Podcast appearances and mentions of Michael Lewis

Hey SNAFU fans! We wanted to share another episode from a show that we think you'll enjoy: Here We Go Again with Kal Penn. Each week, Kal Penn takes today’s trends and headlines and asks: Why does history keep repeating itself? From the new space race and plane delays to fad drugs and movie remakes, our guest's answers will make you feel better about everything. Back in 2008, it seemed like everyone was talking about the financial crisis. And then came The Big Short, Michael Lewis' book-to-screen story that exposed the corrupt subprime mortgage industry and its impact on the 08 crash. Now, it seems like everyone's wondering: Are we heading towards another big recession? Who would you trust if you were that very man who exposed that broken system in the first place? Kal gets candid with journalist and author Michael Lewis about our financial future, who he trusts with his money, and why.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Description:In this Road Tripping episode, Jen is joined by one of her dearest friends — the brilliant and beloved author and interviewer, Kelly Corrigan. Kelly read Awake cover to cover (twice!) and came armed to the live Awake Book Tour event in Denver, Colorado with ten of her favorite lines from the book, inviting Jen to riff on each one in real time. What unfolds is a night of belly laughs, truth-telling, and deep reflection on faith, patriarchy, divorce, parenting adult kids, therapy, rebuilding your life, and why middle age is actually the most freeing chapter yet. This conversation is Jen and Kelly at their absolute best: funny, wise, irreverent, and wide open. Growing up inside patriarchal faith systems and the lifelong impact of being taught not to trust your own intuition Why Jen believes that curiosity has never led her wrong — but that certainty has led her down many dead ends The moment that Jen realized the patriarchy harms everyone, including the men and boys she loves How purity culture can shape (and warp) our early ideas about sex, marriage, and womanhood Parenting through divorce and the shift from coaching to comforting Therapy breakthroughs around conflict, attachment styles, codependency, and dropping the need to control others' emotions Thought-provoking Quotes: “Curiosity has never led me wrong. Certainty has led me down so many dead ends.” —Jen Hatmaker “Patriarchy messed both of us up. Neither one of us was meant to live inside those roles.” —Jen Hatmaker “When you try to rush your kids through their hard feelings, they feel abandoned. Comfort over coaching — that's where we live.”  —Jen Hatmaker “I'm not your leader. I'm your sister. This book isn't a prescription. It's my story handed to you with open hands.”  —Jen Hatmaker “Sometimes the worst thing that ever happens ends up becoming the best thing. Not because of the pain — but because of the life that blooms afterward.” —Jen Hatmaker Resources Mentioned in This Episode: Awake: A Memoir by Jen Hatmaker – https://amzn.to/440b5YW Tell Me More: Stories About the 12 Hardest Things I'm Learning to Say by Kelly Corrigan –  https://amzn.to/4an9rUX The Middle Place by Kelly Corrigan – https://amzn.to/49Xueyt Kelly Corrigan Wonders podcast – https://www.kellycorrigan.com/podcast Who Is Government?: The Untold Story of Public Service by Michael Lewis – https://amzn.to/4pLC3Md Guest's Links: Website - https://www.kellycorrigan.com/ Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/kellycorrigan Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/kelly.corrigan.376 Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/@kellycorriganvideo Podcast - https://www.kellycorrigan.com/podcast Connect with Jen!Jen's Website - https://jenhatmaker.com/ Jen's Instagram - https://instagram.com/jenhatmakerJen's Twitter - https://twitter.com/jenHatmaker/ Jen's Facebook - https://facebook.com/jenhatmakerJen's YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/user/JenHatmaker The For the Love Podcast is presented by Audacy.  Listen in as Jen and Kelly discuss: To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In episode 471 of The Reformed Brotherhood, hosts Jesse Schwamb and Tony Arsenal begin a multi-part series on Jesus's parables of lost things in Luke 15. This first installment focuses on the Parable of the Lost Sheep, exploring how Jesus uses this story to reveal God's disposition toward sinners. The hosts examine the contextual significance of this teaching as Jesus's response to the Pharisees' criticism of his fellowship with tax collectors and sinners. Through careful analysis of the text, they unpack how this parable not only rebukes religious self-righteousness but also reveals the active, seeking love of Christ for His own. The discussion highlights the profound theological truth that God's joy is made complete in the restoration of His lost children. Key Takeaways The Parable of the Lost Sheep demonstrates Christ's heart for sinners, showing that seeking the lost is not exceptional behavior but the expected norm for those who understand God's character. Jesus positions this parable as a direct response to the Pharisees' criticism, turning their accusation ("he eats with sinners") into an affirmation of His mission and identity. The lost sheep represents those who belong to Christ but have gone astray; the shepherd's pursuit illustrates Christ's commitment to recover all whom the Father has given Him. God's rejoicing over one repentant sinner reveals a profound theological truth: divine joy increases in the act of showing mercy and restoring the lost. The shepherd's willingness to leave the 99 to find the one reflects not recklessness but the infinite value God places on each of His children. Regular worship practices, including family worship and congregational singing, reflect the same disposition of praise that heaven displays when sinners return to God. The parable serves not only as a comfort to sinners but as a challenge to believers to adopt God's heart toward the lost rather than the judgmental attitude of the Pharisees. Understanding the Shepherd's Heart The central focus of the Parable of the Lost Sheep is not simply God's willingness to receive sinners, but His active pursuit of them. As Tony Arsenal points out, Jesus presents the shepherd's search not as an extraordinary act of sacrifice, but as the obvious and expected response: "What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the one that is lost?" Jesus frames this as the normal behavior that any shepherd would exhibit, making the Pharisees' lack of concern for "lost sheep" appear not just uncompassionate but utterly irrational. This reveals a profound truth about God's character: He is not passively waiting for sinners to find their way back to Him; He is actively seeking them out. As Jesse Schwamb emphasizes, "Christ's love is an active, working love." The shepherd does not merely hope the sheep will return; he goes after it until he finds it. This reflects God's covenant commitment to His people—those whom He has chosen before the foundation of the world. The parable thus powerfully illustrates the doctrines of divine election and effectual calling within a deeply personal and relational framework. The Divine Joy in Restoration Perhaps the most striking element of this parable is the emphasis on the shepherd's joy upon finding his lost sheep. This isn't merely relief at recovering lost property, but profound celebration that calls for community participation: "Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost." Jesse highlights Thomas Goodwin's profound insight that "Christ's own joy, comfort, happiness, and glory are increased and enlarged by his showing grace and mercy." This suggests something remarkable about God's relationship with His people—that in some mysterious way, God's joy is made more complete in the act of showing mercy and restoring sinners. The hosts point out that this doesn't imply any deficiency in God, but rather reveals the relational nature of His love. When Jesus states that "there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance," He's indicating that divine celebration isn't prompted merely by moral perfection but by restoration and reconciliation. This understanding transforms how we approach God when we've strayed. As Jesse notes, "Jesus is never tired, flustered, or frustrated when we come to him for fresh forgiveness or renewed pardon." Our repentance doesn't merely avoid punishment; it actually brings joy to the heart of God. This is a profound comfort for believers struggling with sin and failure, assuring us that our return is met not with divine disappointment but with heavenly celebration. Memorable Quotes "This parable of the lost sheep gives us the beating heart of God, his normative disposition toward his children. It's really an exceptional and special window into God's design, his loving compassion for us, his heart of ministry and seeking for us, for his children who are lost." - Jesse Schwamb "He wants us to draw on his grace and mercy because it is inherently who he is. And he drew near to us in this incarnation so that his joy and ours could rise and fall together, which is insane that God would come and condescend to that degree that in his giving mercy and in ours receiving it, Christ gets more joy and comfort than we do when we come to him for help and mercy." - Jesse Schwamb "Christ's love is an active working love. Just as the shepherd did not sit still, wailing for his lost sheep, so our blessed Lord did not sit still in heaven pitying sinners. He comes to us, he came to us, and he continues to draw to himself those who are sheep, who hear his voice." - Jesse Schwamb Host Information Jesse Schwamb and Tony Arsenal are the hosts of The Reformed Brotherhood, a podcast that explores Reformed theology and its application to the Christian life. With a blend of theological depth and practical insight, they examine Scripture through the lens of historic Reformed doctrine, offering accessible teaching for believers seeking to grow in their understanding of the faith. Resources Mentioned Scripture: Luke 15:1-7, Matthew 18, John 10 Worship Resource: Sing The Worship Initiative (sing.theworshipinitiative.com) Theological Reference: Thomas Goodwin's writings on Christ's joy in redemption Brad Kafer and Michael Lewis, The Theocast Tragedy, episode 75, with guest Jeremy Marshall, November 16, 2025, https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-reclamation-podcast/id1747221237?i=1000736883898. Joshua Lewis and Michael Rowntree, The Theocast Split: Examining Christian Unity and Theological Differences, November 11, 2025, https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-remnant-radios-podcast/id1392545186?i=1000736293538. Daniel Vincent, Fallout of Theocast, November 15, 2025, https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-particular-baptist-podcast/id1512601040?i=1000736872315. Tony Arsenal, "A Refutation of Reformed Fringe," Reformed Arsenal, November 2025, https://reformedarsenal.com/category/a-refutation-of-reformed-fringe/. Tony Arsenal, "The Quest For Illegitimate Religious Gnosis: How 'Fringe' Theology Deforms Christology," Heidelblog, November 24, 2025, https://heidelblog.net/2025/11/the-quest-for-illegitimate-religious-gnosis-how-fringe-theology-deforms-christology/. Full Transcript [00:00:08] Jesse Schwamb: And what's special about the series? Parables that we're about to look at is it gives us the beating heart of God, his normative disposition toward his children, which is not like, we haven't seen some of that already, but this is, I think, really an exceptional and special window into God's design. His loving can compare for us, his heart of ministry and seeking for us for his children who are lost. It's really unequal in all the parables and probably among some of the most famous, Welcome to episode 471 of the Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse. [00:00:56] Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony. And this is the podcast with ears to hear. Hey brother. [00:01:01] Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother. You know, it seems like sometimes we could just summarize the teaching of Jesus like this. You get a parable and you get a parable, and you get a parable, and we've already, by looking at some of these parables, gotten to see what the kingdom of God means. The kingdom of God is Jesus coming in His power. It's here, but also not yet. The kingdom of God is the judgment of God. The kingdom of God is a blessing of God. The kingdom of God is the treasure of God. And what's special about the series? Parables that we're about to look at is it gives us the beating heart of God, his normative disposition toward his children, which is not like, we haven't seen some of that already, but this is, I think, really an exceptional and special window into God's design. His loving can compare for us, his heart of ministry and seeking for us for his children who are lost. It's really unequal in all the parables and probably among some of the most famous, and I think we'll probably have some maybe like semi hot takes, maybe some like mid hot takes as the young kids say. [00:02:07] Tony Arsenal: Mid hot takes. [00:02:08] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. [00:02:08] Tony Arsenal: So like [00:02:09] Jesse Schwamb: lukewarm takes, well my thought is like, what is a hot take that's not heretical? Do you know what I mean? So it's gotta be, yeah, [00:02:16] Tony Arsenal: there you go. [00:02:16] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. That's what I'm saying. It's like, listen, we want to be orthodox in our approach here, but I think we gotta, we gotta chew these up a little bit. Like we gotta digest them, we gotta move them around in our gut and really take everything that we've, we thought we knew about these, we just heard and they've been written on cards or postcards or crocheted into, I guess you're not crocheting bible verses, but like cross stitching Bible verses on pillows and really go deep because I think there's so much here for us, and if this were like for, for everybody that wants to say that, sometimes we take a little bit too long with our series. Again, I do have a question, simple question for all of those people. And that question is how dare you? And the second thing I would say is, you're lucky that you're not listening to a Puritan podcast. Maybe you never would, like at the Puritans in a podcast, the series would never end. They'd start with like a single verse and be like, we're gonna do two episodes on this. And then they'd be getting to the like, you know, 4 71 and they still wouldn't have left like the, the first five words. [00:03:11] Tony Arsenal: It's true, it's true. We move a little bit faster than that. Pace. Not much. Yeah. Way, [00:03:15] Jesse Schwamb: listen, way faster. By like Puritan standards, we are cruising. Like we're, we're just like NASCAR going through these parables. And to that end, I'll try to keep us moving though. I've already delayed us already because we're, we're late for affirmations. [00:03:30] Affirmations and Denials [00:03:30] Jesse Schwamb: Denials. The time is ripe. It is Now. The fields are gleaning with affirmations and denials. So let's, let's bring them in. Tony, are you denying against, are you affirming with something? [00:03:40] Tony Arsenal: It's a little bit of both, I guess. Um, do it. [00:03:44] Controversial Theology Discussion [00:03:44] Tony Arsenal: A little while ago, uh, it was maybe back in September, I did an episode on, uh, some theology that was being propagated by a podcast called Reformed Fringe. Um, it was a solo episode, so if you haven't listened to it, go back and listen to it. The affirmation here comes in, in, uh, the form of a show called, I think it's called The Reclamation Cast. Um, there are a series of podcasts that have addressed some of the same issues. For those who haven't been following it, which I would assume is probably most of you, the issue is kind of blown up online. Um, Theo Cast, which was a pretty big a, a really big podcast in the, uh, sort of reformed ish, particular Baptist world. Um, they actually split because of this. And so John Moffitt was one of the hosts. Justin Perdue was the other. And then John was also on this show called Reform Fringe with Doug Van Dorn. So I'm affirming some of these other podcasts that have covered the same issue, and I would encourage you to seek them out and listen to them. I can can pull some links together for the show notes today. Um, more or less the, the issue that I identified, um, is beyond just sort of what's known as Divine Counsel Theology, which was made, made, really made popular by, um, Michael Heiser. I don't know that he would, we could say that he was necessarily like the. Architect or inventor of that. I'm sure there are people who've had similar thoughts before that, but he's really the main name. Um, he's passed on now, but, um, Doug Van Dorn was a, uh, he's a Baptist pastor outta Col, uh, Colorado, who took his views and actually sort of like cranked him up and particularly. Uh, troubling is the way he handles, um, the angel of the Lord in the Old Testament. Um, I won't go into all of the details, but he wants to argue and he has argued in writing actually, and he, he published the paper first in 2015, and then again in 2024, he published it again, uh, with very minimal changes and nothing substantial. It was really kind of contextual stuff. Um, he actually argues that in the Old Testament, when we see the angel of the Lord, it's not just, not just God appearing as an angel, it's God actually becoming an angel. And in his paper, at least, he argues, um, more or less that this is a sort of hypostatic union. It's not just a temporary taking on of some sort of like outward appearance. Um, it's an actual, uh, uh, assumption of properties into the person of the sun. And the whole reason he makes this argument, which is why it's a little disingenuine, that now he's saying that's not what his argument was. He makes this argument in order to make it so the angel of the Lord can genuinely suffer, experience passions, change his mind, um, enter into covenant, come to know new knowledge, like there's all sorts of things that he wants the angel of the Lord to be able to actually do, not just accommodated, but actually. Experience. Um, and he does that by having the angel of the Lord be an appropriation of angelic properties into the person of the sun, what we would call a hypostatic union. And in his paper, he actually says like, I would want to use all of the same language of, uh, of this union as I do of the incarnation. He intentionally uses the words image and form kind of drawing from Philippians two. So the, the affirmation comes in and there are other podcasts that have identified this. So it's not just me. I would encourage people to go find them. Where the denial comes in is, um, there have been many people, including myself, who have attempted to engage with Doug Van Dorn, like publicly, directly, um, through private messaging. There are many people who've tried to reach out to him, and he has just sort of waved all of them away. Which is one thing, if like you just say like, I don't really care to interact with you. I don't really care to have this discussion. But then he is also presenting the situation as though he, he is totally open to having these conversations and nobody is trying to reach out to him. So I would encourage everyone, you're all reasonable people, search the scriptures, read what he has to say. The paper that he wrote is called Passing the Impassable pa or impassable Impasse, which is hard to say, but it's a very clever title. Um, and it was, it actually was written, I don't know a lot about this controversy and maybe I need to do a little bit more research. It was actually written during a time where, um, the particular Baptist conventions that were out out west where experiencing a lot of internal controversy regarding impassability, and this was his proposal for how, how biblically you can still maintain the divine attributes of changeness and impassability all these things, uh, without compromising the real, the real passable, um, appearance that we see of the, of God in the Bible. So. I don't wanna belabor the point. This is not the point of the show. We, I already did a whole episode on this. I've published, I wrote many blog articles. There's a lot that I've, I've put out on this. Um, so check it out, look at it. Wait for yourself. Um, the only reason I've been, this has come up in our telegram chat. People have encountered this theology. Um, one, one guy was asking about it, 'cause I think like his mom or his aunt or someone close to him had, has been sort of reading Michael Heider's work. Michael Heiser was very instrumental at logos. He was on staff at Logos for quite a while. So a lot of their, um, more speculative theological articles that you might find on their website are written by him. Um, he was a, one of the main people behind the sort of proprietary translation that, um, Laro uses the Lham, um, English Bible. So. It's not a neutral point. Pretty significant theological consequences if, uh, if our reading of what Doug is saying is correct. Um, and there doesn't seem to be any real openness to discussing that. He has to be fair, he has published a series of affirmations and denials, um, affirming his a his orthodoxy saying he affirms the change changeness of the son. He denies that there was a hypothetic union. So that's encouraging. It's great to see that when it comes down to it. He's willing to make affirmations, uh, of orthodox things and to deny unorthodox things, but it doesn't really help the situation when those things and those affirmations, denials are still at very least difficult to reconcile with what he wrote. I think in point of fact, they're actually contradictory to what he wrote. So the, the proper course of action would be for him to say, well, no, that's not what I meant. Or, or, yes, I wrote that, but that's not what I believe. Um, rather than to just try say, trying to say like, well, you all got it wrong. There's a lot of people reading these papers looking at it going, Ooh, it sure seems like the sun took on an angelic nature, even if that was temporary. That's, that's got some pretty weird consequences for your theology. And one of the shows I was listening to made this point that I thought was interesting and a little scary is this is like an utterly new theology. Um, no one that I've talked to who is aware of this, who studied these issues. Is aware of anyone ever saying anywhere that the angel of the Lord in the Old Testament was some sort of like assumption of actual angelic properties into the person of the sun. Almost everywhere that you read. It's either a manifestation view where the sun is kind of appearing as an angel, um, but it's not actually becoming an angel. It's, it's sort of taking on created medium, uh, in order to reveal himself or an instrumental view, which would be something like there's an angel that is used instrumentally by the Lord, and so we can say that it the angel of the Lord is the Lord in an instrumental sense, kind of like saying like if I pick up a hammer. Use that hammer for as long as I'm using that hammer. The hammer is actually sort of an extension of me. I'm moving it, I'm motivating it, I'm controlling it, it's connected to me, and then I put it down when I'm finished. Those are kind of the two main views that people, people would argue in the Old Testament, if they want to even say that the angel of the Lord is a Christoph, it would either be this manifestation view or this instrumental view, this sort of weird novel assumption of properties view. I'm, I've never encountered anything like that and I've studied this, this, this particular issue at some length. So check out the other episodes, I'll pull together some links, uh, of ones that have done it, both that have been, uh, critical of Doug's position. And also there was one, um, on remnant radio, which I never heard of, but, um, that was acknowledging that there are some question marks, but sort of saying like, this really is an overblown controversy. Um, and then I'll link to Doug's podcast too, so you can listen to his own words and, and sort of think through it yourself. [00:11:51] Jesse Schwamb: Some point I have this volition, you know, places, organizations, groups might have like FAQs, frequently asked questions. I have this idea to put together for us, like a frequently discussed topic. This would be one of them. We've talked, or we co we've come back to this idea of like the molecule way, the messenger of the Lord many times. Yeah. In part because I think there's a good and natural curiosity among many when you're reading the scriptures and you see that's the angel of the Lord and you're trying to discern, is it Christoph? And in some cases it seems more clear than others. For instance, the Maia appearing to, you know, Joshua, or, you know, there's, there's all kinds of instances in the scripture that draw us into this sense of like, well, who is it that is being represented here? And the funny thing about this though, and I agree with you, that like makes it. Puts it in like, I would say contradistinction to like just kind of innocently wanting to understand is that there's a lot of theological gymnastics happening here, like a lot and two, it seems to me that he's kind of trying to create a problem to find a solution on this one. Yeah. And so it should give everybody that sense that we always talk about where like the red light goes off, the flags get thrown up, that when you hear that, you're just like, well, something is not right about that. And the thing that's not right about it is one, it doesn't subscribe to, like you're saying, any kind of historical orthodoxy. And two, it's just funky for funky sake. It's, there's really a lot that's happening there to get to some kind of end, and it's better to know what that end is. I'm glad you brought that up. So I think you can, everybody who's listening can weigh, like, if you. Don't wanna weigh into that, or you don't really need to solve the problem that's being created here, then don't bother with it altogether. Yeah. Uh, it's just not worth your time. But people, this is the hide thing. Like when, when we are challenged to be discerning people, when we are challenged to take scriptures at face value, there is always a tendency for us sometimes to go too deep, to get too wild with it, to try to turn around and bend it to, to answer all in every single question. And even the reform tradition doesn't attempt to do that. So here, there is something that's beautiful about these certain mysteries of God and to take him at his face, to trust him in his word, we should seek, seek out many things. Some things are just not worth seeking out. So, you know, the Internet's gonna internet and people are gonna, people and theologians are gonna theologize. And sometimes that's good and sometimes it's not that productive. [00:14:08] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I, I think to be as charitable as I possibly can be, I think, um, Doug is, has identified a legitimate. Question about the Old Testament, right? Right. The, the Bible appears when we read about God in the Old Testament. He appears to do things like change his mind, suffer yes. Grieve experience passions. Right. Um, and, and so that's a real, um, question that needs to be answered as you read the Old Testament. Um, and the two options of course, or the two primary options of course, are either that God actually suffers, he actually experiences those things, in which case he wouldn't be a changeless God. Um, he wouldn't be a perfect God because there's these, these modes of change within God. The other option would be that there's some sort of appearance of suffering or appearance of, of change or passions that is not actual, it's not real in the sense that he's not God's lying. It's not that God's lying to us, of course not. But that these are appearances for our sake. We would say that's, we call that the doctrine of accommodation. Right. Um. What Doug tries to do is actually exactly what the church did in trying to understand how it could be that the second person of the Trinity suffered. Uh, why, why we can genuinely say that God suffered. Um, we can say that and that the answer was the hypothetic union, and this is where it really kind of like jumped into full relief for me is Doug has the same answer for the Old Testament, but instead of an incarnation of humanity, I don't know what you would call it, an, an evangelization or a, something like that, um, he would probably call like a, some somatization. Um, he uses the difference between Soma and sars as though that somehow answers the question. He says it's not a, an incarnation into sarks. It's a, an assumption of properties in da Soma. But in either case, like his answer is the same answer. That the way that the angel of the Lord suffers in the Old Testament is not according to his divine nature. It's according to these angelic properties that are assumed into his person well. Okay, so like you get the same conclusion. There needs to be some explanation now of like, well, why is it a hypostatic union when it's the human nature, but it's not a hypostatic union when it's the angelic nature or angelic properties. Um, and I think the, the real answer is that when Doug wrote those papers, he just didn't realize those implications. Um, Doug is a sharp guy, like, don't get me wrong, he's a smart guy. Um, I think he's got a pretty good grip on Hebrew and, and a lot of this too is, um. Not to make this more of an episode than it is, but, um, this Divine Council worldview at first feels like not that big of a deal when you, when you read about it the first time. Um, or when you read sort of like popular treatments of it. Um, the real problem is that this divine council worldview, um, which I'm not gonna define again, you can look, I'll pull the radio episode or the other podcast episodes, but this divine council worldview becomes like the controlling meta narrative for the entire scripture for these guys. And so if, if the son is to be the sort of lead Elohim on this divine council besides Yahweh himself, then he has to become an angel. He has to become a one of the sons of God in order to do this. Sort of almost ignoring the fact that like he already was the son of God. Like, it, it just becomes, um, this controlling meta-narrative. And if all that this, all that this divine council worldview is saying is like, yes, there's a class of creatures. Um, that are spiritual in nature and the Bible uses the word Elohim to describe them and also uses the word Elohim to describe the one true God who's in an entirely different class. And it just happens to use the same, the same word to describe those two classes. Okay. Like I would find a different way to say that that's maybe not as risky and confusing, but that would be fine. But this goes so much farther than than that. And now it has all these weird implications. He actually did a five, five-part sermon series at his church where his argument is essentially that like this. This overarching narrative of the Sons of God and, and the 70 sons of God. Um, that that's actually the story that explains how salvation functions and what we're being saved to is we're not being swept into the life of the Trinity, which is kind of the classic Christian view, the classic orthodox view that because, because of who the son is by nature, in reference to the father, when we're adopted, we gain that same relationship with the father and the son and the spirit. Um, he's, he's wanting to say, it's actually more like, no, we, we we're sort of brought onto this divine council as, as creator representatives of the cosmos. So it's, it, there's a lot to, it's, um, again, I, I don't want people just to take my word for it. I'm gonna provide as many receipts as I can, um, in the, the, um, show notes. Um, but yeah, it's, it's weird and it, it's unnecessary and [00:18:57] Jesse Schwamb: that's right. [00:18:58] Tony Arsenal: It made a lot of sense to me when Michael Heiser went down these routes, because his whole program was, he had a, a podcast called The Naked Bible, and the whole idea was like he interprets the Bible apart from any prior interpretations, which of course we know is not possible. But that was sort of his plan was he's. It wasn't necessarily anti cre, anti-real or anticon confessional. He just thought you needed to and could come to the Bible without any sort of pre interpretive, uh, positions. Um, so it made a lot of sense to me when he was like, well, yeah, this isn't the way that the historic tradition isn't understood this, but that doesn't matter. But then you have someone like Doug Van Dorn come around who claims to be a 1689 Confessional Baptist. This is like radically foreign to that system of doctrine. So it's just a weird situation. It's kind of an abandonment of the pattern of sound words that handed down to us, the ages. Um, and it does have all these weird implications, and I'm not hearing loud and clear. I am not saying Doug Van Dorn is not a Christian. Um, I do think that the implications of what he's teaching are heretical. Um, but we've made the distinction before that like, just because you teach something heretical doesn't mean you're a heretic. Um, that's a, that's a formal proclamation that the church officially makes not some dude on the internet with a podcast. But the, the implications of his teaching are quite dangerous. So. Check it out. Read it with caution and with discernment, um, and with, you know, a good systematic theology that can help kind of correct you in your hands. And the creeds and the confessions. But dude, check it out. You, you're reasonable people. Look at the scriptures yourself and make your own decisions. I don't expect anybody to ever just take my word for any of this stuff. [00:20:25] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that's right. Or like you said, don't bother with. Yeah. Or don't bother. Just read the confessions. Unaware of it. Yeah. That's also, okay. Stick to the, the, hopefully the good local preaching and teaching that you're receiving and just hang out there. Yeah. And that's also okay. The internet is a super strange and weird place. Yeah. And that includes even among well intentions. Theology, sometimes it just gets weird. And this is one of those examples. [00:20:51] Tony Arsenal: It's true, it's true. I often tell people that my, my goal in any sort of public teaching or podcasting or blogging or when I'm preaching, uh, my goal is to be as like vanilla reformed as I possibly can. Like that's what I'm saying. There, there are times where like some of the stuff that I be, like, I, I'm not like straight down the middle on every single thing. There are things that I would, you know, like my view on, um, state relations with church like that, that's not exactly run of the mill vanilla presbyterianism. Um, so there are definitely things where I'm, I'm sort of a little off center on, um, but I try to be like right down the middle of the vanilla, vanilla aisle here with maybe a little bit of chocolate sauce here and there. But it's, it's pretty, uh, my reform theology is pretty boring and I'm fine with that. I love [00:21:35] Jesse Schwamb: it. I love it. It's okay to be boring, isn't it? Like boring? It's is for the most part, right. On the money. Because often when we do take our views and we polarize them to some degree, we know that there's a greater probability propensity for the errors to lie there if you're always hanging out there. Yeah. But especially in this, again, you've said all the right things it, it's just one of those things. But it's a good mark for all of us to understand that when we move so far away from orthodoxy that we're just kind of out on the pier by ourselves and you're looking around, you ought to ask what happened that you're out there so far. [00:22:05] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Well, Jesse, save us from this train of thought. What are you affirming or denying today? [00:22:10] Jesse Schwamb: I hope I have something that's exactly the opposite. As you know, Tony, not all affirmations especially are created equal because sometimes we throw one out there and it's, it's good. We think it's great. Maybe not for everybody. It doesn't resonate. It doesn't hit. This is not one of those, this is for everybody. [00:22:24] The Importance of Daily Worship [00:22:24] Jesse Schwamb: I'm coming in with a hot, strong affirmation, and that is one of the things you and I have promulgated for so long is the beauty, the necessity, the responsibility, and the joy of regular daily worship, and that can look. Lots of ways, but I think you and I have tried in our own lives and we've spoken a lot about the high conviction that we have that that kinda worship should be participatory and it can involve reading the scriptures, praying, singing this spills over into convictions about family worship, leading our families, and that kinda experience, even if it's just a little bit every day and even if it's, we give it our best efforts, this is not like a kind of legalistic approach. And so I just came across something that I think I've been testing for a while that I think is faab fabulous for everybody, could be helpful to you in daily worship. And I'm just gonna give you the website first and explain what it is. Secondly, so the website is sing the worship initiative.com. That's sing dot the worship initiative.com. You can find it if it's easier. Just search the Worship initiative. What this is, is it is. Once you sign up for this, you'll actually get a text. It's a daily text, and that text will be a link in a browser every day. So it's not a podcast, but it comes through a browser every day. It is a time of, I would say, I'll use the word colloquially, it's a time of devotional with singing led by Shane and Shane and some of their other musicians and their friends. And this is glorious. It's no more than 15 minutes, and it's purposely orchestrated to lead you or whoever's listening with you in singing, including in the app or rather in the browser. They will give you the words for the songs that they're gonna sing that day. And one, Shannon and Shane are fantastic musicians. You wanna listen to this with a good speaker or set of, uh, earbuds because, uh, the music is great and it's very stripped down. It's just, it's just piano and a little bit guitar generally. Uh, but the speaking of the theological pieces of what's in these songs is fantastic. And this just past week, they've done songs like Crown Hit with Many Crowns. Um, in Christ Alone, he will hold me fast, he will hold me fast, is an incredible piece of music and a piece of worship. So I'm just enjoying, they are using rich deeply theological songs to speak rich, deep theological truths, and then to invite you into a time of singing, like along with them. It's as if like they were just in your living room or in their kitchen and said, Hey, you got 15 minutes, especially start the day. Why don't we gather around this table and why don't we worship together? So I haven't found something quite like this where it's like an invitation to participate, both by being active listeners into what they're saying, but by also singing together. So I. Can only come at this with a really hot affirmation because I'm being blessed by it. And this rhythm of somebody like leading you daily into song, I'm finding to be so incredibly valuable. Of course, like we can find song in lots of places. We may lead ourselves, we may rely on the radio or a playlist to do that, but this kind of unique blend of a time that's being set apart, that's organized around a theme and then brings music into that as a form of meditation and worship is pretty singular. So check out, sing the worship edition of.com and especially if you're a fan of Shane and Shane, you're gonna slide right into this and feel very blessed because they're talented musicians and what they're bringing, I think is a, is a rich theological practice of actual worship, not just devotionals of some kind, but like actual participatory worship of, of in spirit and truth. [00:25:53] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, I just signed up for this while you're talking. It took about a minute. It's super easy. So, um, and I'm sure that they have a way to opt out. If you start it and you hate it and you want to just stop getting text messages, I'm sure you can just respond, stop. Um, so there's really nothing to lose. There's no gimmick. They don't ask for a credit card, anything like that. Um, and I, I'm with you, like I love me some Shane and Shane music, and I do like some Shane and Shane music, um, that, that like takes me way back. Those, there are a lot of singers who've been at this for a long time. Yes, Shane and Shane was like. A really like popular band when I was in like, like upper high school. Oh yeah. So like, we're talking about a multi-decade career, long career doing mostly worship music, like they're performers, but they have entire, they have entire, many entire, um, albums that are psalms, um, entire albums that are worship choruses or what you might think of as chorus singing. Um, so yeah, I think this is great. And I'm always looking for new ways to integrate worship into my life. So this could be something as simple as like, maybe you're not gonna be able to sing out loud, but you could listen to this on the bus on the way home. Or you could put in your air, your ear pods, uh, when you're, you know, doing the dishes and instead of just listening to another podcast. I recognize the irony of saying that on a podcast that you may be listening to while you're doing the dishes, but instead of just listening to another podcast, you spend a little bit of time thinking about meditating on God's word. So that's great. I think that's an awesome, awesome information. A little [00:27:20] Jesse Schwamb: bit like very casual liturgy, but you're right, they've been around for a while and this, the content that they're producing here strikes me as like very mature. Yeah, both like in, of course, like the music they're doing and how they're singing, they're singing parts, but also just what they're speaking into. It's not just like kind of a, let's let tell you how this song impacted my life. They're, they're pulling from the scriptures and they're praying through. They're giving you a moment to stop and pause and pray yourself. There's a lot that's, that's built in there. And can I give like one other challenge? [00:27:47] Encouragement for Family Worship [00:27:47] Jesse Schwamb: This, this came to me as well this week and I know we've had some conversation in the telegram chat about like family worship, leading our families in worship about somehow how do we model that? How do we bring that together? And music often being a part of that. And I think that it's especially important for families to hear their. Their fathers and their husbands sing, no matter what your voice sounds like. Can I give a, a challenge? I think might sound crazy. This might be a hot, hot take. And so you can bring me back down instead of a mid hot take. If it, yeah, if it's a little bit too hot. But I was reading an article, and this is really from that article, and it, it did challenge me. And the article basically challenged this and said, listen, most people are actually far more musical than they understand themselves to be. And that might just not be in the instrumentation of the voice, but in other ways. And so the challenge was if you're a, a husband, a father, maybe you have some proclivity of music, maybe you have none. The challenge was basically, why don't you consider. Learning a musical instrument to lead your family in worship. And, and the challenge was basically like, pick up a guitar and, uh, see if you can eke out a couple of chords. Work through that just for the sole purpose of if nothing else, but saying like, I want to participate in something differently in my home. And maybe that's getting a keyboard and just, just trying it there. If I can play the guitar, anybody truly I think can play the guitar. It's, it's not really that difficult. I just found this captivating that this guy laid down the gauntlet and said, maybe you ought to consider doing that if only to be a model of worship in your own home throughout, throughout the week. And I just thought, you know what? That's something we're thinking about. I think all of us have something there. And that might be for some, like, maybe it means strengthening your personal prayer closet. So like your example in time of, of corporate worship of your family is stronger. Maybe it means your study of the scriptures, not just of course for like pure devotional life, but to instruct or to practice that scripture for your family. So I, I take this point of, it's not just about the music, but it could be if you're, if you're looking and saying like, man, I wish that we had some music. Um, you, you possibly could be the music. And it's just something to think about. [00:29:47] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, I'll say this. Uh, it's not that hard to play guitar, but Jesse is actually quite a talented guitar player, so even though he's right, it's not that difficult. Uh, Jesse is, uh, is much better than he's letting on. But yeah, I mean, most modern worship songs, um, you can get by, you might have to like find a version online of it in this key, and you might not be able to sing it in this key, but like GC, D and E Minor. Yeah, that's right. We'll get you, we will get you basically every major worship song that you're used to singing. And those are all very easy chords to play. Yes. Um, there are difficult chords and some, some worship songs are more difficult or the, the tone is more difficult. Um, but even, even something like that, or get a keyboard and just do, you know, you can just pluck out notes, right? You can write on the notes what the, what the name of the notes are and just pluck out notes so people can sing with it. Um, there are lots of ways you can do, get a kazoo. You could lead music, you could lead your, that's your family in worship with a kazoo, um, or get the Trinity Salter hymnal app. Like, it's, yes, there are many ways that you could incorporate music in your family devotions and your personal devotions that, um, are not that challenging and, uh, really do add a lot. Now, I know there are some, there are probably a few people in our, our listening audience that are acapella only people. And I respect that perspective and, and I understand where it comes from. But, um, even then, like this might also be a little bit of a hot take. I'm not an excellent singer. I'm not a terrible singer, but, um, I could be a better singer if I practiced a little bit. And with the, with the ease of finding things like YouTube vocal coaches and right, just like vocal lessons and techniques and practice. Cool. Like, you could very easily improve your ability to sing and your confidence to sing, right? And that's only gonna help you to lead your family. I'll even throw this in there. Um. I'm in a congregation with lots and lots and lots of young families. There are five pregnant couples in our church right now. Wow. And our church, our church is probably only about 70 people on an average Sunday. So five pregnant, uh, couples is a pretty high percentage. Um, what I will tell you is that when the congregation is singing, we have lots of men who sing and they sing loud. But when the children are looking around at who is singing, they're not looking at the women, they're looking at the men. Right. Um, and you know, we're not, we are not like a hyper-masculinity podcast. We're not, you know, this isn't Michael Foster's show, this isn't the Art of Manhood. Um, but we've been pretty consistent. Like, men lead the way. That's the way the Bible has, that's way God's created it. And that's the way the Bible teaches it. And if you're in the church. You are commanded to sing. It's not an option. [00:32:28] The Importance of Singing in Church [00:32:28] Tony Arsenal: But what I will tell you is that, um, singing loud and singing confidently and singing clearly and helping the congregation to sing by being able to project your voice and sing competently, uh, it does a lot for your church. Yes. So it's never gonna be the wrong decision to improve your ability to sing and your confidence to sing. So I think that's great. I think the whole thing is great. You can learn to sing by listening to Shane and Shane and singing with them, and you can Yes. Invest a little bit of time and maybe a little bit of money in, in like an online vocal. I mean, you can get something like Musician or something like that that has guitar, but also you can do vocal training through that. There's lots of resources out there to do that. So yes, I guess that's the challenge this week. Like, let's all get out there and improve our singing voices a little bit and, and see if we can, can do this together. [00:33:14] Jesse Schwamb: I love it. I, I don't wanna belabor the points. [00:33:16] Encouragement to Learn Musical Instruments [00:33:16] Jesse Schwamb: I only bring it up because there might be somebody out there that's thinking, you know, I'd like to do more of that. And I say to you, well, why not you? It's okay. Like you could just go and explore and try get or borrow a relatively inexpensive guitar. And like you said, you don't need to learn to read music to do that. You're just kind of learning some shapes and they correspond to certain letters in the alphabet. And in no time at all, you could be the person that's strumming out, eking out some chords and you're doing that at home. And that might be a great blessing. It might change your life. It might change the trajectory of how you serve in the church. And you might find that God has equipped you to do those things. Yeah. And wouldn't it be lovely just to try some of those things out? So whatever, whatever they are, it's certainly worth trying and, and music is a big part of, I know like your life. Mine and it is someday. Tony, we have to do the sing episode. I don't know that we've actually done that one, right? We just talk about what it like, is it a command that we sing and why I think we've [00:34:08] Tony Arsenal: done that. I think we did have, we, it's early on in the episode on our views. Might have changed a little bit. So we maybe should um, we should loop back to, I'm sure we talked about 'em when we were going through Colossians as well. [00:34:17] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, I think we did. I just dunno if we did, like, we're, we're just gonna set a whole hour aside and for us, that's definitely not an hour, but, and just talk about this in particular and like what, why do we sing and what, why does guy command this? And then why our voice is different and why do some people feel this, you know, sense of like why don't have a good voice and you know, we, you always hear people say like, well make a joyful noise. And I think sometimes that falls flax. You're kinda like, yeah, but you don't know the noise I'm making you. That's kind of the response you hear. So some someday we'll come back to it, but I'm gonna make a prophetic announcement that there is no way we're going get through this one parable. No already. So. [00:34:55] Introduction to the Parable of the Lost Sheep [00:34:55] Jesse Schwamb: Everybody strap in because we'll do probably a part one. And if you're curious about where we're going, we're moving just away from Matthew for now, we're gonna be hanging out in Luke 15. We've got a trio of parables about lost things. And again, I think this is gonna be very common to many people. So I encourage you as best you can, as we read these to always start our conversation, try to strip away what you've heard before and let's just listen to the scripture. [00:35:20] Reading and Analyzing the Parable [00:35:20] Jesse Schwamb: So we're gonna start in Luke chapter 15 in verse one. I'm not even gonna give you the name of the parable because you will quickly discern which one it is. So this is the Luke chapter 15, beginning of verse one. Now all the tax collectors and the sinners were coming near Jesus to listen to him, and both the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling saying, this man receives sinners and eats with them. So he told them this parable saying. What man among you, if he has 100 sheep and has lost one of them, does not leave the 99 in the open pasture and go after the one which is lost until he finds it. And when he is found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors saying to them, rejoice with me for I found my lost sheep. I tell you that in the same way, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repentance than over 99 righteous persons who need no repentance. [00:36:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And yeah, this, this will definitely be a multi-part episode. And, and part of that is we just spent a half an hour talking about affirmations and denials. I think we probably should have a podcast called Belaboring The Point, which is just us talking about other random stuff. Fair. [00:36:33] Comparing the Parable in Luke and Matthew [00:36:33] Tony Arsenal: But, um, the other part is that this parable is, um, slightly different in Luke as it is in Matthew. [00:36:41] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. [00:36:41] Tony Arsenal: Um, and also it's positioning in the narrative and what comes immediately following it is different. And I think that's worth unpacking a little bit as we talk about it this week, next week and, and probably maybe even into a third week. Um, but the, the parable here on, on one level, like most parables is super, super straightforward, right? Like right. This is God's di, this is God's demeanor, and his disposition is that he seeks that which is lost, um, which is good news for us because all of us are lost. There's only lost people until God finds them. Right. Um, and find again, of course, is an accommodated way of saying it's not like God has to go out searching for us. He knows where we are and he knows how to find us. Um. But this is also a different format for a parable, right? He's, he's not saying the kingdom of heaven is like this. The parable is what man of you having a hundred sheep? Like the parable is a question Yes. Posed to the audience, and it, it is in the context here, and this is where, this is where looking at the parallels between different, different gospels and how it's presented and even the different variations here shows you, on one level it shows you that Jesus taught these parables in multiple different contexts and different occasions. Right? In this occasion, it's he's sitting down, he's with the tax collectors and the sinners. They're grumbling. They're saying, this man eats with sinners. And receives them in, um, in Matthew, it's slightly different, right? He's in a different context and sit in a different teaching context. So the way that we understand that is that Christ taught these parables multiple places. And so we should pay attention to the variation, not just because there's variation for variation's sake, but the way that they're positioned tells us something. So when he's telling the account in Luke, it's told as a corrective to the tax collectors and the um. Right on the Pharisees, um, who are, sorry. It's a, it's a corrective to the Pharisees and the scribes who are grumbling about the tax collectors and the sinners drawing near to Christ. And so he speaks to the Pharisees and to the scribes and is like, well, which one of you wouldn't go seek out their lost sheep? Like, it's this question that just lays bare. They're really sinful. Ridiculous Jonah. I just invented that. Like Jonah I perspective that like, oh, exactly how dare God go after how dare Christ eat with sinners and tax collectors? And he says, well, if you love something. If you love your sheep, you're going to go after your sheep. [00:39:03] The Deeper Meaning of the Parable [00:39:03] Tony Arsenal: You're not going to just abandon, uh, this sheep to its own devices, even though there is, and again, this is a, a comedy way of talking about like, even though there's some risk associated with going after the one sheep, because you do have to leave the 99, he still is saying like, this is the character. This is my character speaking as grace. This is my character. This is the character of my father. And there's this implication of like, and it's obviously not the character of you. So I think this is a, this is a really great parable to sort of highlight that feature of parables when they're repeated across different, um, gospels. We have to pay attention, not just to the words of the parables themselves, but what the teaching is in response to what the teaching like proceeds. We'll see when we look at Matthew, there's a very, there's a, a different. Flavor to the parable because of what he's going to be leading into in the teaching. So I love this stuff. This has been such a great series to sort of like work through this because you, you really start to get these fine details. [00:39:59] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. This parable of the lost sheep is I think on the face straightforward, like you said. But it is actually complex. It's complex in the argumentation and the posturing Jesus takes here, like you said, he's binding the pharisee. This is condemning question of like which one of you, like you said. So there's that, which is slightly different element than we've seen or covered so far. There's also the context, like you said, in which it happens and I think we need to think specifically about. Who is this lost? Who are the 99? Who are the ones that Jesus is really trying to draw in with conviction, but also, again, what is he saying about himself? And it's way more, of course, like we're gonna say, well, this is again, that default, that heart posture. Even those things are more cliche than we mean them to be. Yeah. And we need to spend some time, I think, on all of these elements. And it starts with, at least in Luke, we get this really lovely context about when the teaching unfolds. And even that is worth just setting down some roots for for just a second. Because what I find interesting here is I think there's a principle at play that we see where. Everything that everything gives. Jesus glory, all the things give him glory, even when his enemies come before him and seek to label him. It's not as if Jesus appropriates that label, repurposes, it turns it for good. The very label, the things that they try to do to discredit him, to essentially disparage him, are the very things that make him who he is and show his loving and kindness to his people. And I think we'll come back to this like this, this sheep this, these are his children. So these words that it starts with, that were evidently spoken with surprise and scorn, certainly not with pleasure and admiration. These ignorant guides of the Jews could not understand a religious preacher having anything to do with what they perceive to be wicked people. Yeah. And yet their words worked for good. I mean, this is exactly like the theology of the cross. The very saying, which was meant for reproach, was adopted by Jesus as a true description of his ministry. It is true. He's the one who comes and sits and subs and communes and touches the sinners, the ugly, the unclean, the pariahs. It led to his speaking three of these particular parables in Luke in rapid succession. For him to emphasize that he's taken all of what was literally true that the scribes of Pharisees said, and to emphasize that he is indeed the one who received sinners. It's not like he's just like saying, well, lemme put that on and wear that as a badge. He's saying. You do not understand God if you think that God does not receive sinners, to pardon them, to sanctify them, to make them fit for heaven. It's his special office to do so. And this, I think therein lies this really dip deep and rich beauty of the gospel, that that's the end that he truly came into the world. [00:42:47] Christ's Joy in Finding the Lost [00:42:47] Jesse Schwamb: He came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. He came to the world to safe sinners, what he was upon Earth. He's now at the right hand of God and will be for all eternity. And he's emphatically the sinner's friend. And without this reproach from the Pharisees, like we don't get this particular teaching and what they intended again, to be used to really discredit God, to say, look, how can this be the son of God? What we get then for all of eternity is some understanding of Christ. And even here now with his word, we have this sense like, listen, do we feel bad? Do we feel wicked and guilty and deserving of God's wrath? Is there some remembrance of our past lives, the bitterness of sin to us? Is there some kind of recollection of our conduct for which we're ashamed? Then we are the very people who ought to apply to Christ. And Christ demonstrates that here, that his love is an act of love. Just as we are pleading nothing good of our own and making no useless delay, we come because of this teaching to Christ and will receive graciously his part in freely. He gives us eternal life. He's the one who sinners. I'm so thankful for this parable because it sets up very clearly who Jesus is, and this is where we can say he is for us. So let us not be lost for lack of applying to him that we may be saved. This text gives us the direct inroad to apply for that kind of healing and favor of God. [00:44:08] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And, and I love, um, there is such a, um, subtle sort of SmackDown that Jesus does. Like, yeah. I, I think, um, just speaking on a purely human level for a second, like Jesus is such a master re tion. Like he is so handy and capable to just dismantle and smack down people who, and I obviously, I don't mean that in like a sinful way. Like he just puts down the argument. He just gets it done with, and even the way this is phrased, right, they come, they're grumbling, this man receives sinners and meets with them. So he told them this par ball, what, what man of you having a hundred sheep, if he lost one of them, doesn't leave the 99 in the open country and go after the one that is lost, right? So he's saying like, he jumps in right away, like. This is just the obvious answer. This is just the obvious state, like who would not go after their sheep. I think we hear this, and again, I'm not an expert on like first century sheep herding practices, right? But like we think of it, I look at it, I'm like, actually, like that seems like a really bad investment. Like it would be really bad idea to go after the one sheep and leave your 99 in the open country. That seems like a silly answer. That's my error. That's me being wrong because he's saying that as the obvious answer. Right? I think we sometimes, um, I've heard, I've heard sermons that preach this, that make it almost like this is a super reckless. You know, abandonment. Like he's so enamored with us that he leaves the 99 and he goes after the one, and he's taking such a huge risk. But the way that this is presented, this is the obvious thing that anyone in their right mind would do if they lost a sheet. Right? For sure. Right? It's not an unusual response. Yes. There's an element of risk to that, and I think that's, that's part of the parable, right? There's a, there's a riskiness that he's adding to it because, um. Again, we wanna be careful how we say this. Um, God's love is not reckless in the sense that we would normally think about reckless, but it's reckless in the sense that it, it es assumes sort of ordinary conventions of safety. Right? Right. That's not really what's at play here. Like the, the fact is Christ presents the scenario where you, you go after one lost sheep and leave your 99 in the open country or in Matthew, it's on the mountains. Like that's the normal expected course here, such that if you are the person who won't do that, then you are the one that's out of the ordinary. But then he goes on to say, and this is where, where I think he's just such a master, he's such a master at setting a logical trap. Here he says, um. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors saying to them, rejoice with me for I have found my sheep that was lost. And again, this is the expected answer. This is not some unusual situation where like people are like, oh man, he like, he had a party 'cause he found a sheep. That's strange. This is what, what would be expected, right? This would be the normal response. But then he says, just so I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over 99 righteous persons who need no repentance. He is able, in the course of like. 30 words, like this is a short, short response. He's able to show them that their response to, to sinners is totally out of the ordinary. Like it's a, it's sort of an insane response. Um, he positions going after the one sheep and leaving the 99 as the sane response and leaving the, you know, leaving the one to be lost, leaving the sinners and tax collectors to be lost. That's the insane response. Right. That's the one that like, nobody would do that though. Why would anybody do that? But then he goes to show like, but that's exactly what you're doing. [00:47:55] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. Right. And he [00:47:56] Tony Arsenal: says, what you should be doing is rejoicing with me for, I found my lost, she. Right. He shifts. He shifts. He's now the man in the parable saying, um, not just, uh, not just rejoice or not just I'm rejoicing, but he's summoning them to rejoice with him over the salvation of these lost sinners. And that is the normal expected response. And then he, he shows like there will be this rejoicing in heaven when a sinner repents more so than if there was a, but, and we should address this too. He's not saying that there is a such thing as a righteous person who needs no repentance. Right? He's saying like, even if there were 99 righteous people who need to know repentance, even if that was somehow the case, there would be more joy. There is more joy, there will be more joy over the sinner who repents than over a hun 99 people who didn't need to be saved. Right? He makes the sin, the, the, um, Pharisees and the scribes look like total chumps and totally like. Totally self-absorbed and turned inwards on themselves in this tiny little master stroke that you wouldn't even, you wouldn't even think that that was part of the point. If it wasn't for the fact that it was positioned right after verse 15, one and two. You just wouldn't get that from this parable. That there is this sort of like rhetorical SmackDown going on that I think is, is important for us to, to latch onto a little bit here. [00:49:18] Jesse Schwamb: Uh, why is our podcast not three hours? Because there's so much I want to say, so. I'm totally with you. I like what you brought up about this recklessness of God, and I'm with you. We shouldn't define that in the same way. Maybe we can modify it. I might say like His love is recklessly spend thrift. That is, we see when Paul says like God has lavished his love on us, like these big verbs that they are real. Yeah. It's not just hyper rip hyperbole or just like flowery language. And I think as you're speaking, what really occurred to me, what really kind of came through with what you're saying is, okay, what is this cost? Why is he so particular to go after this one? And I think it's because it's, he's looking for his sheep. So these are his children. Yes. It's not just, I think Christ is out in the world because he will find his children. He will find the one who is. His own. So he is looking for his own sheep. One of his, one of his fold. So like the sheep I might find in the world is the one that God has been seeking to save, even one of whom knows his name. That's like John 10, right? So one of, I think our problem is understanding this parable has to do with the when of our salvation. You know, we generally think it's at the time that, you know, we believe. The people are those given to God before the foundation of the world. And God sees us as his people before we were ever born, even before the world began. And when we believe it is just our Lord finding us as his last sheep and we're returned to the fold. So he always goes after that one. So we'll learn more. Like you said, when we look at Matthew's account about who are those other 90 nines. So we can set that aside, I suppose, for now. But it really is a matter of our status before Adam, before the fall, and then after Adam, after the fall, while all men fell with Adam. So also did God's people, which he had chosen before time began. And so this idea of going after the one is bringing back into the fold that who is his child though, who he has made a promise, a covenantal promise to bring into the kingdom of heaven. I was thinking as well of this amazing quote and like, what that all means about God's love for us, which again, is just more than like, isn't it nice that when you are out in

Robert Evans is a Living God and can never lie.....Also we talk with Jamie Loftus about Sam Bankman-Fried and beloved biographer to con man Michael Lewis, author of The Big Short. Original Air Dates: 12.5.23 & 12.7.23 Sources: https://www.newyorker.com/books/under-review/michael-lewiss-big-contrarian-bet https://archive.is/GnVkX#selection-2015.0-2029.125 https://archive.is/cZZcN#selection-455.0-523.30 https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/oct/03/michael-lewis-sam-bankman-fried-crypto-going-infinite https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2023/10/02/is-michael-lewis-throwing-out-his-reputation-to-defend-sam-bankman-fried/ https://archive.is/yrvL9#selection-1231.0-1271.105 https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/02/sam-bankman-fried-trial-key-takeaways https://newsletter.mollywhite.net/p/the-fraud-was-in-the-code https://www.investopedia.com/why-ftx-plan-to-refund-90-percent-of-recovered-assets-doesnt-add-up-to-90-percent-of-what-customers-lost-8362556 https://jacobin.com/2023/11/sam-bankman-fried-convicted-crypto-fraud-michael-lewis https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/books/story/2023-08-15/the-blind-side-michael-lewis-michael-oher-sean-leigh-anne-tuohy-original-review-archiveSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this special episode, we sit down with Chris Hill, former host and executive producer of Motley Fool Money and one of the most recognized voices in investing. Over his 25-year career at The Motley Fool, Chris co-created five shows about money and investing, hosted more than 3,500 episodes, and interviewed some of the biggest names in business and finance—including Malcolm Gladwell, Michael Lewis, Dan Pink, Becky Quick, and Mark Cuban.Chris is also the narrator of Morgan Housel's international bestseller The Psychology of Money and its New York Times best-selling follow-up Same As Ever. His audiobook narration of The Psychology of Money reached #1 on Audible's Nonfiction bestseller list in 2023.Join us as Chris shares insights from decades of experience, his approach to simplifying investing for beginners, and his thoughts on building financial confidence for retirement. Whether you're just starting your investment journey or preparing for life after work, this episode delivers practical wisdom and inspiration.Timestamps:00:00 – Intro03:03 – Chris Hill's Journey to The Motley Fool08:07 – Money Unplugged Podcast: The Mission, Memorable Moments, & Core Audience18:04 – Simplifying Investing: Chris Hill's Approach20:56 – Investing Recommendations for TRS Members26:04 – Most Common Investing Mistakes Influenced by Fear28:27 – Chris Hill's ETF Choices: Buy, Add To, & Hold Forever31:56 – Making Investment Decisions: The “Circle of Competence”35:18 – Chris Hill's Three Stock Choices: Buy Now & Hold Forever40:19 – Why Consumers Should Read Morgan Housel's “The Art of Spending Money” 44:45 – Finding the Balance: Being Financially Prudent vs. Splurging51:11 – Last Words & Finding Money Unplugged53:57 – OutroAre you about to retire? If you haven't had the chance to meet with us one-on-one in a virtual or in-person format, and are within 2 years of retirement eligibility, be sure to log in to your TRS account online and register for a session today! Are you new to TRS or in the middle of your career? Be sure to designate your beneficiaries as soon as possible in your TRS online account. We want to hear from our members! Please email the show for topic inquiries, questions and comments! Contact us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠podcast@trsga.com⁠⁠⁠⁠. Host: Everett Crockett Guest: Chris Hill, Host of Money Unplugged, Former Host & Executive Producer of Motley Fool PodcastFor more information visit: ⁠⁠⁠⁠www.trsga.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ Facebook: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.facebook.com/trsgeorgia⁠⁠⁠⁠ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@trsgeorgiaInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/trsgeorgia/#RetirementPlanning #PensionPodcasts #RetirementThis podcast is for information purposes only and should not be considered financial, legal, or tax advice. The views and opinions expressed are those of the speakers and may not reflect the views of the Teachers Retirement System of Georgia.

This week's Wealth Formula Podcast is about the economics of sports—if you are a sports fan like me, you will love it. But before we get to that, I want to give you my two cents on one of the most important elements to financial success in anything: conviction. As I write this, Bitcoin sold off from a high of $126K to under $90K. Other cryptos have lost 50-90 percent of their value in the same time. It's been called a blood bath. Some are even saying it’s over for Bitcoin. I might even believe them if I hadn't seen the same story at least 5 times before over the past decade. True bitcoiners have tremendous belief in what bitcoin means to the world. Someone who bought $1,000 of Bitcoin in 2010 and simply refused to sell would now be sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars. That is the reward for true conviction. The irony of this bitcoin cycle is that many of those individuals with high conviction are finally cashing in on the fruit of their patience. Almost every day, another wallet that hasn't been active since 2011 is selling off a billion dollars into the market into the hands of Wall Street and governments. That's why prices are tumbling. But don't be fooled into thinking that these buyers are the dumb money holding the bag. The story does not end here. Nor is the Bitcoin story a one-off either. History repeats itself as the story of investments unfolds over time. In December 1999, Amazon stock traded at $106. After the dot-com crash, it fell to $5.97. Every talking head had a eulogy written for the company. But if you were crazy enough to hold through the storm, your conviction paid off spectacularly: $10,000 invested in Amazon in 2001 is worth over $20 million today. Now, moving on to the topics of sports. One of my favorite examples of conviction is from 1920, when George Halas bought the Chicago Bears franchise for $100. The Halas family could've “taken profits” countless times. They lived through multiple depressions, a world war, a dozen recessions, five or six league restructurings, labor disputes, player strikes, and decades of bad seasons. Anybody else would've bailed. But they didn't, and today, the Chicago Bears are valued at over $6.3 billion. These stories have different time periods and different industries, but they all teach the same lesson: Conviction is one of the most profitable assets you can own. That's the message I want to leave you before we move into a perhaps more entertaining topic: the economics of professional sports. Most people think of sports in terms of touchdowns, rivalries, and Super Bowl rings. But the truth is… professional sports is one of the greatest wealth-creation machines in American history. Few people understand those engines better than our guest this week. He's one of the clearest, most respected voices in sports economics today, and he's going to break it all down for us: salary caps, streaming deals, and team valuations. If you are a sports fan, you are going to love this week's episode of Wealth Formula Podcast! Transcript Disclaimer: This transcript was generated by AI and may not be 100% accurate. If you notice any errors or corrections, please email us at phil@wealthformula.com.  Donald Trump pretty much bankrupted the USFL by saying we’re gonna go head to head, uh, with the NFL instead of trying to build a a Spring Sports League. Welcome everybody. This is Buck Joffrey with the Wealth Formula podcast. Happy, uh, Thanksgiving week, uh, and uh, this week because it is a holiday week in, you know, football and all that kind of stuff that goes along with it. We’re gonna talk. About the economics of sports. And if you’re a sports fan like me, you’re gonna really like this. I really had fun with this interview actually. It was just like me asking a bunch of questions I always had. But anyway, before we get to that, I want to give you my 2 cents. One of the most important elements that I think there is give financial success in anything, and that is conviction. And I bring this up to you in part because Bitcoin sold off. Um, and well at least all the time, I’m recording this from a high of 126,000 and then it, it plunged actually below 90,000. And then of course, there were other cryptos that lost 50 to 90% of their value in the same time. Uh, yeah, it was a bit of a bloodbath. It’s been called a bloodbath and it is a blood bath. And of course, there are some who are declaring Bitcoin dead Again. Um, and you know what? I might even believe them if I hadn’t seen, uh, the same story, at least I’d say, I don’t know, maybe four or five times over the past I, eight years, nine years, whatever. True Bitcoiners though, have a tremendous belief in what Bitcoin means to the world and where this is headed. And some of them, well before I ever got in, right? I mean. That serious conviction because, you know, the people who were buying, you know, back in 2012, 13, I mean, this was completely outta nowhere, had no one’s, uh, no one’s support, nothing. In fact, in 2010, uh, you know, if, if you bought Bitcoin back then simply refuse to sell up until now, um, say you bought a thousand dollars of Bitcoin. You’d be sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars of Bitcoin, right? That’s the reward for true conviction. And those people, frankly deserve it. Because can you imagine if you just bought a thousand bucks or something and it was already up to a million, it was already up to 10 million and all the way up to 20 million, you still didn’t sell. I mean, I don’t even know if I could, I don’t know if I could do that. I don’t think I could. I mean, at some point I would be like, take the money and run. Right. Um. You know, it’s a funny thing though. The irony of this Bitcoin cycle that we have right now is that many of those individuals with, you know, super high conviction, um, the ones that were in way before any of us and before me, well, they’re actually, a lot of them are actually cashing out sort of the fruit of their patients. Right. Almost every day right now, you’re seeing a another wallet that’s been dormant since like 2011. And all of a sudden it sells. It’s something that has done nothing, but just sit there in storage, selling off a billion dollars into the market, probably, you know, started out as like 10 grand. Right? And where’s that money going? It’s going to the hands of Wall Street’s, going in the hands of, uh, governments. That’s actually the ironic part here. That’s why prices are tumbling. Because I think people are saying, well, gosh, we’re at a hundred grand. I’m sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars. I’m sitting on a billion dollars. Uh, I think it’s time to get out, right? But don’t be fooled, in my opinion, to think that these buyers are, uh, you know, they’re the dumb people holding the bag. I mean the, the people holding the bag, it’s Wall Street, right? They’re governments and reserves. And, uh, you know, big treasury companies, the story doesn’t end here. And the other thing is that Bitcoin story is not a one-off in history at all, right? In fact, you know, it, Bitcoin gets a lot of attention. But you even look at something like Amazon, right? December, 1999, Amazon stock trading at $106. Then the.com crash comes, and guess what? It fell down to $5 and 97 cents. That’s a Bitcoin like crash, right? And every talking had a eulogy written for the company. And if you were crazy enough to hold through that storm, your conviction paid off spectacularly. If you had $10,000 invested in Amazon in 2001, it’s worth over $20 million today. So anyway, that’s the point I have though. You know, it’s, the point is about conviction. Uh, and, and I’m not saying that you should just be dumb, buy something and be dumb about it, but especially on these asymmetric things where you think something could be really big, give yourself a time, a period, right? I mean. The only thing other than Bitcoin that I think I, I’m really interested in, in the crypto space is something called Solana. Solana is down like 50% from its ties, and I still think that, you know, when the dust settles, I think this is going to be something that’s gonna pay, pay off. Now if I were to watch it day by day, uh. It’s demoralizing, right? But, but I think the point is, if you have some conviction in something, give it some time. You know, say, I’m gonna watch this for at least five years if I can, if I don’t absolutely get into a situation where I need that money, which hopefully you don’t, because this is not where that kind of money belongs. Right? But give it some time and don’t look, there’s lots of noise, and, and, and then just give it some time and see what happens. Right? Now speaking of giving it some time, you know, a similar story in the sports arena in 1920, George Halas, I think it was Papa Bear, right? George Papa Bear. Halas bought the Chicago Bears franchise for a hundred bucks. Yep, a hundred bucks. Now the Halas family could have taken profits countless times, and they lived through lots of, uh, bad times. Depressions, uh, you know, world War, uh, a dozen recessions, five or six, uh, league restructurings, labor disputes, player strikes, decades of bad seasons. And maybe anybody else would’ve billed at some point if they’d made, you know, millions of dollars from the a hundred bucks. But they didn’t. And the Chicago Bears, as much as I don’t like the Chicago Bears, are valued over $6.3 billion. Now these stories, ultimately, they’re, you know, different time periods, different industries, but same lesson conviction, it’s one of the most profitable assets you can own or attributes at least. Maybe it’s not an asset, I don’t know. That’s a message I wanna leave you before we get into the topic of today, which is the economics of professional sports. Now, most people think of sports in terms of touchdowns, rivalries, super Bowl rings, all that kind of thing. But the truth is professional sports is one of the greatest wealth creation machines in American history, and few people understand those engines better than our guest this week. He’s one of the clearest, most respected voices of sports economics today. And he is gonna break it all down for us. We talk salary caps, streaming deals, team valuations. We talk about the Green Bay Packers and why they’re owned by the city of Green Bay instead of owners. All that kind of stuff that you might have wondered about but you never really knew. So if you’re a sports fan, enjoy it and happy Thanksgiving. We’ll have that interview for you right after these messages. Wealth formula banking is an ingenious concept powered by whole life insurance, but instead of acting just as a safety net, the strategy supercharges your investments. First, you create a personal financial reservoir that grows at a compounding interest rate much higher than any bank savings account. As your money accumulates, you borrow from your own. Bank to invest in other cash flowing investments. Here’s the key. Even though you’ve borrowed money at a simple interest rate, your insurance company keeps paying you compound interest on that money even though you’ve borrowed it. At result, you make money in two places at the same time. That’s why your investments get supercharged. This isn’t a new technique. It’s a refined strategy used by some of the wealthiest families in history, and it uses century old rock solid insurance companies as its backbone. Turbocharge your investments. Visit Wealth formula banking.com. Again, that’s wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Today. My guest on Wealth Formula podcast is, uh, Dr. Victor Matheson, professor of Economics and Accounting at College of Holy Cross. He’s a leading authority on sports economics, studying everything from the financial impact of mega events like the Olympics and World Cup, to the inner workings of professional sports leagues, lotteries, and public finance. Uh, welcome to the show. How are you? Well, thanks for having me. Great. Always happy to talk some sports economics. Oh gosh, this is interesting. I’m a huge, uh, I’m a huge sports fan, especially NFL and, uh, so, you know, instead of talking personal finance, you know, without, uh, without any, uh, uh, sports in it, this is definitely a, uh, welcome for me. So, um, well, vigor, let’s start, start with this, you know, um. Most of us who are big sports fans, you know, we’re really driven by the idea of the, the, you know, the, the emotion, the entertainment. Taking a step back from your perspective, how should we look at this whole ecosystem of sports as an economic system? Well, uh, first of all, it’s. It’s both bigger and smaller than, uh, than you would imagine. So if we think of the NFL, the NFL ha generat more revenue than any, uh, sports league in the world. Uh, this year it’ll come in somewhere around 22 ish billion dollars. Uh, that certainly seems like a lot of money. On the other hand, a Sherwin Williams paint store comes in at about that same sort of, uh, revenue, you know. On many podcasts talking about talking about paint, right? Um, if we talk worldwide, all the sports leagues all put together, uh, we’re talking about maybe a hundred billion or so, maybe 120 billion, roughly the same size as Johnson and Johnson. So, uh, you know, it’s a big industry. It’s a, you know, billions in with a B, but it’s also a tiny percentage of, of the total amount of economic. Being generated every year, and, and so we can easily get, uh, um, we can easily get ahead of ourselves and say, well, you know, uh, it’s the biggest company in the world, the NFL, it’s, it’s not even 500. Interesting. Um, so let’s talk a little bit about this, um, uh, how value is created in these leagues. So, so, you know, you said professional leagues are built on the economics of controlled scarcity. So talk a little bit about that, if you would, how this scarcity model drives value and, and, and protects, uh, uh, profitability. Right. So let’s compare, you know, let’s compare a Walmart. To the NFL, right? Uh, so Walmart takes a look at all these potential places that you could put a Walmart and they say, oh, this would be a good one. And a Walmart goes in. And now that Walmart’s generating economic impact and generating revenues for the, for the. For the company and all these sort of things. Now let’s look at the NFL, right? Uh, the NFL does the same thing. They said, Hey, uh, let’s look at Las Vegas. Would that be a good place for a, for a team? Uh, is is London gonna be a good place for a team? Uh, and they look at those. Uh, but here’s the deal. If Walmart looks at 50 places and says, Hey, these 35 would be good places. They’re not gonna just pick the best one for a franchise. They’re gonna put. Walmart’s in all of those, right? Uh, the NFL on the other hand, very specifically saying, you know, we actually don’t wanna put an NFL franchise in every place that we could, uh, make a profit in because we want to be in the, in a world where there are fewer NFL franchises than there are cities that want them, and that generates demand for this. Um, Walmart can’t do that because if Walmart doesn’t put in a franchise somewhere, uh, you know, Target’s gonna come in instead. Uh, that’s not gonna happen in the NFL, uh, because there’s no other competitor to that. So they can actually restrict the number of franchises they have, which means that every franchise is selling at a, a super premium price. These are, you know, at the lowest end, we’re talking five, six, $7 billion franchises. Now, uh, they could sell multiple new expansion franchises, but they choose not to. To maximize the value of those existing franchises. It’s been a while actually since the NFL expanded, um, the league. And I’m curious, what are, you know, what is it that drives them ultimately to do that? I mean, again, you just mentioned there’s this whole scarcity issue. I mean, what do you think are sort of the limitations or sort of the. You know, the, the, the points at which they say, well, gosh, maybe we do move to London, or maybe we do that. Like, do you have a sense of that? Yeah. So a couple things they wanna do. So first of all, one of the big things that all of the leagues in the United States have done is they want to be a big enough league to make sure that they cover all of the good spots or most of the good spots for a team. You don’t wanna leave enough good team locations that a rival league could come and start to challenge you. Right? So thinking back to the 1950s, uh, one of the most important sports leagues ever to come about in the United States. Actually never even existed. And this league is what was called the Continental League. And the Continental League in the 1950s arose as a challenger to major league baseball. Major League baseball in the 1950s was exactly the same size as it was in 1901. It was 16 teams. But the United States had grown immensely and the league had started to move, you know, the Dodgers to LA and the Giants to San Francisco, but you still had huge amounts of the country uncovered by baseball. And so this Continental League came about as an idea saying, you know what? We can take on Major League Baseball by putting franchises in places that it doesn’t exist. They said, oh, here’s our new eight league team. And the way Major League Baseball responded to that is before continental baseball could even start, uh, start existing, it said, oh yeah, well we’re gonna put a team in Minneapolis. We’re gonna put a team in Houston. We’re gonna put teams in these Lee in these cities that the Continental Baseball Association was gonna go into. And therefore, uh, continental baseball never got into existence because Major League Baseball expanded into those locations and everyone has taken that, that hit. You need to be big enough to make sure that every place with a, a good chance at having a team, or at least most of them, uh, are covered so that there’s 8, 10, 12 cities out there, uh, a big enough footprint that you could have your own new league. Uh, do that. So, I mean, if you look at the NHL, if you look at NBA major league baseball, NFL, all about 30 teams. There’s about 30 or a few more big cities. But what’s very important is there’s not 10 or 12 big cities out there, uh, without NFL teams, without football teams that. A rival league could move into that space. You know, I’m curious when you, you brought up that Continental league in baseball. It reminds me when I was a kid of, uh, the United States football, like the USFL and all, they got all these, uh, players, like I remember Herschel Walker started there and, and there was a number of actually guys who ended up in the NFL and being big stars there. So they, they definitely, uh, started out pretty strong. What went wrong for the USFL? It’s so funny you say that. Uh, the answer is actually one big, uh, name. It’s actually Donald Trump. Yeah. So, so what USFL did is, is they noticed that their niche was, um, was the spring, right? We play college football, we pay play high school football, and we play the NFL in the fall, which means that, uh, people out there in the spring, there’s no football out there to be had. The USFL said, you know, we could move into this market. So first of all, we’re gonna move into the spring where there’s not a rival. Second of all, we’re gonna take at least some cities where there’s not active, um, football teams either places like Birmingham, right? Uh, so any case, uh, what happened there is the USFL. Kind of got a little, its ego kind of got ahead of itself and it said, Hey, now that we’ve established ourselves in the spring, we do have some big stars like, uh, uh, Herschel Walker, like Doug Flutie, uh, some of these others. We’re gonna try to take the, uh, take the NFL on, uh, head to head and we’re gonna move from the spring to the fall. And the other thing they did that was very important is they filed a lawsuit against, uh, the NFL, saying that the NFL was engaging in antitrust activity that was keeping this rival league down. It was, uh, keeping them off TV by using their market power with some of the broadcasters. It was using its market power with stadiums to keep these teams out. And so they took him to court, and I think the, the hope was that there would have to be a settlement and that settlement would result in the USFL merging with the NFL. And the owners of the big teams in the USFL would kind of get a backdoor into the NFL this way. As it turns out, the court, in fact did find in favor of the USFL. Uh, they said yes, the NFL is engaging in illegal antitrust activity, but they also said. You guys are insane. Uh, going against the NFL in the fall, there was no way you’re gonna make it. So even though the NFL was found guilty, the jury only awarded $1 of damages. Uh, technically in antitrust cases, that’s tripled. So they actually were awarded $3 in damages and the league basically folded the next day. They won their lawsuit, but they folded the next day. But of course, the owner that had most. Most importantly pushed the league to go head to head against the NFL was the owner of the new, uh, New Jersey team, the Generals New Jersey Generals. Right? And it was Donald J. Trump. Donald Trump. Uh, so Donald Trump pretty much bankrupted the USFL. By, uh, by saying we’re gonna go head to head, uh, with the NFL instead of trying to build a, a Spring Sports League. Now, to be fair to Donald Trump, which I don’t necessarily want to be, but to be fair to him, um, there’s no guarantee that the USFL would’ve made it as a spring league either, but I think anyone, again, a jury looking at this said there was just no chance of that league, uh, surviving against, uh, the NFL. If you try to go head to head in the poll. Just, just outta curiosity, uh, you know, there, when you talk about Trump, I know like he’s had an interest in, you know, professional football teams for a long time where he did, at least, there’s a certain politics that goes into buying an NFL team as well, right? Right. So the NFL is a partnership. Yeah. Which means that they can choose who they decide to partner with. And, uh, the presumption was, uh, in the 1980s when Donald Trump was trying to become an NFL owner that Donald Trump, uh, neither had the money, nor had the friendships among other NFL player, uh, NFL owners, uh, to get into that very exclusive club. And so again, he was able to get into the USFL because it was a much lower buy-in, in terms of, of cost. The USFL owners couldn’t be as picky about who they wanted as fellow partners, and again, I think Donald Trump saw the USFL as a way to potentially get into the NFL through the back door through this lawsuit, and, and by moving directly in the, in the fall because the jury just didn’t find that, that there was any plan. By which the USFL teams could have ever become profitable, uh, going head to head in the fall against the NFL. Let’s talk a little bit about sort of valuations, because what’s interesting is, you know, you’ve talked about scarcity and, you know, the way that the leagues have manipulated, uh, that to make sure that there, you know, the values continue to grow, but at some point in the last 30, 40 years, the numbers just really skyrocketed, right? Where these football teams, you know. It wasn’t a straight line in terms of how much they were worth. What, what went into that massive inflection of, uh, of, of valuation? So, first of all, I think you’re exactly right. There has been this massive inflection. Uh, so I’ve been teaching sports economics since the 1990s and, and the 1990s were kind of at the end of an era where this was really one of the sames back in the seventies, eighties, and even as late as the early nineties, that if you wanna become a millionaire. Start out a multimillionaire and then buy a sports team because it was a, it was just a, uh, a dumpster fire that you could just burn up cash without any hope of any sort of real return. And that changed in probably the late eighties, early nineties. That really changed, uh, a couple things. Change that, uh, first of all. By the nineties and certainly by the two thousands, um, most of the big professional sports in the United States had solved lots of their labor relation problems with the, with the athletes. So there was always this question about, uh, you know, do athletes have the ability to bargain with other teams? Are they able to get free agent, uh, agency, are teams going to be constantly fighting and, and spending every dollar that they can down to the point of bankruptcy to buy that superstar team? And what happened again in the nineties, starting in the eighties through the nineties and the two thousands is pretty much leagues have, uh, agreed to a world where. We’re gonna limit the amount of spending, uh, that we’re gonna do on players so that we’re not all bankrupting each other, bidding for players. In order to get the players to go along with that, we come to an agreement that we’re gonna share basically half the money with the players. And that’s exactly how the NHL works, the NBA works and the NFL works. Major League Baseball is not like that yet. And we may see not this season, but the next one, um, them trying to finally join ranks with the other, uh, with the other leagues. Uh, the question is whether we’re gonna see that happen without a gigantic, uh, work stoppage that. You know, some people who are pessimistic think we’re, we may not have baseball at all in 2027. 2026 is fine, but 20, 27 may, may fall. So as soon as like your costs are all covered up, that you know that everyone is kind of playing on a level playing field. Once we know that we don’t have to worry about bankrupting ourselves. We are only paying players, what we’re bringing in as revenue. All of a sudden, this is a fairly safe investment in a way that it never was prior to, you know, this all dying down. Couple other things going on here as well is, of course, the country’s gotten bigger. We have gotten bigger, but without adding additional, many additional franchises, which means, uh, those, those tickets are becoming increasingly expensive. We’ve gotten richer in a, in a skewed fashion, so that, uh, that of course the rich have gotten richer, a lot faster than the poor have. But of course, going to a baseball game, especially with those luxury boxes and things like this, is, uh, an activity that is reserved for the wealthy. And as the wealthy have gotten more, uh, uh, have gotten, you know, increasingly rich, uh, that means that. You know, businesses like Major League Baseball in the NFL that cater to the upper class, uh, do disproportionately well. And the last thing, and I’m sure you’ve talked about, uh, this before, is on your show, obviously you can have, um, you can have investments that are irrational as long as you think there’s someone later that’s irrational, that you can, you can hand it off to, right? This is, this is all the Greater fool theory. Uh, although I don’t think necessarily in this case, the, the owners are fools, but. Sports teams are a toy of billionaires that you say, well, look, I, I am, I’m a Mark Cuban. I’ve made billions of dollars. Now I want to spend some of my, my money on a, a fun asset. You know, you and I might collect a baseball cards. Mark Cuban might collect baseball teams, right? Uh, so, uh, in a world you might be willing to overpay because you wanna be a sports soldier and you wanna rub elbows with. You know, KA Leonard, you wanna rub elbows with, uh, with, with Shhe Tani. Um, and you may be willing to overpay for that asset, but guess what? 20 years down the way, there’s still gonna be another billionaire who wants to rub elbows with that next generation of superstars. And so you’re fairly sure that the next time when it comes to sell your franchise, there will be another person who’s willing to pay a premium for that asset as well. So again, as we’ve gotten more billionaires, more billionaire wealth, um, this is something that, uh, you know, has attracted folks like Steve Ballmer to, to part with, with big money. And, uh, again, as billionaire assets have grown, uh, the ability and the desire to buy these teams has grown as well. I would think a major driver of the value. Is also coming from, um, the, the media sources, uh, that are changing, right? Where, I mean, I remember, you know, again, being a kid and there was this, you know, there was Monday night football and it was on NBC and. And that, that’s how it worked. But now there’s like bidding for these things and you’ve got Amazon, uh, doing Thursday night football, which is a little weird. Um, and you know, you sometimes you have, uh, uh, you have games on Peacock. What’s going on with that? How does it affect the economics? Uh, and ultimately, like where is this headed? So, uh, in a, in a league like the NFL, uh, over 60% of all revenues that they generate is media revenue, right? Because most of us aren’t going to games every day, uh, too expensive for us, or too time consuming or all sorts of other things. But, uh, lots of us tune in on tv. So we’re talking about, uh, well over $10 billion of annual media contracts with the NFL. Um, and those numbers have been going up, uh, at least in part because you have media companies, uh, in a pretty competitive environment bidding against one another for these things. Now, one of the things about, again, things like the NFL or the NBA is it allows broadcasters or other types of TV networks to bring in customers in a way that their regular programming doesn’t. So a, a company may actually be willing to overpay for the NFL, kind of as a way to get people to buy all of your other products. A famous example from early days, uh, is, is Fox, right? So in the old days there were three big networks. So old days, I’m talking, you know, 1970s, there were the three big networks, right? There was A, B, CNB, C, and CBS, and they all competed against one another. And then in the 1980s, this rival network came up and this is Fox. And they wanted to get into all these markets nationwide. Well, how do you make sure that a. A local station decides to pick up the Fox programming. So for example, I grew up in Denver and Denver had a, had a, an independent channel that, you know, played reruns and all sorts of other things, and, and so they have a broadcast license already. Fox goes up to them and says, Hey, would you like to carry our regular programming? And, and that, that channel said, well, I don’t really think so. We’re doing fine showing Gilligan’s Island and Love Boat and things like this, and we don’t need, uh, an entire set of your programming. We’re doing just fine, as as it is. Uh, so Fox couldn’t get a foothold in that Denver market. So what Fox does is they buy rights to the NFL. All of a sudden now they go back and say, Hey, we’ve got all this Fox programming, we’ve got the Simpsons, and we’ve got, I don’t know, uh, you know, uh, you know, these early, these early Fox programming. But, um, they say, but we also have the NFL. You can’t, you can’t turn down the NFL. And then all of a sudden that existing affiliate says, okay, all right, we’ll add the whole line of Fox programming because you’re right, we can’t turn down having the NFL. So what, what basically happens here is the NFL serves as this kind of must stock item. And uh, you know, Fox was willing to overpay for the NFL because now they’re gonna get everyone to be able to buy the Simpsons and everything else they were offering at the same time. Uh, and so media rights have gone much, have gone up much faster. And we see this all over the place, right? How do you get people to buy. Amazon Prime. Well, let’s say that’s the only way you get to watch, uh, football on Thursday nights. How do you get people to buy, you know, apple tv? You offer major league soccer games as part of their package, right? Uh, and so this is how you kinda legitimize yourself as an actual, real, uh, you know, quote real media company is by offering some, uh, live. Live sports. And that gets people who would not otherwise buy Netflix or Amazon Prime or Apple, uh, to actually purchase those because again, they’re offering this secondary item. Then presumably that in turn drives up the value of of the NFL and you know, they’re bringing in a lot more money because they’ve got not just the three major networks bidding on them, but they’ve got all sorts of big companies with deep pockets. Willing to, you know, increase their, their, their revenue is and, and that sort of snowballs. Is that, is that fair? No, and that’s exactly right. And, and for as much as I talk about, you know, that billionaire who wants the an NFL team or an NDA team as a. Prestige asset. Uh, they’re also concerned about having it as an actual functioning asset as well. So I’m willing to pay, you know, a lot more, even if I’m willing to pay a premium. That premium is based on a fundamental value in the first place. And how do you drive that fundamental value? You drive that fundamental value by maximizing the revenue you generate through things like media contracts, and by maximizing. And by minimizing your costs, by making sure that your labor costs aren’t gonna run away with you, uh, because again, hopefully you, uh, most of the leagues have solved kind of their long-term labor, uh, their labor strife between them and the players within each league. There is also some different rules, and specifically, again, being a big NFL fan, I love the fact that the NFL has a salary cap and profit sharing for each team. ’cause it makes for a much more competitive league, basically, you know, for people who don’t know what that means, essentially each team can pay, has a salary cap of how much they can pay players for a given year. But not all of the leagues have that. Uh, I don’t really follow the other ones. I, I’m not sure who has it, who doesn’t, but I know that, like in baseball, I don’t think they have that. And it creates a situation where you’ve got the Dodgers or the Yankees in, in, in the World Series. More often than not, and you know, you’re not getting the smaller teams usually. No. So you’re exactly right. So the NFL has what’s called a, uh, a salary cap, and it’s actually got what’s called a hard cap. So they’re actually quite serious about this, and there are very few exceptions that can be made to go over this cap. Uh, this cap is based on the total amount of revenue that’s being generated by the league. Uh, and again, the cap basically is the way that they make sure that they share. A fair proportion of the money with the players. Uh, what’s also important is they also have a floor. So the, the cap this year is about 225 million, if I remember right, but the floor is about 200 million. So every team in the league basically is spending the same amount on labor this season, which makes for a very even playing field. And we know that some teams are gonna lose and some teams are gonna win. And it seems like the Browns and the, and the jets never win. And it seems like other teams always do. But what’s important about that is it’s not just because they’re in a big city, that they have these gigantic revenue advantages and that they can buy a championship. It really is, you know, who is smartest with their money, who’s smartest with your coaching, who’s lucky with the draft and things like this. And, uh, that makes for a very nice thing here. What’s also super important is the NFL has a gigantic amount of revenue sharing, and the reason for this is every single game you watch on TV is part of a contract that’s being sold by the league, not the team. And because of that, the league is generating all these, all this revenue, and then is equally distributing that money to each of the individual teams. So a, a team playing in little tiny Green Bay is generating exactly the same amount of media revenue as the New York Giants. Or the LA Rams. So that’s really nice. Uh, again, gigantic amounts of, uh, again, even revenue sharing to all the participants. As a matter of fact, of all of the businesses in the United States, the NFL is probably the single most socialist company. In the United States. So this Great American pastime is wildly socialist when it comes to how they distribute their, their income. So what incentivizes a team to be better and to win Then from the ownership standpoint, if there’s revenue sharing, is it just at the, the other sources of income that come, like advertising, things like that. I’m, I’m just curious, like if there’s so much revenue sharing, what is it that drives a team to, you know, try to be better from the ownership standpoint? So first of all is that being bad doesn’t help you, right? This isn’t major league baseball, so we’re gonna go the o. The other extreme, at least for a US sport, is major League baseball. No, uh, salary cap there at all. So you can pay, uh, players as much as you want, although there is what’s called a luxury tax. So as you, as your, uh, salary, your total payroll gets too big, you start getting, uh, uh, paying penalties to the league, which is then redistributed to the poor teams in the league. That being said, you can spend as much as you want. So yeah, the Dodgers, they spent somewhere, uh, by some accounts somewhere around $400 million this year on talent, including, you know, gigantic contracts to folks like Shhe, Tani, right? Um, but there’s also no minimum either. So if you’re a team that decides, hey, we’re not even gonna bother to try to compete this year, uh, you are the. I don’t know to, if I should call them the Oakland A or the Las Vegas a a or the Sacramento A or the Traveling through the desert, sort of a for a while. Um, but, you know, this is a team that made a decision not to compete and had a, had a tiny payroll. Uh, other teams have decided to do this, and the, and the NFL you could decide that you didn’t wanna win. But it wouldn’t save you any money because again, not only is there a salary cap, there’s a salary floor. So if I have to pay $225 million each year anyway, I might as well try to win with that 225 million. Uh, ’cause I don’t have a choice to just collect my paycheck and hire, you know, the Minnesota Gophers for $20 million, uh, for my, for my team this year. ’cause that’s not an option. Right. Um, one of the things I wanted to just kind of, uh, drill down a little bit on is the model of the Green Bay Packers. As you um mentioned, it’s a tiny little town, northern Wisconsin. Uh, not much going on there. I’ve, I’ve been there myself for a game. It is unique in that it is owned, not by billionaires, but it’s owned essentially as by the fans. How, how does that work? And, and I guess the question is like, why, why aren’t other teams modeled that way? So other teams are not modeled that way because the NFL does not want other teams to be modeled that way, nor do any of the other, uh, major leagues out there. Uh, it’s not good for the NFL for a couple reasons. Uh, first of all. They have to open their books. If it’s a public company and they don’t like to open their books, um, you also don’t have a face for that, uh, league in a way that, that a person couldn’t, couldn’t be in there, uh, pouring extra money in as a kind of a, an, an angel investor. Uh, on top of that, uh, you can’t threaten to relocate to another city unless you get taxpayer subsidized. Um, you know, uh, stadiums and things because it’s a publicly owned team and we know that, that those public owners will not ever decide to move that team out. How did they get that status in the first place? That’s an interesting story, and it’s a story that’s not unique to. The Packers, but it is fairly unique to the United States. So, uh, in the rest of the world, this type of ownership model actually is fairly common. Um, teams that your, you know, listeners would’ve heard of, like Barcelona, like Al Madrid, these are club owned teams. Um, there is not an owner there. They are owned by the fans themselves, and they’re in the business of. Trying to stay in business every year while winning as many games as possible. Uh, there is, they’re not trying to win trophies for a, a Steinbrenner or a Mark Cuban. They’re trying to win, uh, trophies for that fan base. That literally, again, the, the season ticket holders are those owners. Um, the NFL itself, you know, was, was a very hard Scrabble league for a long time. It started in 1920, uh, and between 1920 and 1935. Roughly 55 teams played at least one season in the NFL. And of those 55 teams, basically all but about six of them, had gone outta business or relocated at some point in here. Uh, this is why actually we got such a socialist, uh, uh, business model here is because the owners of the big teams, the owners of the bears. Uh, the owners of the Giants, uh, they said, look, you know, this league isn’t gonna work if we can’t actually find someone to play. And yeah, we’re making money here, but we’re not gonna continue making money if we can’t find other teams that are gonna work in this league. So they said, Hey, we are gonna be very generous. We’re gonna make sure that, that we share our revenues with the people, uh, the other people in our league. We would rather have a small piece of a big pie, uh, than a big piece of a pie that is tiny or disappears completely. Uh, so that’s why we ended up with this, uh, revenue sharing. And of course they were very open to any sort of model that kept stable teams around, including a model where rather than some rich owner in, in Green Bay owns that team. Instead, it’s a municipally owned team. As long as that team had stability and conform long-term rivalries and can afford to put forward a product that’s gonna, that’s gonna work on a, you know, on an NFL field to make a competitive product, they were happy to kind of do whatever they needed to do because again, this was a, this was a really tough league to be in. For the first roughly 20 years with, you know, a lot more successes. There’s been a lot of talk, uh, I know about private equity entering the, uh, the NFL. Tell us, give us a little bit of an understanding of that. I mean, obviously, I, I kind of think of these owners in these buying groups as private equity already, so what’s the big deal? Is the point. So in most sports leagues have already allow private equity and already allow ownership groups with multiple owners, uh, to, to own teams. So again, uh, you know, the, the Red Sox, they have multiple owners of, of that team. Uh, again, Celtics, same sort of thing. Um, but in the NFL we have required basically one owner, right? So this is a, a person. That owns the team and is the face of the team and is this controlling majority owner, uh, they’re going to explicitly allow external people unrelated to the ownership group, to own pieces of NFL teams here. Uh, and I think the, the real issue here, uh, has to do with, uh, there are some franchises in the NFL where the owners are asset rich, but cash poor. I’m thinking actually, for example, the Bears. So the bears are still owned by the same group. Who bought the Bears back in 1920 ish. Right? So this, you know, the, the same family, the Halas, uh, have owned this team for a hundred years. Uh, by this point, you know, little pieces of the team have been handed down to all the cousins and the grandkids and the great grandkids and this sort of folks. Uh, so, uh, you know, I think in total there’s something like 86 different owners of the, of the Bears now, but they’re all part of that original ownership group that everyone. You know, has inherited a little, a little share here. Now mind you, you know, one 86th of the, uh, of the bears is like a hundred million dollars. You know, the bears are probably an $8 billion franchise. And so that’s a hundred million dollars of assets that each one of these grandkids has just because, you know, their grandfather made a smart, uh, smart investment a hundred years ago. Um, but it doesn’t mean that they can live the lifestyle of a person with a hundred million dollars. Because they’re not allowed to sell their share to anyone because private equity was never allowed. And the amount of money that that team is actually generating in terms of annual operating profits isn’t super high. So you’ve got a world where you’re wildly rich, but you can’t really do a lot with those riches. So you know, this is a team that would be prime for the idea of, well, let’s sell off 20% of this. 20% of the team is gonna be maybe a couple billion dollars. And, and then we will just share that basically it’s a big Christmas present to each one of these, uh, these kids here. And again, the, the thing here is that’s $2 billion in cash that each of these small minority owners gets rather than, you know, an asset that they can’t actually use. To buy a yacht in Monaco. Right? And so that’s giving these kids, or the, you know, these minority owners an option to basically, uh, you know, get liquidity for their ownership. And, and that’s the big difference, right? And of course the other thing is, is there are lots of wildly rich people who would like to be an owner of a team in a way that you could do that 20 or 30 years ago by being just a, you know, just a multimillionaire or a multi, multi multimillionaire. That was enough. Uh. You know, you can be a billionaire nowadays and not have nearly what it needs to become an owner in one of these big groups. So, uh, you know, if we think about, uh, Arod, right? Arod bought, uh, the Timberwolves, uh, in the NDA, um. But he couldn’t do it alone despite the fact that he was, uh, you know, for 10 years the highest paid athlete in the world, you know, signed the single biggest contract, uh, in the history of professional sports, uh, when he did so. Uh, and even a guy with that sort of money doesn’t have enough money to buy a sports franchise. So, uh, I think the NFL is, you know, looking down the, the road to a, a world where. Someone wants to sell, but there’s not that many folks with $10 billion out there. And so the idea that we were gonna keep a, a world where there’s gonna be one single owner forever, uh, you know that that’s a pretty small pool of people in a world where you’re thinking about selling franchises at $10 billion. But if we allow these to be sold private equity wise. Then people can live their dream of being a sports owner, you know, for a mere couple billion dollars. And of course, that increases the pool of, of potential people by a lot. You know, you, you mentioned, um, during, just a minute ago in, in passing that these teams don’t actually necessarily throw off a lot of cash. They’re not, you know, they’re not super profitable. It’s not like a bunch of money’s being distributed to owners. Uh, can you talk a little bit about that? I, I didn’t know that actually. Sure. So a bunch of these teams in, in fact, in terms of operating revenue, don’t actually generate gigantic amounts of, of money every year. Uh, again, taking an an NFL team, so an NFL team is gonna generate, you know, somewhere around $500 million, maybe six or $700 million a year, but you’re already competing about 250 million of that to, uh, to the players. So half of that revenue coming in automatically is going to the players. If you built yourself a new stadium anytime recently, obviously you could have big payments on that. Uh, there’s other operating expenses associated with that. Um, in, in a world where you’re not the NFL, but you’re a world like, uh, major League baseball, where. You have much more variability in your, in your player costs year to year and more variability in your revenue. Uh, you could easily end up with years where you’ve got negative cash flow or at least negative profits, and, uh, and that means that you need, you need to be able to weather that. And so of course that’s one of the reasons, for example, why the NFL, you know, wouldn’t just take anyone as an owner, you need to be for sure rich enough to, uh, to weather both the ups and the downs. Again, if you borrowed any money to, uh, to purchase the team, uh, that’s obviously a big, uh, big interest payment there as well. So you could easily have teams again, depending how the owner purchased that, that are not kicking out gigantic amounts of cash on a year to year basis. One of the things that I’ve been hearing about, I don’t really know how this would work, is the, is of private equity moving into potentially like college sports. So we’ve seen some changes in, uh, for example, in college football where now these players can legally get paid. So it’s, it’s starting to look more and more like a professional. Uh, professional league. So how would that work if you’ve got private money essentially buying, uh, the sports teams of an individual university? Or maybe I’m not, maybe that’s not exactly what’s happening, but that’s kind of the impression I got. So first of all, that is exactly what could be happening and, and what people are talking about. Uh, I am deeply skeptical that this is a good idea for the institutions involved. Um. So basically it works exactly like any other sort of, uh, sports franchise, right? Uh, basically you would have an owner, uh, you know, let’s call him Mark Cuban, although he’s not, you know, he’s, he’s not talking about doing this. But imagine Mark Cuban decided he wants to buy, uh, Ohio State, right? Uh, so he comes up with a a billion dollars hands over a billion dollars to Ohio State. And now Mark Cuban is the recipient of any revenues being generated by the Ohio State, uh, program here. Um, and so this works like, just like anything else, right? So this is, this is basically, um, a person like bringing money in, in exchange for a piece of the action. Uh, the reason I’m highly skeptical about this because. Uh, remember the name of your university is very, very strongly tied with the name of your athletic program, right? So, you know, the Ohio State University is the name of both the educational program as well as the, uh, you know, the sports teams, right? And so, uh, one of the reasons that that schools have sports teams in the first place. Is as a method of advertising for their other things, right? So they, they use spectator sports to bring in the students to, uh, bring in, uh, actually, you know, public taxpayer money, all sorts of things. Um, and of course if the school controls the money from the, uh, you know, controls the athletic program as well as the academic program, then we can presume that the interests of the athletic program and the academic program are aligned. As soon as you’ve sold off your, your athletic program to an external, uh, you know, an external buyer, then you have every reason to believe that the incentives of that athletic program, the incentives of the. Academic program are no longer aligned in, in a way that is useful. Um, for example, you could have that, that equity person say, you know what? I’m gonna make money no matter what, and I’m just gonna tank all of our programs because I’m gonna generate more revenue by spending less. And that’s what maximizes my profit. But that may very well harm the academic side. And so if you allow, you know, private equity to come in and they have any control. Over that, uh, athletic program, you basically outsourced an extremely important part of your business while still meaning that your business in the athletics is, is importantly tied to the other parts of your business that you haven’t outsourced. And, uh, that makes me deeply concerned for anyone who would consider going down this route. Is, is that likely to happen, do you think? I don’t think anyone who makes predictions about college sport to this point, uh, can, can do that with any certainty at all. It’s fascinating stuff. Um, and one last question I guess for you, which is, you know, we talk about like people who own teams, uh, being, you know, multi-billionaires. Um. Is there any way that fans can still get a stake if they’re just simple millionaires? Is that just not something that’s po un unless you’re live in Green Bay, I guess, is that pretty much non-existent? So it depends what you’re interested in doing, right? So if you’re a mere multimillionaire, uh, you’re not gonna become an NFL owner. You’re not gonna become an NDO owner. Right. Mm-hmm. Um, if you’re very famous and a multimillionaire, you might be able to come into an ownership group because they want you as the face of the organization. Right. Um, one example of this was George W. Bush who came in with a very tiny ownership stake, uh, when, uh, he bought the Texas Rangers and he owned about. 2% of that, that team. But he was the face of that because he was the son of the president. Right. Uh, and, and then when the Rangers did well, uh, you know, he, he made a fortune doing that as well. So, um, the answer is generally no. But as long as your heart isn’t wedded to the NFL or NBA, there are certainly options that you can come into. Right. Um, we have seen. One tier down, uh, buying into things like the WNBA or the, uh, NWSL in women’s soccer or, uh, or women’s basketball. Uh, even that’s become pricey nowadays. These are a hundred million dollar franchises now these days. Or you can take chances with lower level, essentially minor league, uh, soccer in the United States or, uh, elsewhere, uh, in, in the world. And I think you know where we’re going here. So if you’re a merely. Multimillionaire, uh, and you’re a, a famous, uh, movie star or two, you could put your money in and buy a football or soccer team in Wales, uh, called Reim. Right? And of course, that’s exactly what Ryan Reynolds did. And Malaney and, uh, you know, they did not have anywhere close to NFL money despite being famous guys, you know, big movie stars, you know, you know, tens of millions of dollars in, uh, in money. They’re nowhere close to being NFL owner money. Guess what they were wreck some owner money and, uh, they get all the fun and excitement of being an owner without needing to be a billionaire. Interesting. Well, listen, uh, I, I appreciate all your time and, uh, it’s, it’s fun for me personally as a sports fan to see how this stuff works. Um, do you have a site where you write, do you have people curious about this stuff or, or how can they learn more? So how people can learn more is, uh, is there is some fun sports economic stuff out there. Uh, the classic, uh, book in sports economics is of course Moneyball by Michael Lewis, who of course is a great writer about all things finance and, and people who are interested in, in general interest books about, you know, all sorts of things related from to the tech boom to, uh, obviously the financial crisis of the two thousands to. His early days in, in junk bonds in the 1980s. Uh, Michael Lewis is one of the, one of the great writers out there. Um, uh, other fun books by colleagues of mine, uh, omics by Stephan Semanski is, is a fun one. Uh, and, uh, you know, you can catch up, uh, with some, uh, some. Other podcasts that, uh, that follow these sort of things, including Freakonomics has often things on sports that are, that are fun as well. Uh, unfortunately if you wanna, you know, hear from me, it’s all textbook stuff and then I’ll have to give you a grade. And so probably that. Uh, but again, it, it’s a great time to be a fan of sports and of economics ’cause there’s just so much good stuff out there. Thanks so much for being on the program today. Again, my pleasure. You make a lot of money, but are still worried about retirement. Maybe you didn’t start earning until your thirties. Now you’re trying to catch up. Meanwhile, you’ve got a mortgage, a private school to pay for, and you feel like you’re getting further and further behind. Now, good news, if you need to catch up on retirement, check out a program put out by some of the oldest and most prestigious life insurance companies in the world. It’s called Wealth Accelerator, and it can help you amplify your returns quickly, protect your money from creditors, and provide financial protection to your family if something happens. Steve, the concepts here are used by some of the wealthiest families in the world, and there’s no reason why they can’t be used by you. Check it out for yourself by going to wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Hope you enjoyed it. And, uh, once again, uh, I wanna just wish you a happy Thanksgiving and, uh, thank you for, you know, being a listener of this show. And one more thing, just a reminder, uh, we are heading into sort of the last month or so. Of, uh, investment possibilities in the investor club. Wealth formula.com is where you go to join that group. And if you’re looking for a last minute tax mitigation type investment, make sure you sign up as soon as possible. Uh, that’s it for this week on Wealth Formula Podcast. Happy Thanksgiving. This is Buck Jre signing off. If you wanna learn more, you can now get free access to our in-depth personal finance course featuring industry leaders like Tom Wheel Wright and Ken McElroy. Visit wealthformularoadmap.com.

#661: When your income drops, debt spikes, and a rental property starts bleeding cash, it can feel like your entire financial foundation is cracking beneath you. Veronica, our first caller, is navigating all of it at once, from a near-foreclosure to a luxury car payment that's strangling her budget. Her question is simple but enormous, how do you rebuild when you're overwhelmed and out of margin? Once we work through her path forward, we shift to a listener on the opposite end of the spectrum. Daniel has maxed his Roth IRA, HSA, 401(k), and 457, and now sits on growing surplus cash. We talk about where extra money belongs when you're aiming for early retirement and wondering whether to invest, save, or crush a low-interest mortgage. And to close, we take on a question dominating every financial feed right now, what if AI stocks really are in a bubble? We break down what it means to short the market, whether put options are actually a “safe” bet, and how to position a portfolio if you're worried about tech valuations. Listener Questions in This Episode Veronica asks (02:06): How do I dig out of debt, repair my credit, and stabilize my rental after nearly going into foreclosure. Daniel asks (28:17): What should I do with my surplus side hustle cash when I already max tax-advantaged accounts and have a 3.5 percent rental mortgage. Scarlet asks (49:20): If AI stocks are in a bubble like the dot-com era, is there any relatively safe way to profit from a crash, such as put options. Key Takeaways Why tackling the right problem first can change the entire trajectory of a debt recovery plan. How downsizing one major expense can unlock breathing room you didn't realize you had. The surprising factor that often matters more than interest rates when choosing between investing and debt payoff. Why flexible money becomes essential when planning for early retirement. What most people misunderstand about betting against a bubble, especially in fast-moving tech sectors. The simple portfolio shift that can help calm bubble anxiety without trying to time the market. Resources and Links GreenPath Financial Wellness – nonprofit credit counseling and debt management support for people overwhelmed by payments and afraid of bad actors in the debt relief world. Our course: Your Next Raise – a deep dive on how to negotiate a higher salary at work, with a special comp offered in this episode. Paul Merriman Four-Fund Portfolio – the simple, diversified investing framework Daniel uses inside his retirement accounts. The Big Short movie Michael Lewis and the film adaptation. 1929 book by Andrew Ross Sorkin – a historical look at bubbles and crashes. Chapters Note: Timestamps are approximate and may vary greatly across listening platforms due to dynamically inserted ads. (0:00) Veronica's debt crisis and rental challenges (16:46) Cutting car costs and rebuilding cash flow (22:28) Debt relief programs and avoiding bad actors (28:17) Daniel's surplus cash and retirement strategy (37:52) Brokerage vs mortgage payoff discussion (49:20) Can you profit from an AI bubble burst (1:00:40) Why shorting and puts rarely pay off (1:08:18) Safer ways to position your portfolio Got a question: Call it in: https://affordanything.com/voicemail Share this episode with a friend, colleagues, your veterinarian: https://affordanything.com/episode661 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Sam Bankman-Fried BioSnap a weekly updated Biography.Sam Bankman-Fried is back in the headlines, though not for any new exploits—unless you count lobbying from behind bars. According to Morning Brew, SBF, once celebrated as a Forbes 30 Under 30 “whiz kid” in 2021, is now memorialized in their Hall of Shame, serving a 25-year sentence for seven counts of fraud connected to his orchestration of FTX's multibillion-dollar collapse. The outlet notes he is actively petitioning President Trump for a pardon, a move analysts consider highly unlikely. Markets.com assigns just a 4 percent chance of that pardon ever arriving, making the effort seem more a desperate gambit for relevance than a credible bid for freedom.In terms of business activity, FTX itself is now a relic. As Galaxy Digital's newsletter observes, this week marks the third anniversary of the FTX implosion, a fever dream in crypto lore where Bankman-Fried resigned under a cloud of scandal and bankruptcy attorneys took over. By now, the estate under John J. Ray III has clawed back enough assets to pay 100 percent of official customer claims, with distributions starting to reach affected users—though at November 2022 prices, leaving some feeling shortchanged as crypto valuations surged after the collapse.Bankman-Fried has tried to shape the public's understanding of his downfall. CoinMarketCap reports he's been using messages from prison to argue FTX was solvent and that bankruptcy lawyers are at fault for delays in asset recovery, claims roundly rejected by the official estate and largely dismissed by industry observers as self-serving. Meanwhile, TheStreet notes his verified account continues to make waves on social media, most recently by mocking blockchain sleuth ZachXBT with pointed, if implausible, allegations connecting him to Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao, signaling SBF remains undeterred in stirring drama behind the wire.In the wider media, Sam Bankman-Fried's story is now a recurring cautionary tale. Recent episodes from the Aspen Ideas Festival featured acclaimed author Michael Lewis, who shadowed Sam for months for his book "Going Infinite," dissecting how SBF's blend of ambition and naivety created a cult of fast money and misplaced trust. Researchers and commentators at Ivey Business School and elsewhere use Bankman-Fried's arc to explain the media's role in sculpting—then shredding—tech founders' reputations, with SBF serving as the patron saint of the boom-to-bust narrative.On social media, references to Sam remain persistent, as crypto influencers and legal analysts debate his case's parallels with a growing rogues' gallery of 2025 crypto fraudsters. Discussions continue around the supposed regulatory schemes he floated with the SEC, with Uniswap's founder alleging SBF's pitch to classify bitcoin and ether as securities was narrowly thwarted by FTX's collapse.In sum, Sam Bankman-Fried is not fading quietly into prison obscurity. He remains a fixture of headlines and podcasts, his name invoked by advocates and detractors alike as the symbol of crypto's wild excesses and the lasting need for tighter oversight.Get the best deals https://amzn.to/3ODvOtaThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Episode 711: Neal and Toby chat with author Michael Lewis to talk about the 10th anniversary of “The Big Short” movie and the lines drawn from the 2008 financial crisis to today. Then, Michael shares his take on the AI industry and whether or not we're actually in a bubble. Plus, a dive into prediction markets and the proliferation of sports betting. Finally, Neal and Toby put on their casting director hats and re-cast “The Big Short” as if it was being made today. Learn more at usbank.com/splitcard  Get your MBD live show tickets here! https://www.tinyurl.com/MBD-HOLIDAY  Subscribe to Morning Brew Daily for more of the news you need to start your day. Share the show with a friend, and leave us a review on your favorite podcast app. Listen to Morning Brew Daily Here:⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.swap.fm/l/mbd-note⁠⁠⁠  Watch Morning Brew Daily Here:⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@MorningBrewDailyShow⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Discover all of the podcasts in our network, search for specific episodes, get the Optimal Living Daily workbook, and learn more at: OLDPodcast.com. Episode 3343: Jesse Cramer unpacks why Warren Buffett labeled derivatives and leverage as “financial weapons of mass destruction,” showing how these tools can amplify both profits and catastrophic losses. Through real-world analogies and examples like the 2008 financial crisis and Long-Term Capital Management, Jesse urges everyday investors to recognize the hidden risks around them and stick to steady, sustainable strategies. Read along with the original article(s) here: https://bestinterest.blog/financial-mass-destruction/ Quotes to ponder: “Neither derivatives nor leverage is free.” “The range of derivatives contracts is limited only by the imagination of man, or sometimes so it seems, madmen.” “Wall Street ends up trillions of dollars too optimistic, until the music stops.” Episode references: When Genius Failed by Roger Lowenstein: https://www.amazon.com/When-Genius-Failed-Long-Term-Management/dp/0375758259 The Big Short by Michael Lewis: https://www.amazon.com/Big-Short-Inside-Doomsday-Machine/dp/0393338827 Odd Lots Podcast (featuring Brad DeLong): https://www.bloomberg.com/podcasts/odd-lots SPIVA U.S. Scorecard by S&P Dow Jones Indices: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/research-insights/spiva/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This Week, Voice of the Cardinals Mick Tidrow chats with Football Head Coach Mike Uremovich, Men's Basketball Head Coach Michael Lewis, and Women's Basketball Head Coach Brady Sallee.

Discover all of the podcasts in our network, search for specific episodes, get the Optimal Living Daily workbook, and learn more at: OLDPodcast.com. Episode 3343: Jesse Cramer unpacks why Warren Buffett labeled derivatives and leverage as “financial weapons of mass destruction,” showing how these tools can amplify both profits and catastrophic losses. Through real-world analogies and examples like the 2008 financial crisis and Long-Term Capital Management, Jesse urges everyday investors to recognize the hidden risks around them and stick to steady, sustainable strategies. Read along with the original article(s) here: https://bestinterest.blog/financial-mass-destruction/ Quotes to ponder: “Neither derivatives nor leverage is free.” “The range of derivatives contracts is limited only by the imagination of man, or sometimes so it seems, madmen.” “Wall Street ends up trillions of dollars too optimistic, until the music stops.” Episode references: When Genius Failed by Roger Lowenstein: https://www.amazon.com/When-Genius-Failed-Long-Term-Management/dp/0375758259 The Big Short by Michael Lewis: https://www.amazon.com/Big-Short-Inside-Doomsday-Machine/dp/0393338827 Odd Lots Podcast (featuring Brad DeLong): https://www.bloomberg.com/podcasts/odd-lots SPIVA U.S. Scorecard by S&P Dow Jones Indices: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/research-insights/spiva/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Discover all of the podcasts in our network, search for specific episodes, get the Optimal Living Daily workbook, and learn more at: OLDPodcast.com. Episode 3343: Jesse Cramer unpacks why Warren Buffett labeled derivatives and leverage as “financial weapons of mass destruction,” showing how these tools can amplify both profits and catastrophic losses. Through real-world analogies and examples like the 2008 financial crisis and Long-Term Capital Management, Jesse urges everyday investors to recognize the hidden risks around them and stick to steady, sustainable strategies. Read along with the original article(s) here: https://bestinterest.blog/financial-mass-destruction/ Quotes to ponder: “Neither derivatives nor leverage is free.” “The range of derivatives contracts is limited only by the imagination of man, or sometimes so it seems, madmen.” “Wall Street ends up trillions of dollars too optimistic, until the music stops.” Episode references: When Genius Failed by Roger Lowenstein: https://www.amazon.com/When-Genius-Failed-Long-Term-Management/dp/0375758259 The Big Short by Michael Lewis: https://www.amazon.com/Big-Short-Inside-Doomsday-Machine/dp/0393338827 Odd Lots Podcast (featuring Brad DeLong): https://www.bloomberg.com/podcasts/odd-lots SPIVA U.S. Scorecard by S&P Dow Jones Indices: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/research-insights/spiva/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ball State Men's Basketball Head Coach Michael Lewis joined Voice of the Cardinals Mick Tidrow and analyst David Eha on the WMUN 92.5 FM /1340 AM postgame show, presented by Pepsi, after the win vs. Louisiana.

Michala Janatová je jednou z hrstky nezávislých investičních a majetkových poradců v Česku, kteří nežijí z provizí, ale jsou placeni přímo svými klienty. V novém rozhovoru s Robertem Vlachem mj. pokřtila svůj nový mistrovský videokurz Základy bohatství. Více na https://navolnenoze.cz/zb a https://jamico.cz/

In honor of the World Series this week, this episode compares the business of pharmacy to the baseball-themed book and movie Moneyball. The full title of the book is Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game, by Michael Lewis. The story is about how the Oakland A's baseball team used data and statistics to build a winning team — even on a tight budget. The FULL show notes are on thepharmacistsvoice.com. In this episode, I invite you (my audience) to be part of this conversation. I'm looking for 10 pharmacists (techs, owners, professors, or students) to record up to five minutes of input about how any pharmacy setting can thrive by leveraging pharmacist skills, serving changing patient needs, and optimizing limited resources. If you'd like to be part of my second episode about Moneyball for Pharmacists (I'll call it Moneyball for Pharmacists 2.0), use the contact form on my website to schedule your five-minute interview. My website is www.thepharmacistsvoice.com. Once I have 10 responses, I'll publish Moneyball for Pharmacists 2.0. It will be before my show format changes to monthly in January 2026. This episode covers several parallels between Moneyball and pharmacy. Competing with limited resources The data The players The strategy The Moneyball mindset My call to action Links from this episode Moneyball (book on amazon.com) https://amzn.to/4qTcqdV Moneyball (Blu-ray DVD on amazon.com) https://amzn.to/47wXp8n Kim's websites and social media links: ✅ Monthly email newsletter sign-up link https://bit.ly/3AHJIaF ✅ LinkedIn Newsletter link https://bit.ly/40VmV5B ✅ Audiobook Narration Services https://www.kimnewlove.com/narration ✅ Business website https://www.thepharmacistsvoice.com ✅ Buy my book on amazon.com https://amzn.to/4iAKNBs ✅ The Pharmacist's Voice ® Podcast https://www.thepharmacistsvoice.com/podcast ✅ Drug pronunciation course https://www.kimnewlove.com ✅ Podcasting Course https://www.kimnewlove.com/podcasting ✅ LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/kimnewlove ✅ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/kim.newlove.96 ✅ Twitter https://twitter.com/KimNewloveVO ✅ Instagram https://www.instagram.com/kimnewlovevo/ ✅ YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCA3UyhNBi9CCqIMP8t1wRZQ ✅ ACX (Audiobook Narrator Profile) https://www.acx.com/narrator?p=A10FSORRTANJ4Z ✅ Start a podcast with the same coach who helped me get started (Dave Jackson from The School of Podcasting)! **Affiliate Link - NEW 9-8-23** If you know someone who would like this episode, please share it with them. Subscribe for all future episodes. This podcast is on all major podcast players and YouTube. Popular links are below. ⬇️ Apple Podcasts https://apple.co/42yqXOG Spotify https://spoti.fi/3qAk3uY Amazon/Audible https://adbl.co/43tM45P YouTube https://bit.ly/43Rnrjt ⭐️ Sign up for The Pharmacist's Voice ® monthly email newsletter! https://bit.ly/3AHJIaF Host Background: Kim Newlove has been an Ohio pharmacist since 2001 (BS Pharm, Chem Minor). Her experience includes hospital, retail, compounding, and behavioral health. She is also an author, voice actor (medical narrator and audiobook narrator), podcast host, and consultant (audio production and podcasting). Thank you for listening to episode 354 of The Pharmacist's Voice ® Podcast. If you know someone who would like this episode, please share it with them!

Happy Halloween!  And what better topic to talk about on Halloween than paranormal phenomena?!  Lisa's guest today is author and parapsychologist Michael Lewis. Today he shares with us some of his own first-hand experiences and encounters with the paranormal and ghostly realms. After encountering several near-death experiences from a normally fatal heart condition, Michael found new proof for previous conclusions and broadened his paranormal horizons. He also talks about working with angels. Info: https://www.michaellewistherapist.co.uk.

Bestselling author Michael Lewis joins the show to talk about how bubbles happen, the legacy of 'The Big Short' and the global financial crisis, 'Moneyball' and how the data analytics revolution conquered sports and entertainment, the difference between being a good investor and being a good investigative journalist, and the craft of writing. Listen to the new audiobook of Michael's hit 'The Big Short' ⁠HERE⁠! If you have questions, observations, or ideas for future episodes, email us at PlainEnglish@Spotify.com. Host: Derek Thompson Guest: Michael Lewis Producers: Devon Baroldi and Kaya McMullen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Michael Lewis: Sazerac (coat a chilled glass with absinthe, mix 2 1/2 ounces rye, sugar, bitters and chill with ice, add to glass with a twist)Michael reveals an incredible professional connection with Steve Bannon, tells how he's recently been in touch with Sam Bankman-Fried while SBF has been incarcerated, names the key ingredients he needs to have to make a great book, describes the reaction of his boss at Salomon Brothers when he was first working on Liar's Poker and writing articles for the Wall Street Journal in the 1980s, determines who has committed the greater crime between Michael Milken and SBF, relates the filmmaking process for The Blind Side and The Big Short, and suggests which professional sports leagues you should own and which you should short. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Peter Greenberg in conversation with David Eastaugh In 1977, White enrolled at Boston University to study journalism. While in school, he worked in a record shop in Brookline, Massachusetts, named Good Vibrations, where his singing was heard by musician Peter Greenberg of the Lyres. White adopted the stage name Barrence Whitfield to avoid being mistaken for superstar Barry White and began performing with Greenberg and former members of the Lyres as Barrence Whitfield & the Savages STARR AND THE CZARS, hailing from Washington, DC, bring together an all-star line-up of garage-rock veterans into one explosive new band. Fronted by JAKE STARR (Adam West, Jake Starr & The Delicious Fullness, Go Mod Go!, Goy Division…), the group also features PETER GREENBERG and MICHAEL LEWIS, two legends from Boston's trailblazing DMZ. After their time in DMZ, Greenberg and Lewis both carried the torch in Lyres, cementing their reputation as key figures of the late '70s and early '80s garage revival. Greenberg later went on to co-found The Customs and Barrence Whitfield & The Savages, while Lewis added his bass guitar work to bands such as The A-Bones, Yo La Tengo and The Schramms. Starr, meanwhile, became a fixture of Washington D.C.'s garage scene.

Sam Bankman-Fried BioSnap a weekly updated Biography.Sam Bankman-Fried remains behind bars, serving a 25-year sentence after being convicted last fall on seven counts including fraud, conspiracy, and money laundering in one of the largest financial crimes in U.S. history, according to CBS News. The collapse of FTX, which prosecutors say resulted in more than $8 billion in customer losses, continues to define his legacy, with the exchange only now beginning to repay victims almost two years after its implosion. While Bankman-Fried's legal team has mounted an appeal, arguing that he was the victim of a public rush to judgment, there have been no major judicial developments in the past few days—the case is still in the post-conviction phase, with no indication of imminent breakthroughs.However, speculation about his future has absolutely dominated crypto circles and beyond, following President Donald Trump's surprise pardon this past week of Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, the Binance founder. This move sent shockwaves through prediction markets and social media, where chatter about a potential “SBF pardon” exploded overnight. Polymarket, the crypto prediction platform, saw odds for a Trump pardon of Bankman-Fried spike from under 6% to as high as 17% in under 12 hours, according to CoinCentral and TheStreet, with hundreds of thousands of dollars now riding on the bet. A separate Polymarket contract asking whether he will be released from custody this year briefly hit 19% before stabilizing around 15%. But here's the thing: this is pure speculation, fueled by wishful thinking, online memes, and a flurry of headlines—there's zero credible evidence that Trump is considering such a move, and legal analysts like Jake Chervinsky of Variant Fund, quoted by CoinCentral, are openly skeptical, noting Bankman-Fried's Democratic mega-donor past and the gravity of his convictions.Still, the buzz is loud enough that Bankman-Fried's mother and associates have reportedly been quietly seeking allies in Trump's orbit, and his social media presence—ostensibly operated by a friend—has playfully retweeted memes about the pardon odds, according to TheStreet, sparking further online chatter. Meanwhile, Caroline Ellison, his former colleague and ex-girlfriend, was just sentenced to 24 months in prison for her role in the FTX fraud, according to CBS News, a development that serves as another reminder of the scope of the scandal.In the broader culture, the paperback edition of Michael Lewis's “Going Infinite,” which chronicled Bankman-Fried's rise and fall, is about to hit shelves with a new afterword—likely stirring fresh debate about his true character and culpability. While Bankman-Fried himself remains in FCI-Terminal Island prison, the narrative around him is anything but static: a mix of serious legal consequences, feverish prediction market action, and the occasional ironic meme, all reflecting a cultural obsession with one of crypto's most infamous figures. No public appearances, no major business moves—just the ongoing saga of a fallen billionaire, a presidential pardon rumor mill, and a public still trying to make sense of it all.Get the best deals https://amzn.to/3ODvOtaThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

The great Michael Lewis is one of our favourite ever guests on Free State.On an October morning at the end of a long book tour, he asked us to talk about anything at all, not just his latest book. In this timeless piece he talks about life, love, loss, and the pain of losing his daughter Dixie in a car crash.(Originally aired in two parts - October 31st/November 2nd 2023) Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyah speaks with "CBS Mornings" co-host Tony Dokoupil about whether peace can last in the region amid the fragile ceasefire in Gaza, saying, "we agreed to … give peace a chance." He also speaks in the exclusive interview about his views on a two-state solution. Health officials have confirmed 16 measles cases in South Carolina since July, and dozens of students are quarantining at home amid growing concern about the outbreak. CBS News' Cristian Benavides reports. Cody Balmer pleaded guilty to attempted murder, aggravated arson, and terrorism after breaking into Gov. Josh Shapiro's residence, setting fires inside, and coming dangerously close to the rooms where Shapiro and his family slept. Former fashion editors Laura Brown and Kristina O'Neill, who led "InStyle" and "The Wall Street Journal" Magazine, share lessons from their new book "All the Cool Girls Get Fired." Featuring stories from Oprah Winfrey and Jamie Lee Curtis, the book explores how to rebuild confidence, embrace reinvention, and come back stronger after being let go. Acclaimed author Michael Lewis, known for "The Big Short" and "Moneyball," returns to the story that exposed the 2008 financial crisis. For the first time, he narrates "The Big Short" in an audiobook, offering a fresh perspective on the people and greed that fueled the housing market collapse. In the new CBS series "Boston Blue," Donnie Wahlberg's Detective Danny Reagan transfers from New York to Boston, where he partners with Detective Lena Silver, played by Sonequa Martin-Green. The spinoff expands on the world of "Blue Bloods" with a fresh setting and dynamic new duo. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Author Michael Lewis joins Sam to celebrate the 15th anniversary of The Big Short and talk about if we’ve learned any lessons since its publication—like why we so often conflate wealth and wisdom. They discuss why they don’t think anyone would actually prefer to go back 30 or 60 years if they had the choice, why cutting interest rates mean house prices will go up, and why Michael wouldn’t bet against Bitcoin but Sam refuses to take most financial risks. They talk about the tragedy of the CPFB being gutted, why Americans treat the government like the enemy, and if there’s a Canadian “deep state.” Keep up with Samantha Bee @realsambee on Instagram and X. And stay up to date with us @LemonadaMedia on X, Facebook, and Instagram. For a list of current sponsors and discount codes for this and every other Lemonada show, go to lemonadamedia.com/sponsors.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Danny, Vinnie and Porter hosted author Michael Lewis for a special edition of the 'Friday Night Dirty' podcast. To get content like this and more, subscribe over on Substack.--ABOUT THE SHOWFor decades, Danny has seen it all on Wall Street and has built his reputation on integrity, curiosity and skepticism that he will bring with him each week. Having traded through the Great Financial Crisis and being featured in "The Big Short" is only part of the experiences Danny wants to share with the listener. This weekly podcast cuts through market noise, offering entertaining and informative discussions with expert guests giving their views of the financial world and the human side of it. Whether you're a seasoned investor or just getting started, On The Tape provides something for all listeners.Follow Danny on X: @dmoses34The financial opinions expressed are for information purposes only. The opinions expressed by the hosts and participants are not an attempt to influence specific trading behavior, investments, or strategies. Past performance does not necessarily predict future outcomes. No specific results or profits are assured when relying on this content.Before making any investment or trade, evaluate its suitability for your circumstances and consider consulting your own financial or investment advisor. The financial products discussed in 'On The Tape' carry a high level of risk and may not be appropriate for many investors. If you have uncertainties, it's advisable to seek professional advice. Remember that trading involves a risk to your capital, so only invest money that you can afford to lose.Derivatives are not suitable for all investors and involve the risk of losing more than the amount originally deposited and any profit you might have made. This communication is not a recommendation or offer to buy, sell or retain any specific investment or service. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literary-studies

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/systems-and-cybernetics

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

Dave McArthur stays sober to discuss the 2003 Nonfiction book Moneyball.

Pippa Hudson speaks to the Chairperson of the Foschini Group, Michael Lewis, about Foschini celebrating a century as a leading South African brand. Lunch with Pippa Hudson is CapeTalk’s mid-afternoon show. This 2-hour respite from hard news encourages the audience to take the time to explore, taste, read and reflect. The show - presented by former journalist, baker and water sports enthusiast Pippa Hudson - is unashamedly lifestyle driven. Popular features include a daily profile interview #OnTheCouch at 1:10pm. Consumer issues are in the spotlight every Wednesday while the team also unpacks all things related to health, wealth & the environment. Thank you for listening to a podcast from Lunch with Pippa Hudson Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays between 13:00 and 15:00 (SA Time) to Lunch with Pippa Hudson broadcast on CapeTalk https://buff.ly/NnFM3Nk For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/MdSlWEs or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/fDJWe69 Subscribe to the CapeTalk Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/sbvVZD5 Follow us on social media: CapeTalk on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@capetalk CapeTalk on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ CapeTalk on X: https://x.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CapeTalk567 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Week in Ball State Sports is a weekly podcast dedicated to showcasing Ball State student-athletes, coaches, administration, alum, and community members. Voice of the Cardinals Mick Tidrow chats with Director of Athletics Jeff Mitchell, Women's Basketball Head Coach Brady Sallee, and Men's Basketball Head Coach Michael Lewis.

Pablos Holman is a hacker and inventor and the author of Deep Future: Creating Technology that Matters, the indispensable guide to deep tech. Previously, Pablos worked on spaceships at Blue Origin and helped build The Intellectual Ventures Lab to invent a wide variety of breakthroughs. Pablos also hosts the Deep Future Podcast and is managing partner at Deep Future.This episode is brought to you by:Cresset prestigious family office for CEOs, founders, and entrepreneurs: https://cressetcapital.com/timMaui Nui Venison​, delicious, nutrient-dense, and responsible red meat: https://mauinuivenison.com/lp/timAG1 all-in-one nutritional supplement: https://drinkag1.com/timTimestamps:00:00 Intro02:12 The hacker mindset33:05 Nuclear52:35 Autonomous ships58:48 Pragmatic optimism01:00:29 Risk tolerance01:04:50 Blue Origin01:11:59 Zero Effect philosophy01:34:43 China01:43:07 Taiwan01:45:04 AI01:50:42 Salsa02:08:44 Deep tech investing*For show notes and past guests on The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast.For deals from sponsors of The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast-sponsorsSign up for Tim's email newsletter (5-Bullet Friday) at tim.blog/friday.For transcripts of episodes, go to tim.blog/transcripts.Discover Tim's books: tim.blog/books.Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter.com/tferriss Instagram: instagram.com/timferrissYouTube: youtube.com/timferrissFacebook: facebook.com/timferriss LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/timferrissPast guests on The Tim Ferriss Show include Jerry Seinfeld, Hugh Jackman, Dr. Jane Goodall, LeBron James, Kevin Hart, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Esther Perel, Elizabeth Gilbert, Terry Crews, Sia, Yuval Noah Harari, Malcolm Gladwell, Madeleine Albright, Cheryl Strayed, Jim Collins, Mary Karr, Maria Popova, Sam Harris, Michael Phelps, Bob Iger, Edward Norton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Neil Strauss, Ken Burns, Maria Sharapova, Marc Andreessen, Neil Gaiman, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Jocko Willink, Daniel Ek, Kelly Slater, Dr. Peter Attia, Seth Godin, Howard Marks, Dr. Brené Brown, Eric Schmidt, Michael Lewis, Joe Gebbia, Michael Pollan, Dr. Jordan Peterson, Vince Vaughn, Brian Koppelman, Ramit Sethi, Dax Shepard, Tony Robbins, Jim Dethmer, Dan Harris, Ray Dalio, Naval Ravikant, Vitalik Buterin, Elizabeth Lesser, Amanda Palmer, Katie Haun, Sir Richard Branson, Chuck Palahniuk, Arianna Huffington, Reid Hoffman, Bill Burr, Whitney Cummings, Rick Rubin, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Darren Aronofsky, Margaret Atwood, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Dr. Gabor Maté, Anne Lamott, Sarah Silverman, Dr. Andrew Huberman, and many more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Welcome to Season 14 Episode 34 of the ParentingAces Podcast! This is the second in a 3-part series of interviews recorded at the 2025 US Open Junior Championships, and it's a long one! In this installment, Lisa talks with the Boys and Girls Finalists and Champions in both singles and doubles. You will hear from Boys Doubles Finalists, Ben Willwerth and Noah Johnston of the US; Boys Singles Finalist Alexander Vasilev of Bulgaria; Girls Singles Finalist Lea Nilsson of Sweden; Boys Doubles Champions Keaton Hance and Jack Kennedy of the US; Boys Singles Champion Ivan Ivanov of Bulgaria; and Girls Singles Champion and Girls Doubles Finalists Jelene Vandromme of Belgium.The interviews were conducted in the Media Garden outside the US Open Media Center. Lisa was joined by Colette Lewis of ZooTennis.com and Michael Lewis, who both cover junior tennis worldwide. After the singles finals were played, the Boys and Girls champions were both invited into Room 1 inside the Media Center for their interviews. You can find that footage, courtesy of the US Open, here and here. For the draws of each US Open Junior event:Girls Singles: ⁠https://www.usopen.org/en_US/draws/junior-girls-singles.html⁠Girls Doubles: ⁠https://www.usopen.org/en_US/draws/junior-girls-doubles.html⁠Boys Singles: ⁠https://www.usopen.org/en_US/draws/junior-boys-singles.html⁠Boys Doubles: ⁠https://www.usopen.org/en_US/draws/junior-boys-doubles.htmlIn the next installment, you'll hear from some of the parents about their journeys alongside their talented children.As always, I am available for one-to-one consults to work with you as you find your way through the college recruiting process. You can purchase and book online through our website at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://parentingaces.com/shop/category/consult-with-lisa-stone/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.If you're so inclined, please share this – and all our episodes! – with your fellow tennis players, parents, and coaches. You can subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts or via your favorite podcast app. Please be sure to check out our logo'd merch as well as our a la carte personal consultations in our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠online shop⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.CREDITSIntro & Outro Music: Morgan Stone aka STØNEAudio & Video Editing: Lisa Stone

This episode is a solo Q&A session where I answer a bunch of questions. We covered a ton of ground, from personal health protocols to professional frameworks and creative projects. This episode is brought to you by:Eight Sleep Pod Cover 5 sleeping solution for dynamic cooling and heating: EightSleep.com/Tim (use code TIM to get $350 off your very own Pod 5 Ultra.)Monarch Money track, budget, plan, and do more with your money: MonarchMoney.com/Tim (50% off your first year at monarchmoney.com with code TIM)Shopify global commerce platform, providing tools to start, grow, market, and manage a retail business: https://shopify.com/tim (one-dollar-per-month trial period)Timestamps: [00:00:00] Start[00:06:00] Coyote retail distribution challenges and data gathering.[00:09:12] Elbow surgery recovery: sequencing, decongestion, Marc Pro device, peptides, BFR training.[00:16:14] California vs. Austin for builders, mechanical engineers, and tech startups.[00:19:06] Using AI for medical advice workflow (and cross-referencing with professionals).[00:23:51] Current supplement regimen and PAGG/AGG status.[00:31:54] California vs. Texas considerations for aspiring parents.[00:32:48] Saying "No" to good things for "Hell, yes" moments.[00:34:34] Philanthropy lessons learned since starting Saisei Foundation.[00:37:45] Something I've changed my mind about recently: intermittent fasting.[00:42:44] Precious items from childhood I still keep: D&D relics and marine biology books.[00:43:03] Bucket list hike: Glacier National Park.[00:43:42] How the catalytic chaos of publishing The 4-Hour Chef led to launching this podcast.[00:45:52] Bringing delight vs. sixth-gear, high-performance focus.[00:49:05] Thoughts on extended human fasting research from the Soviet era.[00:52:58] Most magical New Mexico experience: Mountain Cloud Zen Center meditation retreat.[00:53:22] Meta skills for the AI era: Hyper-adaptability and world-class learning.[00:54:01] The (real and ideal) future of CØCKPUNCH/Legends of Varlata.[00:59:47] Competitive chess training enhancement: glucose management, intermittent fasting, MCT oil.[01:06:31] Behind-the-scenes projects: Fusion, algae feed additives, meat alternatives.[01:08:32] Countries I wish I had visited earlier, and places I'd still like to see.[01:11:06] "Not yet" vs. "No" in early growth phases.[01:14:14] Post Coyote, do I have any future games in the works?[01:14:46] Over-ear vs. in-ear headphones for podcasting.[01:15:16] What's the uncrowded channel right now?[01:16:17] Recommendations for Dr. Mindy Pelz.[01:16:58] Robert Rodriguez and project juggling.[01:17:24] Fast neutron reactors and the Bugatti of ketones.[01:19:05] Extended family outings and Mahonk Mountain House.[01:20:31] NO BOOK meetup plans?[01:20:54] Parting thoughts.*For show notes and past guests on The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast.For deals from sponsors of The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast-sponsorsSign up for Tim's email newsletter (5-Bullet Friday) at tim.blog/friday.For transcripts of episodes, go to tim.blog/transcripts.Discover Tim's books: tim.blog/books.Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter.com/tferriss Instagram: instagram.com/timferrissYouTube: youtube.com/timferrissFacebook: facebook.com/timferriss LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/timferrissPast guests on The Tim Ferriss Show include Jerry Seinfeld, Hugh Jackman, Dr. Jane Goodall, LeBron James, Kevin Hart, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Esther Perel, Elizabeth Gilbert, Terry Crews, Sia, Yuval Noah Harari, Malcolm Gladwell, Madeleine Albright, Cheryl Strayed, Jim Collins, Mary Karr, Maria Popova, Sam Harris, Michael Phelps, Bob Iger, Edward Norton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Neil Strauss, Ken Burns, Maria Sharapova, Marc Andreessen, Neil Gaiman, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Jocko Willink, Daniel Ek, Kelly Slater, Dr. Peter Attia, Seth Godin, Howard Marks, Dr. Brené Brown, Eric Schmidt, Michael Lewis, Joe Gebbia, Michael Pollan, Dr. Jordan Peterson, Vince Vaughn, Brian Koppelman, Ramit Sethi, Dax Shepard, Tony Robbins, Jim Dethmer, Dan Harris, Ray Dalio, Naval Ravikant, Vitalik Buterin, Elizabeth Lesser, Amanda Palmer, Katie Haun, Sir Richard Branson, Chuck Palahniuk, Arianna Huffington, Reid Hoffman, Bill Burr, Whitney Cummings, Rick Rubin, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Darren Aronofsky, Margaret Atwood, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Dr. Gabor Maté, Anne Lamott, Sarah Silverman, Dr. Andrew Huberman, and many more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Why do some groups spark energy and creativity while others feel draining and tense? Taking on this topic, we sit down with Colin Fisher, the author of The Collective Edge: Unlocking the Secret Power of Groups. We dig into what really sets groups apart from one-on-one partnerships, how social norms and psychological safety shape the way groups function, and why synergy can feel so unpredictable yet incredibly powerful.Colin shares stories and research from his book, busting some common myths about group dynamics, the risks of trying to “sort” people into roles, and how relaunching a team can reset unhealthy patterns. From jazz improvisation to Nobel Prize-winning teams, this conversation is packed with insights and practical takeaways for anyone who wants to get the most out of working and living with others.Listen and Learn: What makes a group different from a one-on-one relationship, and why does that difference matter?Why relying on “sorting hat” thinking like personality tests or rigid categories can limit group success and fuel unhelpful divisionsWhy we often overlook the power of groupsCan you spot the invisible norms shaping your group before they push you toward extreme or unhealthy behaviors?How can bringing in new perspectives or encouraging psychological safety keep your group balanced and open-minded?What is psychological safety?How can groups achieve that magical sense of synergy?Creating high-performing teamsRelaunching groups to reset unhealthy patterns and improve team dynamicsResources:Colin's Book: The Collective Edge: https://bookshop.org/a/30734/9780593715345 Colins Website: https://colinmfisher.com/ Colin's Substack: https://colinmfisher.substack.com/Connect with Colin on Social Media: https://www.linkedin.com/in/colinmfisher?originalSubdomain=ukhttps://www.instagram.com/trumpetfisher/ Undoing Project by Michael Lewis: https://bookshop.org/a/30734/9780393354775 Work, Parent, Thrive by Yael Schonbrun: https://bookshop.org/a/30734/9781611809657 Social Intelligence Test: https://socialintelligence.labinthewild.org/mite/About Colin FisherSince his days as a professional jazz trumpet player, Colin Fisher has been fascinated by group dynamics. As Associate Professor of Organizations and Innovation at University College London's School of Management, Colin's research has uncovered the hidden processes of helping groups and teams in situations requiring creativity, improvisation, and complex decision-making. He has written about group dynamics for media outlets including BBC, Forbes, Harvard Business Review, NPR, and The Times. Related Episodes215. How to Change with Katy Milkman234. The Power of Us with Dominic PackerSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Join our champion program: mark@themomentumcompany.com Attend a Thriving Leader event: https://www.themomentumcompany.com/thrivingleader2025 Instagram: @the.momentum.company LinkedIn: /momentum-companyIn this episode of the Intentional Agribusiness Leader Podcast, Mark Jewell sits down with Brian Sanford, National Sales Manager at smaXtec, to explore what it means to lead with intentionality in the dairy and ag tech industries. From building high-performing sales teams to balancing family life with professional growth, Brian shares insights on staying focused on “dollar productive activities” while cultivating a thriving culture and personal connections.Key TakeawaysDollar Productive ActivityBrian highlights how his early sales training around focusing on dollar-productive activities shaped both his professional and personal life. Whether closing sales or spending time with family, being intentional about high-value actions drives long-term results.CRM & Sales Process DisciplineDespite not being a “detail person,” Brian leans into CRM tools to manage opportunities, categorize customers, and keep sales teams accountable. He stresses that if you can keep all your prospects in your head, you're probably not doing enough activity.Scaling Teams & Building CultureGrowing from 7 to 40 team members in just a few years, Brian explains the importance of cadences—regular meetings, onboarding processes, and tough conversations to ensure cultural fit. Creating a space where passion aligns with purpose is essential for sustained success.Intentional Family TimeFrom playing chess with his son to CrossFit dates with his wife, Brian describes how intentionality extends beyond business into marriage and parenting. Simple, consistent actions—like Mark's “Daily Brief” practice with his wife—can have an outsized impact on relationships.Overcoming Challenges & WinsLeaving a long-term role in feed and forging into tech was one of Brian's toughest decisions, but it led to new opportunities and career wins. He shares stories of closing dairies of vastly different sizes and how objections become lessons when leveraged correctly.Books That Shape LeadershipBrian recommends Unreasonable Hospitality by Will Guidara for transforming customer experience and Moneyball by Michael Lewis as a lesson in data-driven strategy and out-of-the-box thinking.Notable Quotes“What are you doing today that's truly driving toward the results you want?” – Brian Sanford“If you can keep your sales leads in your head, you're probably not doing enough activity.” – Brian Sanford“Sometimes the best thing you can do for culture is have the tough conversation: is this the right fit for you?” – Brian Sanford“Fear of letting go often costs more in money, time, and energy than the tough decision itself.” – Mark JewellAction StepsEvaluate your daily activities: are they “dollar productive”?Create intentional practices in your personal life (like shared activities or daily check-ins).Review your CRM discipline—are you documenting and leveraging your conversations effectively?Don't shy away from tough conversations when scaling a team.Consider reading Unreasonable Hospitality and Moneyball to reframe customer experience and strategic leadership.Listen If You AreA sales leader in agriculture or ag techAn entrepreneur growing a high-performing teamA professional balancing leadership with family lifeSomeone looking to refine both...

Send us a textIn this week's episode of The Wall Street Skinny, Kristen and Jen return to one of their favorite formats: dissecting the finance lessons hidden inside pop culture. This time, they take on Moneyball, a Michael Lewis classic that at first glance looks like a baseball story, but in reality is a masterclass in statistics, valuation, and market inefficiencies. Far more than just a sports narrative, Moneyball is about how disciplined analysis and data-driven decision-making can disrupt entrenched orthodoxy, whether on Wall Street or on the baseball field.Kristen and Jen break down how Billy Beane transformed the Oakland A's into one of the most competitive teams in baseball despite having one of the smallest budgets. From identifying undervalued assets (players) through on-base percentage and walks, to gaming the draft system with the savvy of a hedge fund trader, the discussion highlights how Beane's approach mirrors the strategies of top portfolio managers. The episode draws explicit parallels between constructing a winning baseball roster and building a resilient investment portfolio, making it essential listening for anyone serious about finance.The conversation also zooms out to compare the economics of MLB with the NFL and NBA, where league structures, revenue sharing, and salary caps create vastly different financial dynamics. Along the way, the hosts spotlight themes of efficiency, market psychology, and the importance of independent thinking in both sports and investing. It's the perfect prelude to next week's special episode featuring one of the greatest Major League players of all time.For a 14 day FREE Trial of Macabacus, click HERE For 20% off Deleteme, use the code TWSS or click the link HERE! Our Investment Banking and Private Equity Foundations course is LIVEnow with our M&A course included! Shop our LIBRARY of Self Paced Online Courses HEREJoin the Fixed Income Sales and Trading waitlist HERE Our content is for informational purposes only. You should not construe any such information or other material as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Kevin J. Tracey, MD is president and CEO of the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research at Northwell Health, a pioneer of vagus nerve research and author of the recent book, The Great Nerve: The New Science of the Vagus Nerve and How to Harness Its Healing Reflexes. This episode is brought to you by:Eight Sleep Pod Cover 5 sleeping solution for dynamic cooling and heating: EightSleep.com/Tim (use code TIM to get $350 off your very own Pod 5 Ultra.)AG1 all-in-one nutritional supplement: https://DrinkAG1.com/Tim (1-year supply of Vitamin D plus 5 free AG1 travel packs with your first subscription purchase.)Wealthfront high-yield cash account: https://Wealthfront.com/Tim (Start earning 4.00% APY on your short-term cash until you're ready to invest. And when new clients open an account today, you can get an extra fifty-dollar bonus with a deposit of five hundred dollars or more.) Terms apply. Tim Ferriss receives cash compensation from Wealthfront Brokerage, LLC for advertising and holds a non-controlling equity interest in the corporate parent of Wealthfront Brokerage. See full disclosures here.Timestamps:00:00 Tim's intro: why he dismissed vagus-nerve hype06:34 What the vagus nerve actually is, plus common myths11:31 Breaking news: FDA approval for SetPoint's RA implant + Kelly Owens's turnaround21:11 Inflammation 101: when healing turns harmful31:37 Bioelectronic medicine: from lab insight to real devices55:26 TNF, IL-1, and IL-6: immune drivers and what VNS modulates56:06 Exercise & recovery: vagal signals, IL-6, and adaptation56:30 Cold exposure & breathwork: sympathetic spike, parasympathetic payoff59:04 Chronic inflammation today: prevalence, diagnostics, and uncertainty59:53 Autoimmunity: genes, environment, infections01:01:08 Stress hormones, personality traits, and metabolic fallout01:05:41 VNS tech landscape: implants, focused ultrasound, and what's just TENS01:11:14 Ear maps, revisited: the real science behind auricular stimulation01:27:52 Ulf Andersson: auricular TENS, famotidine, and a depression turnaround01:36:48 Depression & inflammation: where VNS helps (and where it doesn't)01:41:38 Body-brain loop: how inflammation signals ride the vagus nerve01:42:56 Why VNS can lift mood: a working theory01:43:22 Ulf's setup: electrode placement and twice-daily routine01:44:37 Acupuncture, fertility, and plausible vagal links01:47:23 Chronic pain through an inflammation lens01:48:34 Neural “engrams”: how the brain can store inflammatory memories02:02:35 Cervical TENS vs. true VNS: mechanisms and open questions02:12:15 On stage with the Dalai Lama: blue energy and two vagus nerves02:16:55 Closing thoughts: self-care vs. medical devices, and what's next*For show notes and past guests on The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast.For deals from sponsors of The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast-sponsorsSign up for Tim's email newsletter (5-Bullet Friday) at tim.blog/friday.For transcripts of episodes, go to tim.blog/transcripts.Discover Tim's books: tim.blog/books.Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter.com/tferriss Instagram: instagram.com/timferrissYouTube: youtube.com/timferrissFacebook: facebook.com/timferriss LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/timferrissPast guests on The Tim Ferriss Show include Jerry Seinfeld, Hugh Jackman, Dr. Jane Goodall, LeBron James, Kevin Hart, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Esther Perel, Elizabeth Gilbert, Terry Crews, Sia, Yuval Noah Harari, Malcolm Gladwell, Madeleine Albright, Cheryl Strayed, Jim Collins, Mary Karr, Maria Popova, Sam Harris, Michael Phelps, Bob Iger, Edward Norton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Neil Strauss, Ken Burns, Maria Sharapova, Marc Andreessen, Neil Gaiman, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Jocko Willink, Daniel Ek, Kelly Slater, Dr. Peter Attia, Seth Godin, Howard Marks, Dr. Brené Brown, Eric Schmidt, Michael Lewis, Joe Gebbia, Michael Pollan, Dr. Jordan Peterson, Vince Vaughn, Brian Koppelman, Ramit Sethi, Dax Shepard, Tony Robbins, Jim Dethmer, Dan Harris, Ray Dalio, Naval Ravikant, Vitalik Buterin, Elizabeth Lesser, Amanda Palmer, Katie Haun, Sir Richard Branson, Chuck Palahniuk, Arianna Huffington, Reid Hoffman, Bill Burr, Whitney Cummings, Rick Rubin, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Darren Aronofsky, Margaret Atwood, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Dr. Gabor Maté, Anne Lamott, Sarah Silverman, Dr. Andrew Huberman, and many more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Dr. Jeffrey Goldberg is Professor and Chair of Ophthalmology and Director of the Byers Eye Institute at Stanford University, a leading scientist in the development and degeneration of the visual system from eye to brain, and a practicing ophthalmologist and surgeon.This episode is brought to you by: Gamma AI design partner for effortless presentations, websites, social media posts, and more: https://gamma.app (use code TIM at checkout for one month off on their annual plan)Helix Sleep premium mattresses: https://HelixSleep.com/Tim (27% off on all mattress orders)AG1 all-in-one nutritional supplement: https://DrinkAG1.com/Tim (1-year supply of Vitamin D plus 5 free AG1 travel packs with your first subscription purchase.)Timestamps:[00:00:00] Start.[00:05:30] How do you solve a problem like presbyopia?[00:08:34] The athletic benefits of training supranormal (better than 20/20) vision.[00:11:49] Indigenous eye drops and FDA-approved pilocarpine for presbyopia.[00:14:05] Understanding basic eye anatomy.[00:17:27] Exploring AREDS 2, CoQ10, ginkgo, vitamin B3, and other supplements for vision.[00:23:00] Visual training devices and psychedelic-prompted brain plasticity.[00:25:12] Thoughts on visual training effectiveness and motor action requirements.[00:28:29] Concussion rehabilitation and visual perception exercises.[00:32:36] Red light and violet light therapy for myopia and mitochondrial health.[00:36:07] Vision loss correlation with cognitive decline and depression.[00:39:36] Presbyopia progression and psychological dependence on readers.[00:41:15] Cognito Therapeutics headset for Alzheimer's treatment.[00:46:46] Glaucoma basics: neurodegenerative disease and risk factors.[00:48:53] Eye pressure variability and diurnal cycles.[00:50:02] Cannabis effects on eye pressure and compound isolation.[00:51:47] Stem cell research for vision restoration.[00:53:09] Anti-inflammatory effects and immune system role in eye diseases.[00:55:15] Gut microbiome connection to glaucoma in animal models.[00:58:43] Metabolic syndrome and GLP-1 receptor agonists.[01:00:50] Microbiome sharing and future therapeutic possibilities.[01:03:31] Dry eye treatment: preservative-free tears and serum drops.[01:08:43] Vision screening recommendations and UV protection.[01:11:22] Full-spectrum light benefits vs. UV exposure.[01:13:27] Paradigm shifts: irreversible vision loss becoming reversible.[01:17:18] Convergence of neuroscience advances and biotech investment.[01:21:58] Miraculous mitochondria: health, transplants, and three-parent babies.[01:26:24] My family history concerns and metabolic health screening.[01:29:26] Exercise's biggest gain: going from none to some.[01:33:03] Clinical trial participation resources and parting thoughts.*For show notes and past guests on The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast.For deals from sponsors of The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast-sponsorsSign up for Tim's email newsletter (5-Bullet Friday) at tim.blog/friday.For transcripts of episodes, go to tim.blog/transcripts.Discover Tim's books: tim.blog/books.Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter.com/tferriss Instagram: instagram.com/timferrissYouTube: youtube.com/timferrissFacebook: facebook.com/timferriss LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/timferrissPast guests on The Tim Ferriss Show include Jerry Seinfeld, Hugh Jackman, Dr. Jane Goodall, LeBron James, Kevin Hart, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Esther Perel, Elizabeth Gilbert, Terry Crews, Sia, Yuval Noah Harari, Malcolm Gladwell, Madeleine Albright, Cheryl Strayed, Jim Collins, Mary Karr, Maria Popova, Sam Harris, Michael Phelps, Bob Iger, Edward Norton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Neil Strauss, Ken Burns, Maria Sharapova, Marc Andreessen, Neil Gaiman, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Jocko Willink, Daniel Ek, Kelly Slater, Dr. Peter Attia, Seth Godin, Howard Marks, Dr. Brené Brown, Eric Schmidt, Michael Lewis, Joe Gebbia, Michael Pollan, Dr. Jordan Peterson, Vince Vaughn, Brian Koppelman, Ramit Sethi, Dax Shepard, Tony Robbins, Jim Dethmer, Dan Harris, Ray Dalio, Naval Ravikant, Vitalik Buterin, Elizabeth Lesser, Amanda Palmer, Katie Haun, Sir Richard Branson, Chuck Palahniuk, Arianna Huffington, Reid Hoffman, Bill Burr, Whitney Cummings, Rick Rubin, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Darren Aronofsky, Margaret Atwood, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Dr. Gabor Maté, Anne Lamott, Sarah Silverman, Dr. Andrew Huberman, and many more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

"That is the main difference between storytelling for the ear and writing, is that the cost of revisions is so much higher," says Julia Barton.We have Julia Barton. Julia was the third hire, I think I have that right, with Pushkin Industries, the podcast giant founded by Malcolm Gladwell. She's the executive editor of Pushkin and helped develop Revisionist History and Against the Rules, the latter by the journalist and uber best seller Michael Lewis. She, quite literary, edits with her ears.I met Julia briefly at the Power of Narrative Conference in Boston, where she's also a Nieman Fellow, as her talk followed mine. I did not attend her talk and I feel great shame about that, but my battery was in the negative after my talk and I just needed to disappear, the plight of the introvert. I could have learned a LOT since her talk was about the grammar of audio stories. I atoned by inviting her on the podcast to talk about her auditory journey.So Julia has a cool newsletter called Continuous Wave, which is a weekly newsletter exploring the forgotten history of broadcast and all electronic media. It's very specific, which is what you want from a newsletter. She's the founder of RadioWright, she is @bartona104 on IG. We talk about: Editing audio stories and how it's different than print What's the ideal length for a podcast be it narrative or interview The cost of revisions Scratch mixes and dry mixes Animal vs. Mineral editing Picturing the ideal interview in your head And more!Order The Front RunnerNewsletter: Rage Against the AlgorithmWelcome to Pitch ClubShow notes: brendanomeara.com

This is a very special episode for me. My brand-new card game, COYOTE, created in collaboration with Elan Lee and Exploding Kittens, is here. It is available in ~8,000 locations worldwide, including Walmart, Target, Amazon, and many others. Learn more: https://coyotegame.com.This episode is brought to you by: Gamma AI design partner for effortless presentations, websites, social media posts, and more: https://gamma.app (use code TIM at checkout for one month off on their annual plan) Shopify global commerce platform, providing tools to start, grow, market, and manage a retail business: https://shopify.com/tim (one-dollar-per-month trial period)Wealthfront high-yield cash account: https://Wealthfront.com/Tim (Start earning 4.00% APY on your short-term cash until you're ready to invest. And when new clients open an account today, you can get an extra fifty-dollar bonus with a deposit of five hundred dollars or more.) Terms apply. Tim Ferriss receives cash compensation from Wealthfront Brokerage, LLC for advertising and holds a non-controlling equity interest in the corporate parent of Wealthfront Brokerage. See full disclosures here.Timestamps (will be updated): 00:00 Intro 05:21 The Journey to Creating a Game05:51 The Creative Process Behind Coyote17:16 The Importance of Constraints in Creativity35:04 The Toronto Sprint41:02 The Evolution of Coyote: From Concept to Prototype47:36 Game Design Principles and Recommendations51:53 Introduction to 'Don't Shoot the Dog'53:25 Simplifying Game Design58:55 Playtesting and Iteration01:08:10 Finding the Sweet Spot in Game Difficulty01:14:35 The Success of 'Hurry Up Chicken Butt'01:22:26 Testing and Feedback Process01:34:49 Pitching to Big Retailers01:36:19 Designing the Perfect Game Box01:36:31 Testing and Validating Game Designs01:41:23 The Road to Retail Success01:43:51 Keys to a Successful Line Review01:44:29 The Role of Agents and Publishers02:07:56 Crowdfunding and Self-Publishing02:19:56 Understanding Game Publishing Deals02:27:40 Common Pitfalls in Game Packaging and Marketing02:38:39 Navigating Retail and Distribution Challenges02:47:25 Final Thoughts and a Tantalizing Offer*For show notes and past guests on The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast.For deals from sponsors of The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast-sponsorsSign up for Tim's email newsletter (5-Bullet Friday) at tim.blog/friday.For transcripts of episodes, go to tim.blog/transcripts.Discover Tim's books: tim.blog/books.Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter.com/tferriss Instagram: instagram.com/timferrissYouTube: youtube.com/timferrissFacebook: facebook.com/timferriss LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/timferrissPast guests on The Tim Ferriss Show include Jerry Seinfeld, Hugh Jackman, Dr. Jane Goodall, LeBron James, Kevin Hart, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Esther Perel, Elizabeth Gilbert, Terry Crews, Sia, Yuval Noah Harari, Malcolm Gladwell, Madeleine Albright, Cheryl Strayed, Jim Collins, Mary Karr, Maria Popova, Sam Harris, Michael Phelps, Bob Iger, Edward Norton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Neil Strauss, Ken Burns, Maria Sharapova, Marc Andreessen, Neil Gaiman, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Jocko Willink, Daniel Ek, Kelly Slater, Dr. Peter Attia, Seth Godin, Howard Marks, Dr. Brené Brown, Eric Schmidt, Michael Lewis, Joe Gebbia, Michael Pollan, Dr. Jordan Peterson, Vince Vaughn, Brian Koppelman, Ramit Sethi, Dax Shepard, Tony Robbins, Jim Dethmer, Dan Harris, Ray Dalio, Naval Ravikant, Vitalik Buterin, Elizabeth Lesser, Amanda Palmer, Katie Haun, Sir Richard Branson, Chuck Palahniuk, Arianna Huffington, Reid Hoffman, Bill Burr, Whitney Cummings, Rick Rubin, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Darren Aronofsky, Margaret Atwood, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Dr. Gabor Maté, Anne Lamott, Sarah Silverman, Dr. Andrew Huberman, and many more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This Flashback Friday is from episode 370, published last April  7, 2014. Jason Hartman talks about Michael Lewis's new book "Flash Boys" and comments the on the excellent CBS 60 Minutes segment discussing high-frequency trading and how the stock market, according to Michael Lewis and many other experts, is rigged. Then, Jason interviews Dr. Rush from Cenegenics as they discuss the latest breakthroughs in health and longevity science. This interview was originally recorded for Jason's new "Longevity Show" which will launch soon but he wanted to share it in this episode so you can benefit from the ideas right away. Visit www.JasonHartman.com for details. Many experts believe that we are on the verge of major breakthroughs when it comes to increasing lifespan and this has wide ranging implications for, not only our own lives and well-being, but the economy, the real estate market, commodities consumption, wealth creation, government entitlement programs like Social Security and Obamacare but also the outlook for inflation and investing to grow our wealth with income property.     Follow Jason on TWITTER, INSTAGRAM & LINKEDIN Twitter.com/JasonHartmanROI Instagram.com/jasonhartman1/ Linkedin.com/in/jasonhartmaninvestor/ Call our Investment Counselors at: 1-800-HARTMAN (US) or visit: https://www.jasonhartman.com/ Free Class:  Easily get up to $250,000 in funding for real estate, business or anything else: http://JasonHartman.com/Fund CYA Protect Your Assets, Save Taxes & Estate Planning: http://JasonHartman.com/Protect Get wholesale real estate deals for investment or build a great business – Free Course: https://www.jasonhartman.com/deals Special Offer from Ron LeGrand: https://JasonHartman.com/Ron Free Mini-Book on Pandemic Investing: https://www.PandemicInvesting.com  

In this episode, Clay reviews Lee Freeman-Shor's book — The Art of Execution. Freeman-Shor studied 45 of the world's top investors over seven years, revealing why investment success depends far more on execution than stock picking. Through analysis of nearly 1,000 investments, he discovered that even the best investors are wrong half the time, but their success comes from how they handle both winners and losers.  This episode provides essential lessons on the execution strategies that determine long-term investment success. IN THIS EPISODE YOU'LL LEARN: 00:00 - Intro 06:07 - The three types of investor behaviors when facing losing positions and their outcomes. 08:37 - The psychological biases that trap investors in losing positions for years. 11:48 - Why even the world's best investors are wrong 51% of the time. 38:17 - Why selling winners early is more damaging than holding losers too long. 56:25 - How concentration beats diversification for generating superior long-term returns. 58:42 - Why execution matters more than stock picking for investment success. 01:00:36 - The five-point winner's checklist for executing investment strategies like top performers. And so much more! Disclaimer: Slight discrepancies in the timestamps may occur due to podcast platform differences. BOOKS AND RESOURCES Join Clay and a select group of passionate value investors for a retreat in Big Sky, Montana. Learn more ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Join the exclusive ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TIP Mastermind Community⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to engage in meaningful stock investing discussions with Stig, Clay, Kyle, and the other community members. Lee Freeman-Shor's book: The Art of Execution. Michael Lewis' book: Moneyball. The Intrinsic Value Podcast. Shawn and Daniel's episode on Reddit. Related Episode: TIP709: The Art of Long-Term Investing w/ Francois Rochon. Follow Clay on X and LinkedIn. Check out all the books mentioned and discussed in our podcast episodes ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Enjoy ad-free episodes when you subscribe to our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Premium Feed⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. NEW TO THE SHOW? Get smarter about valuing businesses in just a few minutes each week through our newsletter, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The Intrinsic Value Newsletter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Check out our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠We Study Billionaires Starter Packs⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Follow our official social media accounts: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠X (Twitter)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Browse through all our episodes (complete with transcripts) ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Try our tool for picking stock winners and managing our portfolios: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TIP Finance Tool⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Enjoy exclusive perks from our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠favorite Apps and Services⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn how to better start, manage, and grow your business with the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠best business podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. SPONSORS Support our free podcast by supporting our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠sponsors⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠: ⁠SimpleMining⁠ ⁠Hardblock⁠ ⁠AnchorWatch⁠ ⁠Human Rights Foundation⁠ ⁠Unchained⁠ ⁠Vanta⁠ ⁠Shopify⁠ ⁠Onramp HELP US OUT! Help us reach new listeners by leaving us a ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠rating and review⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! It takes less than 30 seconds, and really helps our show grow, which allows us to bring on even better guests for you all! Thank you – we really appreciate it! Support our show by becoming a premium member! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://theinvestorspodcastnetwork.supportingcast.fm⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://theinvestorspodcastnetwork.supportingcast.fm

In this special episode, my friend—and fan-favorite guest—Dr. Peter Attia takes the mic as guest host. Peter sits down with legendary trader John Arnold, widely considered the greatest energy trader of all time. Today, through his foundation Arnold Ventures, John applies the same rigorous thinking to some of America's toughest social challenges—criminal justice reform, healthcare policy, and K–12 education, to name just a few. This interview originally aired on Peter's excellent podcast The Drive. You can check it out at PeterAttiaMD.com, or subscribe to The Drive wherever you get your podcasts.This episode is brought to you by:Vanta trusted compliance and security platform: https://vanta.com/tim ($1000 off)Eight Sleep Pod Cover 5 sleeping solution for dynamic cooling and heating: EightSleep.com/Tim (use code TIM to get $350 off your very own Pod 5 Ultra.)Wealthfront high-yield cash account: https://Wealthfront.com/Tim (Start earning 4.00% APY on your short-term cash until you're ready to invest. And when new clients open an account today, you can get an extra fifty-dollar bonus with a deposit of five hundred dollars or more.) Terms apply. Tim Ferriss receives cash compensation from Wealthfront Brokerage, LLC for advertising and holds a non-controlling equity interest in the corporate parent of Wealthfront Brokerage. See full disclosures here.Timestamps:[00:00:00] Start.[00:05:37] Peter Attia's intro: who is John Arnold?[00:08:38] John's background, upbringing, and early entrepreneurial tendencies.[00:21:16] John's time and rise at Enron.[00:33:40] Characteristics that made John an exceptional natural gas trader and how they translate to his philanthropic work.[00:41:10] The collapse of Enron.[00:46:46] The success of John's hedge fund, and his early interest in philanthropy.[01:02:03] The infamous 2006 trade that brought down Amaranth Advisors.[01:08:28] John's analytical prowess and emphasis on fundamentals.[01:15:13] The decision to become a full-time philanthropist and the founding of Arnold Ventures.[01:25:03] Education — John's quest to fundamentally change K-12 education.[01:30:36] Strategic philanthropy — preventing problems by attacking root causes and creating structural change.[01:37:50] The criminal justice system — structural changes needed to address mass incarceration, policing practices, and recidivism.[01:55:07] Re-imagining prisons to reduce recidivism.[02:02:27] US health care policy — John's focus on drug prices, and the severe consequences of not making system changes.[02:20:00] Climate change — the bipartisan role of John's foundation.[02:23:52] Advice for young adults interested in philanthropy.[02:30:52] Parting thoughts.*For show notes and past guests on The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast.For deals from sponsors of The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast-sponsorsSign up for Tim's email newsletter (5-Bullet Friday) at tim.blog/friday.For transcripts of episodes, go to tim.blog/transcripts.Discover Tim's books: tim.blog/books.Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter.com/tferriss Instagram: instagram.com/timferrissYouTube: youtube.com/timferrissFacebook: facebook.com/timferriss LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/timferrissPast guests on The Tim Ferriss Show include Jerry Seinfeld, Hugh Jackman, Dr. Jane Goodall, LeBron James, Kevin Hart, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Esther Perel, Elizabeth Gilbert, Terry Crews, Sia, Yuval Noah Harari, Malcolm Gladwell, Madeleine Albright, Cheryl Strayed, Jim Collins, Mary Karr, Maria Popova, Sam Harris, Michael Phelps, Bob Iger, Edward Norton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Neil Strauss, Ken Burns, Maria Sharapova, Marc Andreessen, Neil Gaiman, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Jocko Willink, Daniel Ek, Kelly Slater, Dr. Peter Attia, Seth Godin, Howard Marks, Dr. Brené Brown, Eric Schmidt, Michael Lewis, Joe Gebbia, Michael Pollan, Dr. Jordan Peterson, Vince Vaughn, Brian Koppelman, Ramit Sethi, Dax Shepard, Tony Robbins, Jim Dethmer, Dan Harris, Ray Dalio, Naval Ravikant, Vitalik Buterin, Elizabeth Lesser, Amanda Palmer, Katie Haun, Sir Richard Branson, Chuck Palahniuk, Arianna Huffington, Reid Hoffman, Bill Burr, Whitney Cummings, Rick Rubin, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Darren Aronofsky, Margaret Atwood, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Dr. Gabor Maté, Anne Lamott, Sarah Silverman, Dr. Andrew Huberman, and many more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Charlie Houpert is the co-founder of Charisma on Command, a company that helps people develop confidence, charisma, and strong social skills. Originally launched as a 4-Hour Workweek-inspired “muse,” it has since grown into one of the largest platforms for social skills and confidence training, with more than 10 million YouTube subscribers worldwide and more than a billion views across its channels in six languages. His flagship course, Charisma University, has guided more than 30,000 members through practical steps to become more magnetic.This episode is brought to you by: Patagonia's call-to-action to protect America's public lands. Go to Patagonia.com/Tim to learn more and act now. Monarch Money track, budget, plan, and do more with your money: MonarchMoney.com/Tim (50% off your first year at monarchmoney.com with code TIM)LinkedIn Jobs recruitment platform with 1B+ users: https://linkedin.com/tim (post your job for free)*Timestamps: [00:00:00] Start.[00:06:44] Charlie meets the boogeyman (me).[00:10:11] Why defaulting to management consulting after college felt like daily self-betrayal.[00:13:21] Leaping into parkour training via DVD as a first business attempt.[00:15:45] Moonlighting vs. burning-ships entrepreneurship.[00:16:54] Negotiating remote work with a 90% raise.[00:21:22] Charlie moves to New York and kicks off KickAss Academy.[00:22:16] Airbnb survival tactics while living in a 396 sq. ft. apartment.[00:23:26] Using the fear-setting exercise and other disaster-mitigation strategies.[00:26:11] Charlie's first blog post and crossing the publishing Rubicon.[00:28:26] How Charlie's first in-person class prompted an accidental business model.[00:34:21] 10 go-getters make an ambitious move to Brazil.[00:32:14] The daily growth whiteboard system.[00:37:58] How a harsh Tucker Max consultation galvanized the rebranding to Charisma on Command.[00:44:39] From financial downturn to pre-selling a course for $12,500.[00:50:44] Finally making enough money to chase summer in six-to-eight-month increments.[00:52:00] Enjoying the sustainable benefits of creating timeless content.[00:54:05] How Bill Clinton seduced 7,000 people into following Charlie on YouTube.[00:55:46] How Greg McKeown's Essentialism helped solve Charlie's “Herbie” problem.[00:58:26] Evolving funnel flow and fame-jacking.[01:03:46] YouTube algorithm changes, short-form content, and maintaining audience trust for the long term.[01:10:58] Why I still create this podcast.[01:19:30] The dangers of succumbing entirely to audience expectation over authenticity.[01:21:42] The catalysts that led to time off, an ayahuasca retreat, and a seven-year transformation process.[01:30:26] Making the transition from 50/50 partner to sole owner.[01:35:16] Recommended reading: Six Pillars of Self-Esteem by Nathaniel Branden[01:37:32] The influence of The Last Psychiatrist blog.[01:41:46] Jay Abraham coaching: “Make it good enough for Tim Ferriss.”[01:43:52] How testimonials added a 4x conversion lift.[01:44:31] Coming to an agreement with the co-founder.[01:47:20] Joe Hudson and the Art of Accomplishment.[01:51:57] Why I stand by The 4-Hour Workweek without further revision, warts and all.[01:55:06] Exercising gratitude even when receiving praise is difficult.[01:59:15] Relationship with earlier work: video vs. writing.[02:02:05] Don't miss “Filling the Void.”[02:03:56] More recommended reading.[02:06:43] Improv & Dragons.[02:08:06] Charlie's billboard: “Don't think, feel.”[02:08:57] Parting thoughts.*For show notes and past guests on The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast.For deals from sponsors of The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast-sponsorsSign up for Tim's email newsletter (5-Bullet Friday) at tim.blog/friday.For transcripts of episodes, go to tim.blog/transcripts.Discover Tim's books: tim.blog/books.Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter.com/tferriss Instagram: instagram.com/timferrissYouTube: youtube.com/timferrissFacebook: facebook.com/timferriss LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/timferrissPast guests on The Tim Ferriss Show include Jerry Seinfeld, Hugh Jackman, Dr. Jane Goodall, LeBron James, Kevin Hart, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Esther Perel, Elizabeth Gilbert, Terry Crews, Sia, Yuval Noah Harari, Malcolm Gladwell, Madeleine Albright, Cheryl Strayed, Jim Collins, Mary Karr, Maria Popova, Sam Harris, Michael Phelps, Bob Iger, Edward Norton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Neil Strauss, Ken Burns, Maria Sharapova, Marc Andreessen, Neil Gaiman, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Jocko Willink, Daniel Ek, Kelly Slater, Dr. Peter Attia, Seth Godin, Howard Marks, Dr. Brené Brown, Eric Schmidt, Michael Lewis, Joe Gebbia, Michael Pollan, Dr. Jordan Peterson, Vince Vaughn, Brian Koppelman, Ramit Sethi, Dax Shepard, Tony Robbins, Jim Dethmer, Dan Harris, Ray Dalio, Naval Ravikant, Vitalik Buterin, Elizabeth Lesser, Amanda Palmer, Katie Haun, Sir Richard Branson, Chuck Palahniuk, Arianna Huffington, Reid Hoffman, Bill Burr, Whitney Cummings, Rick Rubin, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Darren Aronofsky, Margaret Atwood, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Dr. Gabor Maté, Anne Lamott, Sarah Silverman, Dr. Andrew Huberman, and many more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Nsima Inyang (@nsimainyang) is a strength athlete, movement coach, and co-host of Mark Bell's Power Project, one of the top fitness podcasts in the world. He is also one of the most freakishly athletic humans I've ever met. He's a black belt in Brazilian jiu-jitsu, a professional natural bodybuilder (placed top five in the world), and an elite-level powerlifter (750-plus-pound deadlift, etc.)—but what sets him apart is how he blends all those worlds with unconventional training tools like kettlebells, maces, sandbags, and rope flow. Nsima is also the founder of The Stronger Human, a growing online community focused on strength, movement, and resilience.This episode is brought to you by:Pique premium pu'er tea crystals: https://piquelife.com/tim (20% off—valid for the lifetime of your subscription—plus a free Starter Kit, which includes a rechargeable frother and glass beaker)Momentous high-quality supplements: https://livemomentous.com/tim (code TIM for up to 35% off)Eight Sleep Pod Cover 5 sleeping solution for dynamic cooling and heating: EightSleep.com/Tim (use code TIM to get $350 off your very own Pod 5 Ultra.)*Watch the interview on YouTube: https://youtu.be/mLGqrlxofXANsima's YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/nsimaInyangThe Stronger Human: https://www.skool.com/thestrongerhuman/aboutThe Stronger Human Store: https://thestrongerhuman.store/*For show notes and past guests on The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast.For deals from sponsors of The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast-sponsorsSign up for Tim's email newsletter (5-Bullet Friday) at tim.blog/friday.For transcripts of episodes, go to tim.blog/transcripts.Discover Tim's books: tim.blog/books.Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter.com/tferriss Instagram: instagram.com/timferrissYouTube: youtube.com/timferrissFacebook: facebook.com/timferriss LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/timferrissPast guests on The Tim Ferriss Show include Jerry Seinfeld, Hugh Jackman, Dr. Jane Goodall, LeBron James, Kevin Hart, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Esther Perel, Elizabeth Gilbert, Terry Crews, Sia, Yuval Noah Harari, Malcolm Gladwell, Madeleine Albright, Cheryl Strayed, Jim Collins, Mary Karr, Maria Popova, Sam Harris, Michael Phelps, Bob Iger, Edward Norton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Neil Strauss, Ken Burns, Maria Sharapova, Marc Andreessen, Neil Gaiman, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Jocko Willink, Daniel Ek, Kelly Slater, Dr. Peter Attia, Seth Godin, Howard Marks, Dr. Brené Brown, Eric Schmidt, Michael Lewis, Joe Gebbia, Michael Pollan, Dr. Jordan Peterson, Vince Vaughn, Brian Koppelman, Ramit Sethi, Dax Shepard, Tony Robbins, Jim Dethmer, Dan Harris, Ray Dalio, Naval Ravikant, Vitalik Buterin, Elizabeth Lesser, Amanda Palmer, Katie Haun, Sir Richard Branson, Chuck Palahniuk, Arianna Huffington, Reid Hoffman, Bill Burr, Whitney Cummings, Rick Rubin, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Darren Aronofsky, Margaret Atwood, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Dr. Gabor Maté, Anne Lamott, Sarah Silverman, Dr. Andrew Huberman, and many more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Chris Hutchins is the creator and host of All the Hacks, a podcast that helps people upgrade their life, money, and travel. He previously founded Grove (acquired by Wealthfront) and Milk (acquired by Google), led New Product Strategy at Wealthfront, and was a Partner at Google Ventures. Most importantly, he is the person Kevin Rose and I call if we want to figure how to get a better deal on just about anything in the world, or if we just want to learn about his latest hijinks doing things like getting $200 flights to Japan, running gold pseudo-arbitrage at retail, or dirt-cheap trips to Bora Bora. We cover all three and more in this conversation.Sponsors:Shopify global commerce platform, providing tools to start, grow, market, and manage a retail business: https://shopify.com/tim (one-dollar-per-month trial period)Ramp easy-to-use corporate cards, bill payments, accounting, and more: https://ramp.com/tim (Get $250 when you join Ramp)AG1 all-in-one nutritional supplement: https://DrinkAG1.com/Tim (1-year supply of Vitamin D (and 5 free AG1 travel packs) with your first subscription purchase.)*For show notes and past guests on The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast.For deals from sponsors of The Tim Ferriss Show, please visit tim.blog/podcast-sponsorsSign up for Tim's email newsletter (5-Bullet Friday) at tim.blog/friday.For transcripts of episodes, go to tim.blog/transcripts.Discover Tim's books: tim.blog/books.Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter.com/tferriss Instagram: instagram.com/timferrissYouTube: youtube.com/timferrissFacebook: facebook.com/timferriss LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/timferrissPast guests on The Tim Ferriss Show include Jerry Seinfeld, Hugh Jackman, Dr. Jane Goodall, LeBron James, Kevin Hart, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Esther Perel, Elizabeth Gilbert, Terry Crews, Sia, Yuval Noah Harari, Malcolm Gladwell, Madeleine Albright, Cheryl Strayed, Jim Collins, Mary Karr, Maria Popova, Sam Harris, Michael Phelps, Bob Iger, Edward Norton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Neil Strauss, Ken Burns, Maria Sharapova, Marc Andreessen, Neil Gaiman, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Jocko Willink, Daniel Ek, Kelly Slater, Dr. Peter Attia, Seth Godin, Howard Marks, Dr. Brené Brown, Eric Schmidt, Michael Lewis, Joe Gebbia, Michael Pollan, Dr. Jordan Peterson, Vince Vaughn, Brian Koppelman, Ramit Sethi, Dax Shepard, Tony Robbins, Jim Dethmer, Dan Harris, Ray Dalio, Naval Ravikant, Vitalik Buterin, Elizabeth Lesser, Amanda Palmer, Katie Haun, Sir Richard Branson, Chuck Palahniuk, Arianna Huffington, Reid Hoffman, Bill Burr, Whitney Cummings, Rick Rubin, Dr. Vivek Murthy, Darren Aronofsky, Margaret Atwood, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Dr. Gabor Maté, Anne Lamott, Sarah Silverman, Dr. Andrew Huberman, and many more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.