pool of capital behind them or to compete with the major firms. And our point is the ability to compete is probably more important with respect to this topic than just about any other. Jason Diamond: Totally agree. Thank you for tying a bow on that because I think that’s a good place to leave the AI topic, at least for now. I’m certain we’ll have more to say on this one. By the time we release this episode, we’ll probably have more to say on it. So we’ll have to do a follow-up again. But I want to talk now about enterprise value. And this is one where if you’re an RIA or if you’re an advisor at an independent firm, this might sound like a duh, but hear me out on this one. The idea is as follows, if I’m a wirehouse advisor or any sort of captive advisor, I don’t technically own anything. Agree? Mindy Diamond: Agreed. Jason Diamond: Okay. So if that’s true, that I don’t technically own anything, I technically don’t have any sort of enterprise value or ability to monetize. But my premise here and why I would argue that enterprise value has become a driver of movement is even wirehouse advisors know … They see teams like OpenArc, a massive RIA that launched last year. They see their corner office peers breaking away, starting independent firms. They see them selling to asset managers, private-equity-backed RIAs, private equity firms in their own right for these massive multiples. And what I guess I’m getting at, and I’m curious if you agree is, if a wirehouse advisor, let’s say, sees their colleagues sell to a private equity firm for 20X, doesn’t that have to become a little bit of a catalyst for movement in its own right? Mindy Diamond: Without a doubt. Historically … Actually, let me date myself. When I started this business now 32 years ago, there was zero way for an advisor who was a captive employee of a firm, of any firm, to monetize their business. It’s why there was so much movement, because the only way they could monetize was to get paid a big fat transition deal to move from one firm to the other. Jason Diamond: Yep. Mindy Diamond: Obviously, we all know that first it started with the big firms, and then just about every brokerage firm on the street began to offer a retire-in-place program. And that is the big firms or a traditional brokerage firm’s way of allowing advisor to monetize in place from their perspective to stave off attrition. And for an advisor that believes that the status quo serves them well, that finishing their career, that leaving their legacy, that leaving their team at their firm is the best thing to do, then those retire-in-place programs, like Merrill’s CTP or Morgan’s FAP or UBS’s Alpha or a name at every firm has them, is the best gift to advisors there is. But the problem is that the next generation at those firms are buying an asset they don’t own. And so when we talk about enterprise value or the desire to build enterprise value as a real driver of movement, what we’re talking about is not only that advisors want ownership of an asset, because ownership translates into more control and autonomy and agency over building it the way you want to, but it also translates into maximizing the value of the business that you’ve built. So that’s a long-winded way of saying that the OpenArc deal you are referencing, for anybody not familiar, is a Merrill Lynch team, a legacy Merrill Lynch team in Atlanta that was managing more than 120 billion in assets, part retail, ultra high net worth client assets, and part institutional consulting assets. And believe me, I don’t want to make it sound like it was a snap that one day they’re happy and the next day they’re going independent. Over a 10-year period became more and more aware, driven by the pushes and more aware of the pulse. But ultimately, while there was a long list of things they wanted to be able to do that they couldn’t to best serve clients and grow the business, the real driver at the end of the day, or I shouldn’t say the real driver, but a major driver was the notion of building and owning enterprise value. Yes, they could have all gotten very attractive deals and retired with your Merrill CTP, but they wanted to own the business, they wanted cap gains treatment. And so they went through the sweat equity big time of building what they’re calling OpenArc for the ability for probably five, 10, 20 years, because there’s partners with all different ages, so at all different times, to be able to really maximize the value of the business they’ve built. Jason Diamond: Can I push back on that for … It’s a super helpful example, but my one thought is, okay, yeah, of course, 130 billion in assets, they should be concerned with enterprise value at that size. And the delta between caring about enterprise value and not is too great because those guys have, by all accounts, a phenomenal business that is rivaled by very few in the industry. Most of our audience does not fit into that stratosphere. So what about advisors in, let’s call it the million to $10 million space? Should they still care about this concept? Mindy Diamond: Again, it’s an inside job. It’s a personal thing. Some don’t. But the answer is yes. And if I were them, I would. Why? Because whether I am generating a million a year in revenue or $10 million a year in revenue, at the end of the day, I’ve got an asset. I’ve built a valuable asset. And I have the choice at the end of the day or the middle of the day to decide a million things about that asset. How do I want to live my business life? How do I want to serve my clients? Where do I want to work? But one of the biggest factors to determining where and how they want to work is, ultimately, do I want to be able to maximize the value of the business that I’ve built? And while there are few things that are really definitive in this industry, the one thing that is absolutely indisputably definitive is that if you build an independent practice like the ex-Merrill Lynch churned RIA OpenArc team did, you will ultimately build enterprise value exponential multiples greater than any way you could monetize the business as a traditional employee. Jason Diamond: And that math absolutely still holds up even at numbers smaller than we’ve mentioned. I totally agree with that. I’ll give you one other reason why I think you should care. And I’d love your thoughts on this one. I’ll ask it two ways maybe. I’ll tell you my take and then I’ll ask you yours. Morgan Stanley, let’s use as an example. Who are Morgan Stanley’s competitors? In my opinion, the legacy answer to that is, well, of course the wirehouses are Morgan Stanley’s competitors. Merrill, UBS, Wells Fargo, what maybe used to be a longer list, but today those four. I don’t think that’s the answer anymore. I think those are the direct competitors. But because of this enterprise value conversation, I think Morgan Stanley’s competitors are anyone and everyone who recruits financial advisors with books of business. Because if you think about it, an advisor who has a $3 million business at a wirehouse, even if they’re not actually going to do this, they don’t have any entrepreneurial spirit, no desire to go independent, they still know that they could. This is an option and a viable option. And firms are even figuring out ways to cut out the middle step, right? Because this was historically a two-step process. You’re a wirehouse advisor or a W2 advisor. You break away, launch an independent business to establish your enterprise value, begin building it, and then you monetize it. If you could cut out the middle step, or even if you couldn’t, I still think it’s pretty clear that if you’re an advisor, this is important because the firms know … Like when Morgan Stanley’s writing a recruiting deal, they’re kept honest by RIAs and acquirers just the same as their direct peer set. Do you agree with that or do you think I’m reading too far into this? Mindy Diamond: Oh no, I agree a thousand percent. I think that it is naive for anyone recruiting for or on behalf of a traditional firm to think that the only competition is another traditional firm. The days of pomposity for a senior leader at a traditional firm to say, “We’ve got the best technology, the best everything fill in the blank. We have no competitors.” That’s just naive. Because even if it’s true, you’ve got the best platform infrastructure fill in the blank, there is a multitude of advisors that value things different than what you can provide. Beauty is in the eye of beholder is probably a good way to say that. But at the end of the day, what we’re really talking about is when I started the business, because there was no way, no really good way for an advisor to really monetize their life’s work, the only thing they could or were focused on from a personal financial gain perspective was the short-term deal. What are they paying? What’s the transition deal? Now, of course they’re concerned about that. But almost to a person, they’re equally concerned about what I can build and what will this allow me to build in terms of the value of the business I’m building in the long term. So let me ask you, if we’re talking about an advisor that has the ability to monetize in the short term for what could be 4X and in some cases more than that these days, and we’re talking about the ability to maximize enterprise value, and we talk about the concept of moving once and monetizing twice, what kind of numbers are we talking about? Fill in the blanks there. Jason Diamond: It’s such a hard question to answer because I do genuinely believe recruiting deals, when you talk about 300 to 400% revenue deals in the recruiting space, they vary a little bit, but I feel pretty comfortable quoting those types of numbers that most firms are somewhere in the 300 to 400% of T12 realm. There are some outliers, we mentioned UBS. But the multiple or EBITDA based or enterprise value M&A market where we’re doing these legitimate buyout transactions, the valuations do vary quite a bit. But here’s how I think about it. First of all, most firms are not purchased or sold at top line revenue. Most are sold at some sort of adjusted EBITDA number, which factors in local expenses, platform expenses, but also advisor compensation. And then that adjusted number is typically multipled. The multiples are anywhere from 8X for small kind of, let’s say, million dollar revenue businesses up to, we’ve seen deals struck at north of 20X for some of these mega cap RIAs. Typically, just back of the envelope, if I had to quote, I typically estimate around 5X top line at capital gains is a good kind of ballpark valuation. But there is quite a bit of nuance to it, more so than the traditional recruiting space. And I do think, shameless plug, part of the value in working with somebody who’s an expert on the entirety of the industry landscape is just that. It’s the idea that you need to run the horse race across multiple verticals. The good advisors who work with us typically are looking at a wire like a Morgan Stanley or a Merrill. They’re looking at a boutique firm like a Rockefeller, or they’re looking at a regional like an RBC or a Ray J. They’re looking at an independent firm like an LPL or a Sanctuary. They’re looking all across the spectrum. Mindy Diamond: I think that’s exactly right. But the topic of enterprise value, you can see how powerful it is and how wise it is. For an advisor today, when considering their personal economics to consider not just the short term, but to weigh in or add in or factor in, what could I be building and what ultimately will that business be worth at the end of the day? Jason Diamond: Yeah, 100%. Short of going out and selling your business, what can advisors do then? So I’m an advisor, okay, I’m curious about this. Or is it just as simple as, “Yeah, you should know what your business is worth if you’re an advisor”? Mindy Diamond: Definitively yes, because I mean, we always believe that knowledge is power. And just like it’s important for you to understand what your options are within your own firm, how can I ultimately retire out and monetize my business where I am, I think it’s really hard to make a decision in a vacuum without having other perspective. And getting other perspective doesn’t have to be that you have to go out and take 20 meetings. It’s not that hard for you to figure out what your business is worth to make it a data point for whether or not you’re ultimately best to retire in place or go elsewhere. Jason Diamond: Yeah, that I think is the main takeaway. And the education point is so important. I think because these are relatively new concepts for a lot of advisors that haven’t formally shopped a business before, there’s a lot of resources available. And we’ll certainly link some as well on the page for the episode. Let’s shift gears now, our kind of final trigger 2.0, which is stability and ownership structure of the firm. And this has been a little bit of a hot topic. It’s honestly been a hot topic every year because it seems like things pop up every year. And a lot of times advisors don’t reconcile the question of who owns the firm or how stable is the firm until something happens. The firm gets bought, the firm goes bankrupt, like the First Republic scenario. What should a good advisor do proactively about the idea that if you’re a W2 employee or even an employee who’s affiliated with a broker dealer, you saw this with Commonwealth, you just don’t really have control over what the firm decides to do. Give me your thoughts on this. I know it’s a big topic. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. First of all, using Commonwealth an example, it’s a good one. Because for those unfamiliar, Commonwealth is a boutique broker dealer that was privately owned and whose tagline was, “We love our privately owned status and we are never going to sell,” until one day they did. And not only did they sell, but they sold to the biggest independent broker dealer in the country, ala LPL. That’s not good nor bad, it’s just a fact. So if Commonwealth, who had definitively said we’re never up for sale, suddenly sells, any time you’re an employee of a firm, you never know what tomorrow brings in. You’re not in control over whether it’s sold. So that’s one example. But as you’re talking about this, I’m thinking about, I’m probably going back 20 years, so I’m 10 years into my career and I talked to someone who had been a very successful Merrill advisor. So I’m going to say he was probably generating around $5 million in revenue at the time. Going back 20 years, that’s a pretty significant book of business. He was courted for years by what he thought was a top RIA. And in those days, remember 20 years ago, the RIA space wasn’t nearly as mainstream as it is now. But the story the RIA told him was that ultimately, one, he was going to be a partner in the firm, that was very appealing to him. So he was going to have equity in the firm and much more freedom and control. And locally, by the way, the RIA was a really high quality brand. He worked on a lot of the economics, the short term and the long term with them. They did a ton of due diligence on his book of business. But he failed to ask … And I didn’t represent him. I just know this story. He failed to ask or do enough due diligence about the stability of the firm. What we think is really important, we talk about this expanded landscape. If you’re looking at Morgan Stanley, I don’t think you necessarily need to see Morgan Stanley’s balance sheet. If you are talking to a firm that is anything but a bulge bracket or anything but a large firm, it’s really important to do what we call reverse due diligence and to really understand if a firm expects you to open your kimono and show everything about your business to prove your worth, it is equally important that you do the same for them. In this new world order where private equity has come in and there are so many different ways for a firm to be owned and to be capitalized, it’s very important that an advisor understand what’s going on behind the scenes. And one of the questions around stability, if a firm is private equity backed, is it permanent capital? Is it patient capital? Is the private equity firm going to look to sell and monetize in five years? And then who would the likely buyer be and what does that mean for you? So the question is a big question and it’s really important. Jason Diamond: I love everything you just said, except I do think even the wirehouses, wirehouse advisors, honestly, as much as anybody should be asking these questions. And I’ll give you an example right now, UBS. And UBS, it’s not a story of balance sheet stability. I don’t think anybody has concerns that UBS is going to fail. But UBS management has been very publicly, “Oh, we’re cutting costs.” There’s been some rumors, I think for years, probably dating back 30 years to when you started the business about UBS’s commitment to the US wealth management business. I think those questions about stability and ownership structure are still valid. And to me, the implication of it is twofold. One, what you said, reverse due diligence, ask the questions, plan B. But also the concept of the exits or the off-ramps or how many bites of the apple do you get. So if you’re an advisor and you sell your business to somebody and you sign garden leave and non-competes and non-solicits, the question of ownership structure of that firm becomes less relevant because you have no off-ramps and no ability to exit that business anyway. A lot of times that’s how advisors get comfortable with this concept. And that’s what firms will tell them too, frankly, and we’re living through the middle of this, by the way, with Commonwealth and LPL, is vote with your feet, right? To the extent advisors can, the offer … And this is like, you used the example of private-equity-backed firms. This is how Rockefeller addresses the question of their private equity ownership. If we sell to UBS, all of our advisors will leave. They have that built-in put option. So knowing where the off-ramps are or how many bites of the apple an advisor gets, I think is a big concept that ties into that. But we’re absolutely seeing this pop up, probably largely because of those two examples, Commonwealth and UBS this year, more so Commonwealth, to your point. Janney’s another example last year or two years ago now where KKR comes in and buys Janney. So when these examples happen, it seems like it triggers advisors to say, “Is this something that could happen to me and should I be thinking about this?” Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So let me ask you a question. You’re talking, you’ve mentioned UBS offering this outsized deal. So how does the notion of stability and ownership factor in? If an advisor is considering an unprecedented deal from UBS, what are the caveats or concerns with respect to stability and ownership? Jason Diamond: It’s the same list of considerations you should and would ask of any other firm you’re diligencing, except I think amplified even more in the case … If I was counseling an advisor who was looking at UBS, that would be what I would say, is exactly that. You’re seeing all of these departures and defections, and I would want to have conversations with those advisors and understand exactly why and have guarantees or assurances that I’m not going to suffer from those same pain points that force them to leave. Or, and I say this a little bit flippantly, but it’s a little bit true, I understand the devil that I’m getting into bed with, but for 550%, or whatever the deal might be, I can suck it up. And that’s something that some advisors might well say as well. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. Jason Diamond: I don’t want to end on the negative note of overly large transition, not there’s anything wrong with large transition deals, but as you look out, is there anything that’s coming up in your conversation with advisors that you view as the next wave of this? I’ll give you one that maybe you could touch on, and if you have another one, feel free to offer it in conclusion, but do you think age or advisors starting to succeed out of the business will become more of a driver of movement, even though to your point, advisors can access sunset deals? Mindy Diamond: I do actually, because I think the more the average advisor age increases, the more likely that those advisors are going to want to move on to do something else to monetize the business. And so much of the wave of movement we see is driven not so much by the senior advisor, because many seed advisors are happy enough with the ability to monetize their business in place. Even though it may not maximize the value of the business, it’s a close enough approximation and it means I don’t have to disrupt the apple cart. So we support that 100%. But where we get the calls is from the next generation that says, “Yeah, but hold on a minute. It’s a good way for me to take on a book of assets that I not otherwise have access to. And it’s great for my senior partner, my father, my mother, my whatever to monetize the business. But I’m buying an asset again that I don’t own and I ultimately don’t have control over all these things we’re talking about, the AI investment, the ability to create enterprise value, the stability, the cost cutting, all of it.” So I think it’s all of the above. You say, “What else is there?” I think that’s it. It’s all of the above. It’s anything and everything that drives movement. One, it’s personal, it’s highly unique, it’s different for every advisor. There are certainly themes, and we’re talking about them, but there’s a million different things. It’s personal. And while there are an awful lot of pushes, things that can frustrate an advisor, it is the most exciting time in our view to be an advisor, particularly a high quality one, because the options abound, the ecosystem is big, because the ability to monetize both in the short term and the long term is big, mammoth, exponentially bigger than it ever was before. And the true ability to really build an enterprise has never been greater. And I think all of those things, the desire for an advisor to be the best that they can be and live their best business life is probably the biggest driver of all. Jason Diamond: It’s really true these days, if you can dream it, you can probably build it. And we’ve said in the past, if you build it, they will buy it. It’s a great place to end. This was a really fun topic. I think that’s a spot on kind of fourth trigger, by the way, too. This sort of next gen is almost like the force multiplier or the amplifier of like they see all this other stuff and they’re asking these questions even more so. Because if I’m 60 years old, none of this matters all that much. It matters, but I’m out of the business in five to 10 years. Versus the next gen advisors are the ones who often bear the brunt of this. So I think a lot of really smart stuff. Thank you for sharing your wisdom and expertise. In the episode page, we’ll be sure we have our Industry Transition Report. And we’ve also created a tool, the top 10 tips for a strategic due diligence process, which is a great kind of practical hand-in-hand companion for this topic for advisors looking for more pointed tips on the due diligence process. So Mindy, thank you again. This has been a blast. Mindy Diamond: My pleasure. Thank you. Jason Diamond: Thank you for joining us. We'll be back with a new episode next week, so be sure to listen in. Mindy Diamond: As a financial advisor, you hold yourself to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and credibility. You are successful because you take your professional responsibility seriously and are dedicated to your clients. But are you living your best business life? Are your goals aligned with your firms or could a better option exist? Should I Stay or Should I Go? is a book written with you in mind. It’s a self-guided journey that walks you through the key steps that we take with our advisor clients. This strategic thought process and roadmap to professional self-discovery is designed to help you ask the right questions and think critically and objectively, whether you’re considering change or not. Learn how to get your copy at diamond-consultants.com/thebook. The Advisor Transition Playbook: The Latest on Due Diligence, the Move, and Everything In Between – Part 2 A Special Industry Update with Jason Diamond and Mindy Diamond. Jason Diamond: Welcome to a replay of one of the most popular episodes from our podcast series for financial advisors, The Advisor Transition Playbook: The Latest on Due Diligence, the Move, and Everything In Between. It's Part 2 of a 2-Part Industry Update with Mindy Diamond. I’m Jason Diamond and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner, well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at 908-879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our Annual Advisor Transition Report. It’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Jason Diamond: There’s been a noticeable shift in how advisors are approaching decisions about their business, not necessarily in whether they’re exploring change, but in what they’re focused on when they do. Mindy is back with me for a continuation of our earlier conversation on the Advisor Transition Playbook. Last time, we spent time on the mechanics, how due diligence works, what a move actually entails, and how to think through the process. What’s become more apparent since then is that the inputs into that process are evolving. The traditional drivers are still there, but layered on top are a set of considerations that didn’t carry the same weight before. AI is one of them, and not just as a tool, but as a differentiator that advisors are starting to diligence more seriously. Enterprise value is another. Showing up in conversations, even for advisors who don’t technically own their business, but are thinking more critically about what they’re building over time. And then there are questions around stability, ownership, and flexibility. What happens to the firm itself and whether advisors retain the ability to adapt again if circumstances change. None of this is theoretical. It’s showing up in real time conversations. What we want to do here is unpack those new triggers of advisor movement and what they suggest about how decisions are being made today. So let’s get to it. Mindy, the legend, thank you for joining me. So glad to have you on. Mindy Diamond: Thank you. I’m so happy to be here. Jason Diamond: Great. Let’s dive right in. I’ll set the stage really quickly one more time. When we spoke about this topic last, we talked about the drivers of movement, what we’ll call in this conversation as the old or the legacy drivers of movement, and we spoke about the mechanics of the move. Before we get into the new drivers of movement, which I want to be the meat of the conversation, remind us, when we talk about the legacy drivers of movement …. And by the way, by saying legacy, I by no means want to suggest that they’re not valid today, because they’re equally valid, if not more so today than they were then. But when you think of the classic drivers of movement in our industry, what are they? Mindy Diamond: Yeah. So I would say, first of all, let’s start by saying that for every advisor, they’ve got a unique set of needs. So the first thing to say is that while you and I can talk about the categories of frustrations or things that might bother an advisor, they show up differently in each advisor’s life. So it’s important to note that everyone is unique. But generally speaking, if I had to package them, I’d say it’s number one that shows up most of the time is too much bureaucracy. A feeling that a firm or a model is just too hypervigilant in terms of compliance and it’s too bureaucratic and too hard to get things done.

There is no shortage of nations that refer to themselves as a republic. There is, however, a total absence of nations that fit the profile of a republic, namely a system in which …”supreme authority belongs to the voting public.” But even though many Western nations mock the East where the voter is given only one option to choose, things are not that much better in the West. The selection is still orchestrated, and the voter is akin to a figurehead, with more ceremonial power than actual authority.

Every day, billions of transactions settle between strangers who have no idea which bank the other uses. That lack of friction is not automatic. Nine-tenths of the money in daily circulation has been created by commercial banks, but it stays trustworthy only because central banks stand behind it, and keep the system in balance.In this week's episode Tim Phillips talks to Stephen Cecchetti (Brandeis University, CEPR) about what happens when new forms of digital money test that architecture. Cecchetti is one of the authors of the eighth Barcelona Report in The Future of Banking series, part of the Banking Initiative at IESE Business School, just published by CEPR as a free download.Will retail central bank digital currencies, tokenised deposits, and stablecoins upset the delicate balance of system that has been running for decades? Stablecoins, for example, do not create money, but they claim the status of money without the institutional guarantee that makes money trustworthy. Three jurisdictions — the US, the EU, and the UK — are each resolving the same underlying contradiction in different ways. None has fully resolved it.The research behind this episode:Niepelt, Dirk, Stephen G. Cecchetti, Hélène Rey, and Xavier Vives. 2026. Digital Money: The Future of Banking 8. London: CEPR Press. Available as a free download from CEPR.To cite this episode:Phillips, Tim, and Stephen G. Cecchetti. 2026. “The digital money supply.” VoxTalks Economics (podcast). Assign this as extra listening. The citation above is formatted and ready for a reading list or VLE.About the guestStephen Cecchetti is the Rosen Family Chair in International Finance at Brandeis University, a Research Fellow of the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), and a Research Associate at the NBER. He was previously Economic Adviser and Head of the Monetary and Economic Department at the Bank for International Settlements, and Director of Research at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. His research spanning monetary policy, financial stability, and banking regulation has shaped both academic and policy debate over three decades. He blogs at moneyandbanking.com.Research cited in this episodeWalter Bagehot's lender of last resort doctrine. In Lombard Street: A Description of the Money Market (1873), Bagehot argued that a central bank under stress should lend freely against good collateral at a penalty rate. The prescription remains the intellectual foundation for how central banks manage runs and systemic crises. Cecchetti invokes it to make the point that no private substitute for a central bank backstop has ever proved durable, and that the doctrine is now, one hundred and fifty years on, being tested by instruments its author could not have imagined.Monetary uniformity, mobility, and elasticity. The three institutional conditions underpinning general acceptance of money, developed in analysis by the Bank for International Settlements and discussed extensively in the report. Uniformity means a pound is a pound regardless of which bank holds it. Mobility means claims move between users and institutions at low cost and settle with finality. Elasticity means the supply of money can expand when it is under stress. Together they explain why we accept a deposit at face value without doing any analysis of the bank that issued it; and together they identify exactly where new forms of digital money create institutional gaps.Silicon Valley Bank failure, March 2023. SVB's collapse illustrates both the lender of last resort functioning and the limits of no-bailout commitments. Cecchetti notes that SVB's liabilities were still trading at par on the Thursday before its Friday failure because the Federal Reserve stood behind them. He also notes that Circle, the issuer of USDC, held $3.3 billion of its reserves at SVB and was effectively bailed out in the resolution. The episode is one of two occasions in the past twenty years where money market fund-like instruments have been backstopped by the Federal Reserve under stress.Genius Act (United States). Principle-based stablecoin regulation expected to come into effect in the US around 2027. Under its provisions, only stablecoins issued by bank-affiliated issuers will have access to the Federal Reserve; only those will therefore have the institutional backing needed to function as money. Stablecoins issued by non-bank entities will not.Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation (MiCA), European Union. The EU framework for crypto assets, which entered into force in 2024. For stablecoins, MiCA requires issuers to hold 30 to 60% of their reserves in bank deposits, with no provision for central bank backing. The stated rationale is to keep deposits within the banking system; Cecchetti notes this creates a different category of vulnerability and leaves the question of what happens under stress unresolved.Bank of England stablecoin proposal (United Kingdom). The Bank of England's approach differs from both US and EU frameworks by explicitly requiring large stablecoin issuers to hold significant reserve deposits at the Bank of England, making them in effect narrow banks with a direct central bank backstop. Cecchetti regards this as the most coherent of the three approaches in terms of institutional logic, though the same fundamental question applies: whether holding to that design under stress would be politically sustainable.Tether and the jurisdictional challenge. Tether, the largest stablecoin issuer, is registered in El Salvador having previously operated out of the British Virgin Islands. Its tokens are held by users in multiple countries, traded on exchanges in multiple jurisdictions, and backed by US Treasury securities. Cecchetti uses this to illustrate why local regulation, however well-designed, is necessary but not sufficient; effective oversight of instruments that are genuinely global requires international standards and coordination.Fractional reserve banking and the goldsmith model. The institutional structure described in the episode has roots in mid-seventeenth century England, when goldsmiths began issuing more paper receipts than they had gold in their vaults. The goldsmiths became bankers; the paper became money; the vulnerability to runs became a structural feature of private money creation that persists today. Cecchetti uses the history to make the point that while technology changes how we store and transmit information, the underlying architecture of trust in private money is as old as Newtonian physics.More VoxTalks Economics episodesMaking banking safe, Stephen Cecchetti and Kermit Schoenholtz. Our financial system is supposed to be more resilient than before the global financial crisis, but that didn't save Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank or First Republic. So what went wrong?Related reading on VoxEUNew coins on the block: Digital currencies and the financial system. The authors of the Barcelona Report warn that “Digital money will be reliable only where sound institutions and robust technology come together.”

This is a preview. For the entire episode support the show on patreon: https://www.patreon.com/posts/159368663?pr=true&forSale=true

"When you look at the world now, does it look more uncertain or less uncertain?" In December 2025, the Bank of England's Financial Policy Committee (FPC) answered that question by cutting the equity capital requirement for UK banks. David Aikman (NIESR) and John Vickers (University of Oxford), two former senior Bank insiders who helped to design the regulatory framework post-GFC, think the committee got it wrong.The FPC lowered the benchmark capital requirement from 14% to 13% of risk-weighted assets, a move that could free up roughly £30 billion of capital across the UK banking system. Aikman and Vickers see no compelling economic reason for the change. They argue that the 2015 benchmark was already set too low, built on questionable assumptions about how well resolution frameworks would work. Since 2015, Brexit, the pandemic, and a sharply stretched fiscal position have all increased the likely cost of a future crisis. The practical effect of the loosening may not even be more lending, but higher dividends and share buybacks. And the December decision may signal a weakening of the leverage ratio backstop, the constraint that limits bank borrowing regardless of how risk weights are applied.The research behind this episode:Aikman, David, and John Vickers. 2026. "The Bank of England's Capital Mistake." VoxEU, 15 January 2026. To cite this episode:Phillips, Tim, David Aikman, and John Vickers. 2026. "The Bank of England's Capital Mistake." VoxTalks Economics (podcast). Assign this as extra listening. The citation above is formatted and ready for a reading list or VLE.About the guestsDavid Aikman is Director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR). He worked at the Bank of England from 2003 to 2020, where he served as Technical Head of Division in Financial Stability and was centrally involved in the creation of the Financial Policy Committee. His research spanning macroprudential regulation, systemic risk, and the macroeconomics of financial crises has made him one of the leading academic voices on bank capital policy in the UK.Sir John Vickers is Warden of All Souls College and Professor of Economics at the University of Oxford. He served as Chief Economist and a member of the Monetary Policy Committee at the Bank of England, and chaired the Independent Commission on Banking from 2010 to 2011, which recommended substantially higher capital requirements than those subsequently adopted. His research spanning industrial economics, competition policy, and financial regulation has shaped UK banking policy for two decades.Research cited in this episodeEquity capital requirements specify the minimum proportion of a bank's assets that must be funded by shareholders' equity rather than borrowed money. Equity is the only form of funding that can absorb losses without triggering insolvency: if a bank suffers unexpected losses, its shareholders bear them first. In the run-up to the 2008 financial crisis, some large institutions held equity equivalent to as little as two or three percent of their total exposures, implying leverage of up to forty times; a small shock was enough to render them insolvent. The post-crisis repair effort was designed to ensure that could not happen again.Risk-weighted assets (RWAs) are the denominator against which capital requirements are measured. Rather than applying the capital ratio to the raw value of all assets, the framework deflates each asset by an estimated risk factor: a mortgage backed by collateral is treated as less risky than an unsecured corporate loan, for example. Capital requirements are then expressed as a percentage of this risk-adjusted total. The approach creates significant complexity and depends heavily on the accuracy of the risk weights; much of the story of 2008 was that regulators allowed banks to attach implausibly low risk weights to their exposures, understating the true leverage in the system.The Financial Policy Committee (FPC) is the Bank of England body responsible for macroprudential oversight of the UK financial system. Created in 2013, it sits above the individual regulators to take a system-wide view of whether risks are building and whether the financial system as a whole has adequate resilience. One of its primary tools is setting the overall capital requirement benchmark for UK banks. In 2015 it set that benchmark at 14% of risk-weighted assets; in December 2025 it reduced it to 13%.The leverage ratio is an alternative measure of bank capitalisation that does not apply risk weights. It expresses equity as a simple percentage of total assets, regardless of what those assets are. The UK leverage ratio backstop currently stands at around 3 to 4%, implying maximum leverage of roughly twenty-five to thirty times for systemically important banks. Vickers and Aikman note that for some UK banks the backstop has become the binding constraint, which they regard as a warning sign: it suggests that risk-weighted measures are understating actual leverage, not that the backstop should be relaxed.Resolution frameworks are the legal and operational mechanisms that allow regulators to manage the failure of a bank without a taxpayer bailout, by imposing losses on shareholders and creditors in an orderly way. A central assumption in the FPC's 2015 capital benchmark was that resolution would work effectively in a future crisis, which justified a lower capital requirement. Vickers and Aikman are sceptical: the experience of Credit Suisse in 2023, which required a state-assisted rescue despite the existence of resolution plans, illustrates that orderly resolution of a major institution cannot be taken for granted.Basel 3.1 is the latest package of international banking regulatory standards agreed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, designed to address weaknesses in how risk weights are calculated. Its implementation in the UK is scheduled for 2027, nineteen years after the 2008 crisis. The FPC's December 2025 decision is partly contingent on Basel 3.1 being implemented as planned; Aikman notes that there have been repeated international delays and rollbacks, and that the UK's ability to move ahead unilaterally is constrained by what other major jurisdictions do.The 2023 banking stress saw three US regional banks (Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, and First Republic) fail in quick succession in March 2023, followed by the forced rescue of Credit Suisse by UBS. These events occurred in what was, by historical standards, a relatively stable macroeconomic environment. Vickers cites them as evidence that banking sector vulnerabilities have not been eliminated by post-2008 reforms, and as a caution against complacency about the effectiveness of current safeguards.More VoxTalks EconomicsMaking banking safe Our financial system is supposed to be more resilient than before the global financial crisis, but that didn't save Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank or First Republic. So what went wrong, and can we fix it? Steve Cecchetti and Kim Schoenholtz suggest how regulators can make banking safer.

Today we're going to connect two stories that, on the surface, look very different. One is Japan, where government bond yields have been rising, and the commentary on financial social media is busy declaring Japan is “blowing up.”The other is the spring of 2023 in the United States, when Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, and First Republic, all failed within weeks of each other. These events rhyme because the underlying physics is the same. Duration risk plus leverage plus flighty funding can turn a paper loss into a real loss in about a weekend.Let's start with the basic math. When interest rates rise, bond prices fall. That's not an opinion, that's bond arithmetic.--------------**Real Estate Espresso Podcast:** Spotify: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](https://open.spotify.com/show/3GvtwRmTq4r3es8cbw8jW0?si=c75ea506a6694ef1)   iTunes: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-real-estate-espresso-podcast/id1340482613)   Website: [www.victorjm.com](http://www.victorjm.com)   LinkedIn: [Victor Menasce](http://www.linkedin.com/in/vmenasce)   YouTube: [The Real Estate Espresso Podcast](http://www.youtube.com/@victorjmenasce6734)   Facebook: [www.facebook.com/realestateespresso](http://www.facebook.com/realestateespresso)   Email: [podcast@victorjm.com](mailto:podcast@victorjm.com)  **Y Street Capital:** Website: [www.ystreetcapital.com](http://www.ystreetcapital.com)   Facebook: [www.facebook.com/YStreetCapital](https://www.facebook.com/YStreetCapital)   Instagram: [@ystreetcapital](http://www.instagram.com/ystreetcapital)  

The second part oin our series about the rise and fall of the first Republic of Armenia in 1918-1920. Get the whole episode on Patreon here! https://www.patreon.com/posts/149346184

In this episode of Tank Talks, Matt Cohen is joined by Samir Kaji, CEO and Co-Founder of Allocate, to break down the explosive growth of private market investing and why trillions in new capital are about to reshape the entire wealth ecosystem. Fresh off a $30.5M Series B, Samir unpacks how Allocate is building the missing infrastructure connecting fund managers, RIAs, and the next generation of investors, solving the painful workflows, broken data pipes, and manual processes still holding the industry back. From intelligent deal discovery and auto-filled subscriptions to AI-powered diligence and portfolio personalization, Samir explains how technology will unlock access, efficiency, and liquidity at scale for both advisors and allocators.He also dives deep into the current venture cycle, the AI valuation frenzy, and the widening gap between mega-funds and emerging managers. Samir gives an unfiltered look at where the real opportunities lie, why liquidity is the next trillion-dollar unlock, how secondaries will redefine private markets, and what investors should be watching heading into 2030. If you want to understand where private markets, wealth management, and alternative investing are truly headed, this episode is essential listening.The Origin Story: 25 Years Watching the Market Shift (03:09)* Samir's work at SVB and First Republic observing the decline of IPOs* Cloud computing's impact on fund proliferation* Early signs that private markets needed new infrastructure* How HNWIs and family offices began demanding access decades before the rails existedWhy Allocate Exists & What It Actually Solves (07:04)* The fragmented “dark forest” problem of GP RIA connectivity* Why wealth advisors can't scale alt allocations using PDFs and lawyers* The three pillars of AllocateHow Advisors Use Allocate to Scale 10x Without Adding Headcount (14:18)* Auto-filled subs, KYC, allocation setup, client mapping* Helping advisors serve all 150 clients, not just the top 20%* Improving revenue while slashing operational dragUnlocking Liquidity: The Biggest Missing Piece of Private Markets (21:16)* Why secondaries are essential for opening the wealth channel* Borrowing against private fund positions* How tech will reduce massive bid-ask spreads* Why liquidity options will double alt allocations from 5% → 10-30% over timeAI's Real Role in Private Markets (25:20)* AI as the intelligence layer for discovery, diligence & personalization* Uploading 10 fund decks → receiving full breakdowns in minutes* Why workflows, not chatbots, will unlock trillions* Execution, payments & portfolio modeling going from days to secondsThe State of Venture Capital in 2025 (32:17)* Why today's market is “the extreme Tale of Two Cities”* AI startups raising at insane velocity vs. great non-AI companies starving* Why 90% of AI companies won't justify valuations* Seed funds getting squeezed by mega-funds writing “option checks”* How emerging managers can still win (go earlier or niche down hard)Founder Discipline, Revenue per Head, & the New Efficiency Era (40:06)* Revenue-per-employee as the new defining KPI* Why scarcity birthed a healthier generation of founders* Companies going from 5 → 50 → back to 20 employees* Running lean with AI as leverage instead of headcountAbout Samir KajiSamir Kaji is the Co-Founder and CEO of Allocate, a platform revolutionizing how investors access and manage private market investments. With a career in venture banking spanning over two decades at Silicon Valley Bank and First Republic, Samir has an unparalleled view of the venture capital and private equity landscapes. He is also a Kauffman Fellow, the host of the Venture Unlocked podcast, and a personal investor in companies like Carta and Reddit. He remains dedicated to Allocate's mission of making the private markets as transparent and responsible as the public markets.Connect with Samir Kaji on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samirkajiVisit the Allocate website: https://allocate.co/Connect with Matt Cohen on LinkedIn: https://ca.linkedin.com/in/matt-cohen1Visit the Ripple Ventures website: https://www.rippleventures.com/ This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit tanktalks.substack.com

Rapid growth as a community bank – Five Star's strategies for using fintech to expand their customer. Detailed Summary: This episode of the Finovate Podcast features DJ Kurtze, Executive Vice President and Bay Area President of Five Star Bank, discussing the community bank's impressive growth trajectory and unique positioning in the competitive San Francisco market. Five Star Bank is a $4.6 billion community bank headquartered in Rancho Cordova with nine branches and two administrative offices, serving real estate communities, small to medium-sized businesses, nonprofits, agriculture, and governmental entities. Founded 25 years ago by real estate developers Buzz Oates and Frank Ramos, the bank has maintained a remarkable 20% compounded annual growth rate over the last five years through organic growth strategies rather than acquisitions. Kurtze joined Five Star after the collapse of Signature Bank in March 2023, bringing his team over to capitalize on opportunities created by the banking sector disruptions involving SVB, First Republic, and Signature Bank. The conversation explores Five Star's competitive advantages, which center on hiring exceptional senior bankers who understand their clients' businesses and providing direct access to decision-makers with speed and certainty of execution. The bank positions itself as "technology first," implementing advanced systems both for customer-facing services and internal operations. This technological focus, combined with their flat organizational structure and lack of legacy systems from acquisitions, allows them to operate at a 40% efficiency ratio and quickly implement customer feedback and new product offerings. The bank's approach to fintech partnerships emphasizes working with vendors who have proven track records with financial institutions and can provide plug-and-play solutions compatible with existing core banking systems. A significant portion of the discussion focuses on Five Star's specialized approach to nonprofit banking, which requires understanding unique cash flows, funding structures, and the sophisticated needs of experienced C-suite executives and board members who often come from successful business backgrounds. The bank provides advanced fraud prevention tools, insured cash sweep products for higher FDIC insurance limits, and creative lending solutions including tax-exempt financing. Kurtze closes by highlighting how community banks have advantages in fraud prevention through personal relationships and direct banker-client communication, allowing them to identify unusual transactions and protect clients more effectively than larger institutions despite having smaller technology budgets. More info: Five Star Bank: https://www.five-starbank.com/ ; https://www.linkedin.com/company/five-star-bank-california/ DJ Kurtze: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dj-kurtze-449b3934/ Greg Palmer: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gregbpalmer/ Finovate: https://www.finovate.com; https://www.linkedin.com/company/finovate-conference-series/ #Finovate #FiveStarBank #communitybank #nonprofitbanking #digitalbanking #podcast #fintechpodcast #financialservices #bank #banks #security #digitraltransformation #fintech #finserv #modernization #innovation #startup #banking

The Book and Its Premise (Order Eric's new Book HERE!) Under Siege is presented as Eric Trump’s account of what is “the greatest governmental corruption this nation has ever seen.” Trump and is family were victims of political persecution, media bias, and systemic weaponization of institutions. Claims of Government “Weaponization” Eric Trump accuses the DOJ, FBI, and state-level prosecutors (Letitia James, Alvin Bragg, Jack Smith, etc.) of targeting his family for political reasons. He recounts the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago as an overreach and describes it as “staged” and politically motivated. Mentions being “the most subpoenaed man in history,” claiming to have received over 100 subpoenas. Debanking and Corporate Retaliation Eric Trump says that hundreds of bank accounts belonging to Trump businesses and affiliates were closed due to political pressure. Specific banks named: Capital One, JP Morgan, Bank of America, First Republic. He frames this as an example of private-sector “weaponization” against conservatives. Financial and Legal Struggles The family spent around $400 million defending themselves from investigations and lawsuits. Describes how banks, courts, and insurance companies were allegedly pressured to avoid doing business with the Trump Organization. Personal Reflections and Family Dynamics Speaks warmly of his father as a calm, strong leader under pressure and a strict but loving parent. Emphasizes a childhood of discipline, work ethic, and learning through labor rather than wealth. Contrasts the Trump family’s “moral integrity” with Hunter Biden’s alleged misconduct. Political and Cultural Commentary Denounces DEI initiatives, “wokeness,” and progressive policies as threats to American values. Frames the Trump family’s experience as symbolic of a broader national struggle between conservatives and “corrupt elites.” Presents cryptocurrency as a form of financial freedom against institutional control. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE on:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/watchdog-on-wall-street-with-chris-markowski/id570687608 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2PtgPvJvqc2gkpGIkNMR5i WATCH and SUBSCRIBE on:https://www.youtube.com/@WatchdogOnWallstreet/featured  The cockroaches never left — they just found better hiding spots. In this episode of WDOWS, we go back to the 2023 regional bank meltdown — Silicon Valley, Signature, First Republic — and uncover why the rot in private credit, bad loans, and commercial real estate was never truly cleaned up. From Jamie Dimon's “cockroach” warning to the extend-and-pretend game keeping zombie banks alive, this is a deep dive into Wall Street's dirty secret: the big boys always win, and the small lenders (and borrowers) get crushed.

Send us a textIn the rolling hills of central Portugal, a tiny village named Fatima became the epicenter of one of the most profound and enduring mysteries of the Catholic faith. It was here, in 1917, that three young shepherd children—Lucia dos Santos and her cousins, Francisco and Jacinta Marto—claimed to have witnessed a series of apparitions of the Virgin Mary, later venerated as Our Lady of Fatima. These encounters, shrouded in both celestial wonder and earthly scrutiny, would go on to captivate millions, shaping Marian devotion and leaving an indelible mark on the 20th century. For believers, the messages delivered at Fatima are not just historical curiosities but urgent calls to prayer, penance, and peace—messages that resonate as powerfully today as they did over a century ago.At Journeys of Faith, we are committed to bringing the transformative power of these sacred moments to life. Founded in 1980 by Bob and Penny Lord, our ministry has spent decades guiding the faithful on pilgrimages to holy sites like Fatima, producing faith-centered resources, and sharing the stories of saints and miracles through books, multimedia, and retreats. Our mission is to make the mysteries of the Catholic faith—such as the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima—accessible for education, inspiration, and spiritual growth. Whether you've walked the hallowed grounds of the Sanctuary of Fatima or are encountering this story for the first time, we invite you to journey with us into the heart of this divine encounter, to uncover its historical roots, its spiritual significance, and the enduring call it places on our lives. Let's step back to that fateful spring of 1917, when the world was at war, and a heavenly vision offered hope to a weary humanity.Historical Context of Portugal in 1917Dive into the tumultuous backdrop of Portugal in 1917, and you'll find a nation grappling with the aftershocks of political upheaval and the grinding weight of global conflict. Just seven years prior, the country had overthrown its monarchy in the 1910 Revolution, ushering in the First Republic—a regime marked by instability, anticlerical sentiment, and a fierce push for secularization. The Catholic Church, once a bedrock of Portuguese society, found itself under siege, with religious orders banned, church properties confiscated, and clergy marginalized. For the faithful, especially in rural areas like Fatima, this was a time of quiet resistance, where devotion to Our Lady and the traditions of the Church became a refuge from a world seemingly intent on erasing them.Layer on top of that the shadow of World War I. Though Portugal had joined the Allies in 1916, the war's toll was felt deeply—soldiers sent to the trenches of Europe, families fractured, and a pervasive sense of uncertainty gripping the nation. Economic hardship bit hard, especially in the countryside, where subsistence farming was the norm, and the specter of loss loomed large. It's no coincidence that the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima, reported by three shepherd children in this unassuming village, struck a chord so profound. In a time of chaos, both national and global, the message of peace, prayer, and penance delivered by the Virgin Mary offered a lifeline—a divine promise that transcended the turmoil of the era. This was Portugal in 1917: a land caught between its past and an uncertain future, where faith became both a shield and a beacon.Link to the Rest of the ArticleOur Lady of Fatima Store Items CollectionOpen by Steve Bailey Support the show

David Silver and Raghu Markus explore the life and teachings of George Gurdjieff, the Russian-born mystic and philosopher of consciousness.This time on Mindrolling, Raghu and David have a discussion about:How a teenage David Silver was first introduced to Gurdjieff's teachingsGurdjieff's influence on the 1960s counterculture and the evolution of consciousness movementsThe call to “do only what is new and fresh” and live in search of the miraculousDoing the work literally and figuratively; supporting oneself and moving towards clear mentation Gurdjieff's view of humans as incomplete sleepwalkers, mechanically reacting to lifeGradual awakening through self-observation, inner struggle, and conscious effort Shedding false pretenses to discover a unified, authentic selfHow Gurdjieff's philosophy inspired Ram Dass's spiritual visionThe Seekers of Truth and The Sarmoung Brotherhood The transformative and ongoing practice of self-remembering Pre-order your copy of There Is No Other: The Way to Harmony and Wholeness a profound collection of newly gathered writings from Ram Dass and edited by Parvati Markus. Ram Dass shows us how a house divided against itself—whether that “house” is our individual self or the society in which we live—can come together in wholeness. Learn more: There Is No Other Way Pre-OrderAbout George Ivanovich GurdjieffGurdjieff, who was born in the late 1800's, was a philosopher, mystic, spiritual teacher, composer, and movements teacher. Born in the Russian Empire, he briefly became a citizen of the First Republic of Armenia after its formation in 1918, but fled the impending Red Army invasion of Armenia in 1920, which rendered him stateless. Gurdjieff taught that people are not conscious of themselves and thus live their lives in a state of hypnotic "waking sleep", but that it is possible to awaken to a higher state of consciousness and serve our purpose as human beings. Learn more about Gurdjieff HERE and pick up some of Gurdjieff's most famous work, Meetings with Remarkable Men.About David Silver:David Silver is the former co-host of the Mindrolling podcast. He is a filmmaker and director, most recently coming out with Brilliant Disguise. Brilliant Disguise tells the unique story of a group of inspired Western spiritual seekers from the 60s, who in meeting the great American teacher, Ram Dass, followed him to India to meet his Guru, Neem Karoli Baba, familiarly known as Maharaj-ji. Two days before he left his body, Maharaj-ji instructed K.C. Tewari to take care of the Westerners, which he did resolutely until the day he died in 1997. Silver's #1 charting MGM/UA/Warners film, “The Compleat Beatles” is the critically acclaimed biopic movie about history's most famous band. The term ‘rockumentary' was first applied to this two-hour movie. Rolling Stone recently described the film as a “masterwork.” Silver's Warner Brothers' feature film, “No Nukes” also started the whole trend of music/activism feature documentaries.“His father basically said to him, you must not do anything old, you must always try and do something new and fresh, you must already be honest, you must always support yourself, These were all important in Gurdjieff's life. You must be in search of the miraculous, because what else is there?” —David SilverSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Scott Aleali joins Brandon Sedloff on The Distribution to share his journey from early beginnings at Silicon Valley Bank to leading the private equity business at Citizens Private Bank. He reflects on the collapse of SVB and First Republic, the creation of Citizens Private Bank, and how his team is building a differentiated service model for private equity and venture capital clients. Scott also provides insight into industry trends, the rise of new liquidity solutions, and his own experience as a podcast host creating content for the private markets community. They discuss: Lessons learned from the failures of Silicon Valley Bank and First Republic How Citizens Private Bank was created and its focus on private equity and venture capital clients The importance of differentiation and returning capital in today's private markets New liquidity solutions for investment professionals and why the middle market is underserved Scott's journey into podcasting and the role of content creation in building authentic connections This episode offers valuable perspective for private markets professionals navigating an evolving financial landscape. Links: Scott on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottaleali/ Fund Fanatics Podcast - https://podcasts.apple.com/lu/podcast/fund-fanatics/id1810788445 Citizens Private Bank - https://www.citizensbank.com/private-banking/overview.aspx Brandon on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/bsedloff/ Juniper Square - https://www.junipersquare.com/ Topics: (00:00:00) - Intro (00:02:04) - Scott's career and background (00:06:33) - The SVB and FRB failures (00:13:13) - Advice for delivering harsh news (00:14:42) - The founding of Citizens Private Bank (00:17:19) - The landscape of CPB today (00:31:12) - Scott's view of the market today (00:34:46) - What makes for a differentiated strategy/GP? (00:44:32) - Building the Fund Fanatics podcast and its impact on the business

We sit down with Jamie Dimon for a live conversation at Radio City Music Hall, covering the incredible journey from his 1998 firing at Citgroup (where he was widely expected to become CEO) to building the most powerful bank in the world. Today JPMorgan Chase is a juggernaut — the most systemically important non-governmental financial institution in the world, with over twice the market capitalization of its nearest competitor. But it certainly wasn't always this way! Jamie takes us from his career restart at the struggling Chicago-based Bank One through how he transformed that platform into the foundation for the modern JPMorgan Chase. We dive into the “fortress balance sheet” strategy that has defined his tenure, and cover blow-by-blow Jamie's approach to the Great Financial Crisis, Bear Stearns, WaMu, First Republic and more. Tune in for an incredible conversation, live from New York City's most iconic venue!Sponsors:Many thanks to our fantastic Summer ‘25 Season partners:J.P. Morgan PaymentsVercelAnthropicStatsigEpisode image photo credit: Rockefeller CenterMore Acquired:Get email updates with hints on next episode and follow-ups from recent episodesJoin the SlackSubscribe to ACQ2Check out the latest swag in the ACQ Merch Store!‍Note: Acquired hosts and guests may hold assets discussed in this episode. This podcast is not investment advice, and is intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. You should do your own research and make your own independent decisions when considering any financial transactions.

Today's episode is about 3 tips on how to start summer in Bratislava, Slovakia. In the Slovak lesson, you will learn how to say “Happy summer, friends!” and “Enjoy a unique day! “in Slovak. At the end of this episode, you can find some information about the Period picnic in Slovak.Episode notesIn today's episode, I'm talking about 3 tips on how to start summer in Bratislava, Slovakia. In the Slovak lesson, you will learn how to say “Happy summer, friends!” and “Enjoy a unique day! “in Slovak. At the end of this episode, you can find some information about the Period picnic in Slovak.Slovak lesson1.    dobový piknik (period picnic / vintage picnic)2.    zabudnutá nostalgia (forgotten nostalgia)3.    pokojné nedeľné popoludnie (peaceful Sunday afternoon)4.    rozložené deky (spread out blankets)5.    piknikové košíky (picnic baskets)6.    elegantné oblečenie (elegant clothes)7.    šarmantné klobúky (charming hats)8.    módna prehliadka (fashion show)9.    tanečný workshop (dance workshop)10. detská herňa (children's playroom)11. ukážky remesiel (craft demonstrations)12. stánky s jedlom (food stalls)13. večerný koncert (evening concert)14. jedinečný deň (a unique day)15. Užite si jedinečný deň! (Enjoy a unique (one-of-kind)day!)16. Veselé leto, priatelia! (Happy summer, friends!)ČO VÁS ČAKÁ? (WHAT AWAITS YOU?)1. Prvorepubliková módna prehliadka (First Republic fashion show)2. Hudba v štýle hot jazz & swing (Music in style of Hot jazz & swing)3. Tanečný workshop (Dance workshop)4. Detská herňa (Children's playroom)5. Ukážky remesiel (Craft demonstrations)6. Stánky s pochúťkami a ručne vyrobenými výrobkami (Stalls with delicacies and handmade products)7. Večer vyvrcholí koncertom kapely FATS JAZZ BAND! (The evening will culminate with a concert by the FATS JAZZ BAND!)8. Predpis obliekania? Nie je povinný, ale veľmi vítaný, a tak si oživte šatník o retro kúsok a staňte sa súčasťou živej spomienky. (Dress code? Not mandatory, but very welcome, so liven up your wardrobe with a retro piece and become part of a living memory.)9. Príďte s rodinou, priateľmi či milovanou osobou a užite si jedinečný deň ako z dobovej pohľadnice. (Come with your family, friends or a loved one and enjoy a unique day like from a period postcard.)10. Deň ako vystrihnutý zo starej knihy, ktorý si budete chcieť pamätať. (A day like cut out of an old book, which you will want to remember.)Timestamps00:34 Introduction to the episode02:34 About the end of June04:16 Period picnic07:17 Afternoon at Palfy Palace10:12 Pool party at Mičurin13:27 Slovak lesson20:48 Period picnic (in Slovak)25:15 What awaits you (in Slovak with the English translation)25:30 Final thoughtsIf you have any questions, send it to my email hello@bozenasslovak.com. Check my Instagram https://www.instagram.com/bozenasslovak/ where I am posting the pictures of what I am talking about on my podcast. Also, check my website https://www.bozenasslovak.com © All copywrites reserved to Bozena O Hilko LLC

Groong Week in Review - May 25, 2025Topics:May 28, Republic DayArmenia's EU-Russia policy confusionConstitutional changes for “peace”Impeachment vs. election dilemmaAzeri invasion threat and silenceGuestArthur KhachatryanHostsHovik ManucharyanAsbed BedrossianEpisode 441 | Recorded: May 28, 2025SHOW NOTES: https://podcasts.groong.org/441VIDEO: https://youtu.be/voqa1Sy5iZYSubscribe and follow us everywhere you are: linktr.ee/groong

Leren van de geschiedenis? Niet als het aan Donald Trump ligt. In zijn vorige termijn versoepelde hij de regels voor de bankensector, met als gevolg dat een paar jaar later banken omvielen. Toch wil hij zijn ideeën doorzetten. Trump onderzoekt of de belangrijkste toezichthouders samengevoegd of zelfs opgedoekt kunnen worden. Je hoort in deze aflevering wat de gevolgen van Trumps bezuinigingsplannen kunnen zijn. En dan hebben we het ook over zijn maatje, zijn alles, zijn partner in crime: Elon Musk. Die kreeg een boze brief op de deurmat. De beurswaakhond is niet blij met de manier waarop hij zijn belang in Twitter bemachtigde, en eist van Musk dat hij binnen twee dagen akkoord gaat met een schikking. Musk zijn reactie? De brief online zetten en het bestempelen als intimidatie. We vertellen je ook over het nieuwste vooruitzicht van De Nederlandsche Bank. Die waarschuwt dat de inflatie hier in Nederland nog jarenlang te hoog blijft. En we blikken terug op de week waarin de nieuwe topman van de AEX de Nederlandse bedrijven wakker probeerde te schudden. Hij vindt dat veel meer Nederlandse parels naar zijn Damrak moeten trekken. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

John Palmer delves into his extensive career in banking, and highlights the golden opportunity that lies in small and mid-sized banks. He highlights trends like consolidation, regulatory evolution, and technological advancements. Looking ahead, he is optimistic about the banking sector's recovery cycle and its capacity for sustained growth, even amid challenges like commercial real estate pressures and emerging fintech innovations.  Today we discuss... John Palmer shared his extensive experience in the banking industry, including his career start at KPMG and his transition to founding a banking-focused investment fund in 1996. How the banking industry has undergone massive consolidation since the 1990s driven largely by efficiency and cost-saving opportunities. Key trends like stricter regulations, higher capital requirements, improved loan underwriting, and the transformative impact of technology on banking operations. The causes of the recent crises at Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, and First Republic, emphasizing asset-liability mismanagement during rapid rate hikes. Blockchain technology acknowledged as a potential long-term asset for banks and skepticism about the role of cryptocurrency in traditional banking. The current banking stock cycle entering an upward phase, with profitability projected to grow steadily through 2026. Bank earnings and stock performance are rising, driven by factors like margin expansion and easing deposit costs. Banks with $1-$10 billion in assets are attractive targets for M&A due to cost savings and growth opportunities. Major banks are expanding branch networks in rural areas, targeting low-cost deposits, while smaller banks focus more on digital channels. The Midwest and Mideast regions show the most M&A activity, though the Southeast and California are also of interest. Investments focus on public banks with shareholder lists amenable to proxy support for structural changes. Banking regulation relief under a new administration could lower compliance costs and ease capital requirements. A normalized yield curve is boosting loan repricing and margins, contributing to earnings growth. Bank valuations remain attractive compared to broader markets, with banking stocks trading at significant discounts to earnings. For more information, visit the show notes at https://moneytreepodcast.com/golden-opportunity-john-palmer-666  Today's Panelists: Kirk Chisholm | Innovative Wealth Phil Weiss | Apprise Wealth Management   Follow on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/moneytreepodcast Follow LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/money-tree-investing-podcast Follow on Twitter/X: https://x.com/MTIPodcast  

On this episode of The Breakaway, goalkeeper Jared Mazzola joins to talk his first season at the club, the various big personalities on the team, and has plenty of questions for Connor Sutton.

Plus: Morgan Stanley agrees to pay $2 million to settle an investigation into trades by First Republic's then-executive chairman before his bank collapsed. The Eurozone economy grew less rapidly in the second quarter than previously estimated. J.R. Whalen reports. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today's show we are talking about one of our banks being forcibly closed and sold to another bank in Philadelphia in an FDIC auction this past week. The bank is known as Republic Bank and is legally named republic first bank, not be confused with the very similar sounding and much larger bank called First Republic which failed last year. Republic Bank was a local Philadelphia bank with about 20 branches in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. It relatively new having been founded in 1988. In 2008 the bank switched from being a purely commercial bank to include retail banking.  Our experience with Republic bank was a good one. They wrote construction and permanent loans on several of our buildings in Philadelphia.  --------- Host: Victor Menasce email: podcast@victorjm.com

In this riveting episode of Capitalist Investor, "Bank-a-Balooza: Earning Season Starts," hosts Tony and Luke delve deep into the financial sector's kickoff to earnings season. They discuss the mixed reviews and performance outcomes from major players like JP Morgan and Bank of America, and Luke shares insights on the effects of acquisitions on bank earnings. Tony brings attention to the condition of credit quality and the risks posed to regional banks with exposure to commercial real estate in the evolving work landscape. Plus, they're not shy about addressing the elephant in the room – executive stock sales, particularly by JP Morgan's Jamie Dimon, and what this might indicate. The duo also unpacks the potential regulatory changes on the horizon and how consumer behavior and job market fluctuations could impact financial institutions. Tune in to catch all their sharp analysis of the biggest stories affecting banks and your bottom line. For any questions or comments about the show, reach out at info@connect.com.1. The Kickoff of Earnings Season and Its Market ImplicationsEarnings season is a key period for investors as it provides insights into corporate performance and sector health. Host Tony expresses his enthusiasm for this time, understanding it acts as a catalyst for market movement. With the banking sector often leading the charge, how they report can set the tone for market expectations and investor sentiment.2. The Mixed Bag from Big Banks' Earnings ReportsThe episode dives into the recent earnings from major banks like JP Morgan and Bank of America. Luke notes they've had mixed reviews, with particular growth concerns in areas like investment banking. However, asset management showed strength in many reports. Despite some stocks selling off due to investor dissatisfaction, there remains an acknowledgment that credit quality has been generally robust, an optimism captured by PNC's anticipation of a 'soft landing'.3. The Banking Sector's M&A ActivityIn recent developments, First Republic's acquisition by JPMorgan was discussed as having an impact on earnings. The hosts highlight the ease with which large banks can acquire smaller, struggling entities like New York Community Bank, reinforcing consolidation trends in the industry. There's an underlying narrative that the "big are getting bigger," with more depositors trending towards these massive, more secure banks.4. The Stakes in Commercial Real Estate and Regional BankingTony discusses the concerns around commercial real estate within the banking sector, identifying it as a weak point, especially for regional banks that disproportionately bear such exposures. The change in office culture post-pandemic, with a shift towards remote work, poses serious questions about the future use and value of these properties.5. Executive Stock Moves and Economic OutlookAn intriguing point raised by Luke relates to the stock selling actions of Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan. Dimon's sale of a substantial chunk of his own stock raises eyebrows, with speculation surrounding the reasoning—whether for personal financial restructuring, such as tax considerations, or a potential lack of confidence in the near-term economic landscape. While the hosts admit uncertainty about the exact motivation, they conclude it is likely a mix of personal strategy and broader economic hedging.

Risk - happens fast! Costco Selling ALOT of Gold April 15th - Tax payment withdrawals Rates spike, oil moves lower PLUS we are now on Spotify and Amazon Music/Podcasts! Click HERE for Show Notes and Links DHUnplugged is now streaming live - with listener chat. Click on link on the right sidebar. Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter Follow Andrew Horowitz on Twitter Warm Up - Risk Happens FAST - Costco Selling ALOT of Gold - April 15th - Tax payment withdrawals - Fewer students attending 2 0r 4-year college Market Update - Banks reporting - mixed results - Rates UP! - Earnings Season - Risk off - Missiles Flying --- WAR escalations concerning investors Rates - Rates spiked with all of the recent concern that the Fed will not be cutting rates so fast - Came on on the Iran retaliation worries - Spike Monday to 4.64% for the 10Yr - starting to get worrisome that could be technical move and disrupt markets Rates in Europe - European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde on Tuesday said the central bank remains on course to cut interest rates in the near term, subject to any major shocks. - "We just need to build a bit more confidence in this disinflationary process but if it moves according to our expectations, if we don't have a major shock in development, we are heading towards a moment where we have to moderate the restrictive monetary policy," Lagarde said. --- Also noted that she is very attentive to the price of oil HA! If you don't like the numbers... - The Bank of England on Friday announced a “once in a generation” overhaul of its inflation forecasting following a long-awaited review by former Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke. - The review was initiated in response to criticism over shortcomings in the bank's recent policymaking. - It sets out 12 recommendations — including scrapping the bank's “fan chart” forecasting system — which BOE Governor Andrew Bailey said the bank was committed to implementing. Inflation Spots Sticker Shock And then at 1:30PM Tuesday - Fed Chairman Jerome Powell at Canadian forum says recent data shows lack of progress on returning to 2% inflation goal; says US economic performance has been quite strong. - Markets were not pleased - ---- Begs the question: - what is the point of this at a time with such global stress having these types of comments? ---- WSJ's Nick Timiraos says Fed Chairman Jerome Powell "dialed back" rate reduction expectations at Canadian forum amid new inflation uncertainty Safe-haven? - Bitcoin and other cryptos PLUNGE when Iran sent misses and drones - How is that digital gold or store of value? - Simply trades like a speculative risk asset and starting to hear that phrase quite a lot. - Tried to rally on Sunday when Iran said that is all they are doing- but sold off again Monday Earnings This Week -  Plenty of banks and financials (BAC, GS etc) also Netflix Thursday after the close - Proctor and Gamble on Friday - Problem is that they come right as risk elevated. Goldman Sachs Earnings - Goldman Sachs on Monday posted first-quarter profit and revenue that topped analysts' expectations, fueled by a surge in trading and investment banking revenue. - The bank said profit jumped 28% to $4.13 billion, or $11.58 per share, from the year earlier period, thanks to a rebound in capital markets activities - Goldman shares climbed more than 4% in the days trading Monday. JPM Earnings - The bank said first-quarter profit rose 6% to $13.42 billion, or $4.44 per share, from a year earlier, boosted by its takeover last year of First Republic during the regional banking crisis. - But in guidance for 2024, the bank said it expected net interest income of around $90 billion, which is essentially unchanged from its previous forecast. - That appeared to disappoint investors, some of whom expected JPMorgan to raise its guidance by $2 billion ...

Elaine Agather is Chairman of the Dallas Region for JPMorgan Chase & Co. She also serves as the Central Region Head and Managing Director of The Private Bank at J.P. Morgan. Elaine joined Chemical Bank of New York in 1979, working in London, San Francisco, and New York until she relocated to Dallas in 1984. After the 1986 merger of Chemical Bank and Texas Commerce Bank, Elaine was promoted to Chairman of Texas Commerce Bank in Fort Worth in 1992 and joined the Private Bank to manage client advisory groups across the state in 1997. In 1999, she was elected Chairman and CEO of Dallas. On this episode, Elaine and Chris discuss: - Working with Jamie Dimon - Wealth Management 101 - Bank runs, cyber threats, AI, and the state of Banking We'd appreciate you filling out our audience survey, so we can continuously work on providing relevant content to our listeners.  https://www.thefortpod.com/survey Topics (00:00:00) - Intro (00:03:43) - Elaine's early career in banking (00:15:40) - Taking over an underperforming bank (00:18:46) - Elaine's rodeo career (00:28:11) - Working with Jamie Dimon (00:31:17) - Wealth Management (00:34:08) - How to transition wealth well (00:39:07) - The process of bringing in a generationally wealthy client (00:42:19) - The SVB & First Republic bank runs (00:45:04) - How to find an exceptional wealth manager (00:46:11) - Cyber threats, crypto & AI (00:48:40) - The state of banking (00:51:36) - DFW (00:55:03) - How do you know you've done a good job? (00:58:29) - Elaine's 8: Get over it Support our Sponsors Juniper Square: https://bit.ly/45yiYUqFort Capital: https://bit.ly/FortCapital Follow Fort Capital on LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/fort-capital/ Chris on Social Media: X: https://bit.ly/3BYIjcH LinkedIn: https://bit.ly/45gIkFd   Watch The Fort on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3oynxNX Visit our website: https://bit.ly/43SOvys Leave a review on Apple: https://bit.ly/45crFD0 Leave a review on Spotify: https://bit.ly/3Krl9jO  The FORT is produced by Johnny Podcasts

We have a huge update on the collapsing Biden economy, our resident Bidenomics and Stock Market analyst Ross joins me once again for this quick and important broadcast. All signs are pointing south for a big-name American Bank, and it doesn't look good.    Highlights:  “Unemployment just made a new high. I think it's at 3.8%. And that's what the Fed wants. They want to hurt the economy just enough to bring inflation down without wrecking the whole thing. And that's a very delicate balance.” - Ross Givens “Silicon Valley and First Republic were likely just the first of many banks that will fail. And I think we are going to have another banking crisis like what we saw back in 2008.” - Ross Givens “Your deposits are secured by the full faith and credit of the United States treasury. But I wouldn't buy stock in any of these banks today. Some are fine, some aren't. Which ones are the good ones? I don't know. But I'm not in the business of playing Russian Roulette with my life savings.” - Ross Givens   Timestamps: [03:18] Are the Feds done or will they hike one more time [05:482] The big problems with our banks that the media is keeping quiet; the bad news for Charles Schwab [10:58] Are J.P. Morgan or Bank of America will have the same problem as Schwab [12:56] How you can keep up and be prepared for what might happen in our banking system Resources:  Don't miss Ross's upcoming free training on September 30th at 11 AM EST! Sign up and secure your spot HERE: https://turleytalksinsidertrading.com/registration/?tambid=18762 Learn how to protect your life savings from inflation and an irresponsible government, with Gold and Silver. Go to  https://www.gcjdjhs3e.com/source_id=TurleyTalks_digital_dollar=Podcast HE'LL BE BACK! Get your limited edition TRUMPINATOR 2024 Bobblehead HERE: https://offers.proudpatriots.com/ The Courageous Patriot Community is inviting YOU! Join the movement now and build the parallel economy at https://join.turleytalks.com/insiders-club=podcast   Thank you for taking the time to listen to this episode. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe and/or leave a review. Sick and tired of Big Tech, censorship, and endless propaganda? Join my Insiders Club with a FREE TRIAL today at: https://insidersclub.turleytalks.com Make sure to FOLLOW me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/DrTurleyTalks BOLDLY stand up for TRUTH in Turley Merch! Browse our new designs right now at: https://store.turleytalks.com/ Do you want to be a part of the podcast and be our sponsor? Click here to partner with us and defy liberal culture! If you would like to get lots of articles on conservative trends make sure to sign-up for the 'New Conservative Age Rising' Email Alerts.

Stress tests are one of the many tools the Federal Reserve has to regulate the financial system. So why didn't stress tests help prevent the bank failures of Silicon Valley, Signature and First Republic? Today, we explain how stress tests work and why the Fed is considering an overhaul.For sponsor-free episodes of The Indicator from Planet Money, subscribe to Planet Money+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

U.S. banks continue to face intense financial pressure, the failure of First Republic and Silicon Valley bank is being followed up by massive losses at PacWest and other regional banks. One of the factors causing the instability is exposure to commercial real estate holdings. In this extra episode of Morning Wire we speak to an expert in the banking and lending sector. Get the facts first on Morning Wire. Bartesian: Get FREE cocktails and FREE shipping with your Bartesian Text “WIRE” to 64000   

Felix Salmon, Emily Peck, and Elizabeth Spiers talk about the failure of First Republic Bank, the (maybe) end of interest rate hikes, and how the shopping app Temu is shaking up e-commerce. Also, a more humane approach to chickens. If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get an ad-free experience across the network and an additional segment of our show every week. You'll also be supporting the work we do here on Slate Money. Sign up now at slate.com/moneyplus to help support our work. Podcast production by Patrick Fort. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Monday, First Republic Bank folded before being sold by regulators to JPMorgan Chase. At the time, it was the 14th largest bank in the U.S. and it is the second-largest American bank by assets to ever collapse. The story of First Republic's fall is similar to that of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature before it – the value of the bank's assets began to plummet as the Fed raised interest rates to fight inflation, causing a crisis of confidence among investors and depositors. This is exactly the kind of situation that the economic historian Adam Tooze warned of when he came on the show in October of 2022. In that conversation, Tooze argued that the Fed's interest rate hikes were “shaking the entire system” – putting pressure on every level of the global financial system, from regional banks to countries that borrow on the U.S. dollar. It would only be a matter of time, he predicted, before things started breaking. Well, things are certainly breaking now, and it's very possible there's more to come. The Fed decided to raise interest rates once again on Wednesday, bringing them above 5 percent for the first time in more than 15 years. So it felt like the right time to revisit our conversation about the fragile, uncertain future of the global economy at this history-making moment and the Fed's role in it. We also discuss what the British financial market meltdown means for the rest of the world, how the interest rate hikes in rich countries export inflation to other countries, the looming possibility of a global recession, why Tooze believes the confluence of high inflation, rising interest rates and high levels of debt points to an economic “polycrisis” unlike any the world has seen, why countries in South Asia are experiencing a particularly severe form of polycrisis, how the Fed should weigh its mandate to bring down inflation against the global consequences of its actions, why he believes analogies to the American inflationary period of the 1970s are misguided and more.Editor's note: Due to a technical error, a previous version of this episode featured the wrong audio file. The episode is now updated with the correct audio.Mentioned:“Slouching Towards Utopia by J Bradford DeLong — fuelling America's global dream” by Adam ToozeBook recommendations:The Neapolitan Novels by Elena FerranteYouthquake by Edward PaiceSlouching Towards Utopia by J. Bradford DeLongThoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast, and you can find Ezra on Twitter @ezraklein. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.This episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” is produced by Annie Galvin, Jeff Geld and Rogé Karma. Fact-checking by Michelle Harris, Rollin Hu, Mary Marge Locker and Kate Sinclair. Original music by Isaac Jones. Mixing by Jeff Geld. Audience strategy by Shannon Busta. Special thanks to Kristin Lin, Kristina Samulewski, Jason Furman, Mike Konczal and Maurice Obstfeld.

The shares of multiple regional banks slid today amid new tremors in the industry following the collapse of First Republic. But bank failures and consolidation are actually somewhat normal. So what’s a regional bank to do? And what are investors and depositors to make of all this? Then, how JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon became a banking industry heavyweight and why a bump in Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. coverage seems unlikely right now.

On Monday morning, the federal government took over a third failing bank — this time, First Republic.Jeanna Smialek, an economy correspondent for The Times, discusses whether we are at the end of the banking crisis, or the start of a new phase of financial pain.Guest: Jeanna Smialek, an economy correspondent for The New York Times.Background reading: First Republic bank was seized by regulators and sold to JPMorgan Chase.Key takeaways from regulatory review of bank failures.For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.

First Republic Bank has now been officially taken over by JP Morgan Chase, the U.S. The Supreme Court is under increasing fire, and a new polling from the Associated Press shows that America's trust in news media continues to spiral downward. Get the facts first with Morning Wire. Birch Gold: Text "WIRE" to 989898 for your no-cost, no-obligation information kit.Genucel: 70% off Most Popular Package + FREE Shipping + Free Spa Essentials https://genucel.com/WIRE Black Rifle Coffee: Get 10% off your first order or Coffee Club subscription with code WIRE: https://www.blackriflecoffee.com/

Unsung hero of the financial system or enabler of failing banks? Today on the show, how the Federal Home Loan Bank system, originally designed to support homeownership and affordable housing, ended up loaning billions to failing banks like First Republic.For sponsor-free episodes of The Indicator from Planet Money, subscribe to Planet Money+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

The turmoil in the banking industry isn't over yet. Today, First Republic Bank was seized, following the failures of Signature Bank and Silicon Valley Bank back in March. How did we get here? And how do we prevent banks from failing in the future? A show-stopping mea culpa from the Federal Reserve provides some answers. For sponsor-free episodes of The Indicator from Planet Money, subscribe to Planet Money+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.

Krystal and Saagar discuss Biden blinking on the Debt standoff with McCarthy, the 'Godfather Of AI" making public calls to shut down development, Republicans develop their first AI political attack ad, ChatGPT nukes Chegg's 'Homework' Business, DeSantis freaks when questioned over allegations he took part in torture at Guantanamo, how the Disney lawsuit is a dangerous corporate power grab, revelations that the 2023 bank failures are bigger than 2008, JP Morgan and Jamie Dimon become way too big to fail with purchase of First Republic, polls show that Americans overwhelmingly blame the Media for the country's division, leaked video from Tucker shows him shredding Fox Nation live streaming, Vice News being weeks from bankruptcy, Saagar looks into how the Covid natural origin theories fall apart, Krystal looks into the Commercial Property Debt Bomb that could destroy the economy, and we're joined by filmmaker James Fox to discuss his documentary "Moment of Contact" and reveal new video evidence concerning a potential alien encounter in Brazil.To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and SpotifyApple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoicesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Krystal and Saagar discuss Biden blinking on the Debt standoff with McCarthy, the 'Godfather Of AI" making public calls to shut down development, Republicans develop their first AI political attack ad, ChatGPT nukes Chegg's 'Homework' Business, DeSantis freaks when questioned over allegations he took part in torture at Guantanamo, how the Disney lawsuit is a dangerous corporate power grab, revelations that the 2023 bank failures are bigger than 2008, JP Morgan and Jamie Dimon become way too big to fail with purchase of First Republic, polls show that Americans overwhelmingly blame the Media for the country's division, leaked video from Tucker shows him shredding Fox Nation live streaming, Vice News being weeks from bankruptcy, Saagar looks into how the Covid natural origin theories fall apart, Krystal looks into the Commercial Property Debt Bomb that could destroy the economy, and we're joined by filmmaker James Fox to discuss his documentary "Moment of Contact" and reveal new video evidence concerning a potential alien encounter in Brazil. To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/ To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and Spotify Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623   Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl   Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today's show……Texas Manhunt still ongoing, Russia still bombing Ukraine, horrific dust storm in Illinois, Satanists Vs Nazis, Woman has orgasm mid opera, The US probably has alien tech & mermaid statue in Italy with a phat ass and tits. (00:03:07) How the boys are doing ☕ Cup of Coffee in the Big Time ☕ (00:05:02) Manhunt for Texas shooting suspect runs into "dead end"; authorities offer $80K reward (00:10:01) Russia launches deadly wave of missile attacks on Ukraine cities (00:10:16) JPMorgan Chase takes over First Republic after biggest U.S. bank failure since 2008 (00:10:30) Six dead, dozens injured after dust storm causes "horrific" pile-up on Illinois' I-55 (00:10:39) Met Gala 2023 (00:11:40) 'SatanCon 2023': Masked Neo-Nazis crash world's largest satanic event (00:16:44) Tensions rise in Hollywood as potential writers' strike hangs over productions on final day of contract talks

The FDIC chips in $50 billion to help JPMorgan Chase buy flailing First Republic Bank. Black farmers are waiting for loan relief that was promised years ago. And a study shows ChatGPT conveys more empathy to medical patients than human doctors. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Las Vegas has pulled off an epic pivot: From sin city to family fiestas. First Republic Bank's stock has plummeted 99%, and all the options to handle the crisis are bad. And Wendy's is bringing its chili to aisle 6 because grocery stores have become the Garden of Eden of American Capitalism. $FRB $LVS $WEN Want merch, a shoutout, or got TheBestFactYet? Go to: www.tboypod.com Follow The Best One Yet on Instagram, Twitter, and Tiktok: @tboypod And now watch us on Youtube Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Krystal and Saagar discuss First Republic bank being seized by regulators and sold to JPMorgan Chase, Charlie Munger's dire banking system warning, leaked documents showing Epstein met multiple times with the CIA Director, Noam Chomsky, and others, Wall Street bankers joking about Epstein's Child Trafficking, a Biden voter is speechless on 2024 support, Charlmagne trashes the DNC for not hosting debates between candidates, Chief Justice Roberts' Wife cashes in on SCOTUS connections, Krystal and Saagar react to the White House Correspondents Dinner, Saagar looks into how Fox News ratings have plunged after Tucker's departure, Krystal looks into how Biden is set to lose New Hampshire to RFK, Marianne, and we're joined by Seth Hettena to discuss his reporting on how the FBI suspects 9/11 Hijackers were CIA assets.(Seth's article: https://www.spytalk.co/p/exclusive-fbi-agents-accuse-cia-of)To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and SpotifyApple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoicesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Krystal and Saagar discuss First Republic bank being seized by regulators and sold to JPMorgan Chase, Charlie Munger's dire banking system warning, leaked documents showing Epstein met multiple times with the CIA Director, Noam Chomsky, and others, Wall Street bankers joking about Epstein's Child Trafficking, a Biden voter is speechless on 2024 support, Charlmagne trashes the DNC for not hosting debates between candidates, Chief Justice Roberts' Wife cashes in on SCOTUS connections, Krystal and Saagar react to the White House Correspondents Dinner, Saagar looks into how Fox News ratings have plunged after Tucker's departure, Krystal looks into how Biden is set to lose New Hampshire to RFK, Marianne, and we're joined by Seth Hettena to discuss his reporting on how the FBI suspects 9/11 Hijackers were CIA assets. (Seth's article: https://www.spytalk.co/p/exclusive-fbi-agents-accuse-cia-of) To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/ To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and Spotify Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623   Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl   Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Banking giant JPMorgan Chase is taking over the failed First Republic Bank, but not without some guarantees. Turns out the deal was sweetened by the FDIC agreeing to be responsible for certain First Republic losses. Plus, what small banks are making of the turmoil. Then, FTC Chair Lina Khan on AI regulation and taking on powerful companies.

First Republic is the third US bank to collapse in the last two months. Also: aid agencies warn of an escalating humanitarian disaster in Sudan, and how artificial intelligence can help detect early-stage lung cancer.

First Republic Bank stock is down 97% in 2023, and this afternoon a takeover by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. looked imminent. Thing is, short sellers have made more than $1 billion betting that First Republic would fall. Is that good for financial stability? Plus, we’ll look into the “We buy ugly houses” business and discuss how new economic data will influence the Federal Reserve’s next move.

The deal is an attempt to prevent attacks from North Korea with Seoul to remain a non-nuclear state. Also: The Chinese and Ukrainian Presidents speak for the first time since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and trading is suspended in shares of the struggling American bank, First Republic, following a further sharp fall in its value.

2022 was The Year of the Wedding, but 2023 has a proposal problem — and that's a problem for the jewelry industry. Three US banks are beating up the financial system globally, but in 3 different ways: Silicon Valley Bank got rescued, Credit Suisse got a bailout, and First Republic got an intervention. And Disney upped the price of Disney+ by $3/month and we all paid it — because it's not just a media company, it's a digital on-demand babysitter. $SIG $DIS $FRB $CS $SIVB Follow The Best One Yet on Instagram, Twitter, and Tiktok: @tboypod And now watch us on Youtube Want a Shoutout on the pod? Fill out this form Got the Best Fact Yet? We got a form for that too Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices