Chinese Stock Scam, Outdated 401(k)s, S&P 500 Risk, Investment Income Tax, Political ETFs, Tariff Confusion, Second-Biggest Trade Gap, Todays Cars, Rising Card Fees & Silver vs Gold

Investors have a false sense of safety in the stock market A psychologist by the name of Gerald Wilde came up with the term homeostatic years ago and I believe this is totally relevant in today's market. It essentially means that when the environment comes to feel safer, people’s behavior becomes riskier. A great example he used was people will probably drive faster in a big SUV than in a little tin can of a car. Relating it to today's market, investors seem to feel safer because of the long bull market. As the market continues to rise in the longer term, investors' appetite for risk increases. They do not realize that their behavior is risky because they have a false sense that the market will not drop. While the risk of their investments is high, because of the confirmation day after day of the market going up, they don’t feel that they are taking any risk. From my perspective, the risk just seems like it continues to climb as people chase quick returns. AS an example, out of 672 launches of new exchange-traded funds so far this year, according to FactSet, 28% are tied to a single stock and 25% are leveraged and at least three seek to double the daily gains or losses of cryptocurrencies! You may not want to believe it, but there is a lot of risk in markets today and this could all end very poorly for those gambling in the market. Ultimately, there are two different types of investors, one is the long-term investor who is investing to build long-term wealth, while the other investor is in it for entertainment and they enjoy the roller coaster ride with the thrill of gains and the pain of the losses. This is a lot like the addiction that gamblers get. The difference is that long-term investors have odds of nearly 100% when it comes to making money over the long-term. Unfortunately, for those who do a lot of trading and take the higher risk road, well the odds of making money over the long term is closer to zero. If you check the prices of your stocks, I would say much more than a few times a year, you’re probably in it for the entertainment and will probably make poor emotional decisions when difficult times come, and they will! IPOs look hot, don’t touch them, you’ll get burned! So far in 2025 there have been over 150 IPOs which if you’re not familiar with the term, it stands for initial public offering. These IPOs have raised about $29 billion so far this year and it is a nice increase in the total number of IPOs when compared to recent years. At this time last year, just 99 IPOs had occurred and in 2023 it was even worse at 76. The exciting news reads “first day gains are averaging 26%, which is the best since 2020”, but it’s important to understand that those eye popping first day gains are not based off of the first public trade but rather are gains on shares that were issued prior to heading to the market. Unfortunately, you as an investor have little to no chance of getting those shares as you generally see these go to your institutional investors and high net worth clients of Fidelity, Charles Schwab and other big firms. So, if you can’t get the shares before they begin trading is it worth riding the bandwagon? I’m going to explain why the answer is a solid no. First off look at an ETF called Renaissance IPO (IPO). Back in 2021 it hit a high around $75 a share and by 2023 it fell to about $25 a share. With the recent frenzy in IPOs, it has climbed back above 50, but that is still a disappointing return to say the least. Also, this means any investors who bought it in 2021 through 2022 are still underwater. There is generally a ton of volatility around these trades considering when companies do an initial public offering, they’re only releasing 15 to 20% of their equity many times and they often come with an initial lockup period of around 180 days, which really reduces the number of shares that are trading. Also, make no mistake that the investment bank that is issuing those shares has an obligation to try to get the opening price as high as possible to get full value for their clients. If it’s an oversubscribed IPO, the demand will be higher than the supply, and the price will rise. Unfortunately, that means the company left money on the table that they could’ve put in their pockets rather than letting investors benefit from those gains. I believe investing in IPOs is a high-risk game, not to be played with by the average investor. A good example is Newsmax, which was a hot IPO with an issuing price of $10 a share that very quickly went to $265, as of today it is trading around $13 a share. A lot of people have lost their shirts, and I doubt they will get them back. To me the safer play to benefit from the increased number of IPOs is the banks handling this process considering they should be seeing a nice increase in profits. This would include your large players like JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs. As of now there are other highly anticipated IPOs that could occur over the next year with names like robo-advisor Wealthfront, crypto firm Grayscale Investments, financial-technology firm Stripe, and sports apparel and betting company Fanatics all potentially hitting the public market. What's going on with the real estate market? This week we got both existing and new home sales for the month of August and there was a stark difference in the reports. The headline number for new home sales showed an increase of 15.4% compared to last year, while existing home sales were up just 1.8% over that timeframe. The first important consideration here is new home sales can be extremely volatile on a month-to-month basis, and they make up a smaller portion of overall sales. Pre-pandemic, new home sales were normally around 10% of total sales, but with the limited listings in recent years they have been closer to 30% of all sales. One other reason for the large difference is how the reports are calculated. New home sales look at people that were out shopping and signing deals in August, while existing home sales look at closings in the month, which means these were deals that were signed in June or July. Interest rates may have played a factor here as rates for the 30-year fixed mortgage were around 6.7-6.8% in June and July vs around 6.5-6.6% in August. This also doesn't include the fact that many homebuilders offer lower rates to entice buyers. The supply of new homes also looks much better for buyers considering there was a 7.4-month supply in August and that was down from a nine-month supply in July. This compares to a 4.6-month supply for existing homes in the month of August. Homebuilders have a much larger need to move homes quickly as many of them don't want them sitting on their balance sheet as that can create risks. This compares to the average home seller that may not have a need to sell their home and when looking at the crazy market from just a couple years ago, I believe many of them have unrealistic expectations for how much their homes are worth and how fast the property will sell. Homes are staying on the market longer at around 31 days on average, which compares to 26 days last year. These factors have led sellers to either pull their listing or even delay listing in the first place. One similarity between the two reports was the annual price appreciation with the median price on existing home sales climbing 2% to $422,600 and the price on new home sales climbing 1.9% to $413,500. These high prices and higher mortgage rates have continued to impact the first-time buyer as their share in the existing home sale market was near historical lows at 28%. With everything considered here I still believe the housing market will remain on a slow upward trajectory with limited supply continuing to battle against affordability concerns. Financial Planning: Insurance Vs Investments When building a financial plan, it’s important to recognize that investments and insurance serve very different purposes. Insurance is designed to protect against loss. Life insurance provides for your family if you pass away, health insurance shields you from crushing medical bills, and auto insurance protects you financially from accidents or damage. You pay a known cost, the premium, to avoid a potentially devastating unknown cost, which makes insurance a valuable safety net. Investments, on the other hand, are meant to grow wealth and produce income. Stocks, bonds, and real estate help your money work for you overtime. While they can experience short-term volatility and uncertainty, most high-quality investments are built on solid foundations and have historically rewarded patience; those who can tolerate the ups and downs are almost guaranteed to come out ahead in the long run. The confusion comes when insurance products, like permanent life policies or annuities, are marketed as investments. While they may promise guarantees or cash value, they usually come with high fees, low returns, limited flexibility, and lots of fine print, making them poor substitutes for true investments. That doesn’t mean insurance is bad, it simply means it works best when used for protection, not growth. The healthiest financial plans keep the roles clear: use insurance to protect and use investments to build wealth. Mixing the two often results in an expensive compromise that doesn’t perform well on either front. Should you be able to do a sleepover at the house before you buy it? Buying a house is a big commitment and recently some buyers have asked sellers if they can stay overnight for one night if not longer. The argument is you get to test drive a car before you buy it, why can't you do the same thing when you're buying a home, which is your biggest purchase. Some buyers and some agents are open to the concept, others are not. It appears to be trending with your higher price homes, but even some mid-price homes see buyers make this special request to "test drive" the house. It is up to the seller and sometimes they will allow it if the buyer is willing to pay a reasonable rent and if they have the renter's insurance to cover any liabilities. The concept is unconventional but is catching on and can really make the buyer very comfortable with their buying decision. Sellers have to be careful of all the liability that can come with this process and the person that is buying the house should be checked out thoroughly before you let them stay in your house. The real estate market is changing, I remember just a few years ago during Covid there were people buying houses sight unseen, which is very dangerous. Now with a slowing real estate market, it is more friendly to buyers, and they can ask for and many times get extra things such as staying in the home to make sure it fits their needs. Adult children living at home could be hurting your retirement The most recent data from 2023 shows 18% of adults ages 25 to 34 years old were still living at home with their parents. Another survey by the American Association of Retired Persons, also known as AARP, found that 75% of parents were still providing some form of financial support to at least one adult. The average amount of support per year was $7000. If you notice, that is the same dollar amount as the contribution limit for an IRA for your retirement and just think how nicely that will compound in the years to come. This is putting a larger burden on people in their 50s or 60s since many people had children later in their lives as opposed to back 50 years ago when people had children in their 20s. For the first time on record, there are more babies born to a woman over 40 at 4.1% of all births than to teenagers which was 4% of all births. If you’re going to have a baby in your 40s, that child will still be living with you in your 50s and maybe even your 60s. So, what can parents do about it? Be upfront with your children about your situation. In most cases, kids don’t understand about saving for retirement and they probably have no idea about your current financial situation. Let them know that you need to save for retirement because you don’t want to be a burden on them when they get older and there’s no reason why they can’t chip in financially as part of the household. Even if you only charge them $500 a month to help out, that is $6000 a year that you can contribute to your retirement account. A mistake that people make is thinking it’s not a problem and they can work forever but sometimes your health issues prevent you from working into your 70s. You need to be realistic about how long you can work. It is also very important to invest wisely with good investments because you’ll probably need more than you think when you retire. The reality is when you hit retirement there is not much help and your own children may be struggling with their family. I always say prepare for the worst and hope for the best. Are corporate managers being overworked? At first glance, if you’re not a manager, you might think they get paid more and they should work more. Which is true to a certain degree but unfortunately in the long term the business and the employees suffer if managers are overworked. A research firm Gartner showed that in 2017, one manager managed roughly five employees but data from 2023 show they were managing 15 employees. Corporate boards and upper management view less managers and employees as a sign of company strength as they can make more money with less people. But the reality is when a manager has more people to manage, they are unable to spend as much time with each employee, which means they have to cut out things such as helping employees with career goals, building a relationship with that employee or helping with productivity in their jobs. Some managers are using AI tools that will handle routine approvals and not spending any time with employees going over important items. Going back to 1950, Peter Drucker came up with and developed a management style where managers set objectives, motivated workers and helped develop them throughout their careers. Managers were not just supervisors but would build trust to inspire employees and help them understand their sense of purpose with the company they were working at. The theory worked very well for nearly 70 years, but now many employees feel less engaged because they don’t get feedback from their managers. In a recent Gallup survey, more than 50% of employees don’t really know what is expected of them. Across US public companies, the number of managers has dropped by over 6% in just the last three years. This may be great for the bottom line; however, I think long-term it will hurt productivity as employees become lost in the corporation or move on to another job because there’s no connection to the company or a manager. The Fed is cutting interest rates, and you may think what a great time to refi your mortgage. Not so fast.... Before you call your mortgage broker to refinance your mortgage it’s important to understand the difference between the federal reserve cutting rates, which is the cost of overnight money versus mortgage rates, which generally tracks the yield on 10-year treasuries. A good example was one year ago in September 2024 when the Federal Reserve began cutting interest rates. At that time the 30-year mortgage was about 6.2%, but even as the Federal Reserve cut rates three times over the next few months, mortgage rates climbed above 7%. So many people were able to refinance their mortgages when rates were low so many people do not stand to even benefit from lower mortgage rates. If your rate is below 6% you likely would not see any benefit from the current rate environment, but if your rate is above 7%, it may be worth exploring. Just make sure you understand all the costs associated with refinancing and I would again make sure you don't pay points at this time. If the broker is quoting you a rate in the 5's, that is likely too good to be true, and you are likely paying unnecessary costs. What does benefit from the Federal Reserve reduction in short-term rates are what are known as HELOCs, which are home equity lines of credit. Rates still remain somewhat high on these products, but with the reduction it may be tempting to tap that credit line. I always tell people to be careful doing so, because if rates go up again your interest costs will also rise. It generally makes sense to use these lines to pay off other high interest debt or for home improvement expenses. The big thing here is you need to remain disciplined and have a plan on how you will repay the credit line. Credit card rates also closely follow the Federal Reserve rates, and while a decline in the APR may be nice, borrowing with credit cards long term should be avoided as the cost of debt will still remain high on these products. How to get more out of your short-term money with the Federal Reserve cutting interest rates If you’ve been lazy with your investments and have just been throwing a lot of money into money markets or high yield savings accounts that were paying around 4%, you are going to start seeing those yields drop due to the Fed rate cuts. The question is what should you do now? The good news is you’ve got a few weeks before it begins to hit your money markets. First off, ask yourself a question, do I really need that much liquid in a money market? It is generally advised to have somewhere between 3 to 6 months in easily accessible funds, but ultimately it really depends on your situation. One area investors can look at for this short-term money is short-term bond funds, which can be found as mutual funds or ETFs. The yields will be slightly higher between 4.1 to 4.3% and your yield will stay higher for longer since those bonds don't all mature at once and are spread out over varying time periods, but as rates continue to fall these rates will also fall. As bonds mature those funds will likely be used to repurchase other bonds at now lower interest rates. Since you are going out a little further on the yield curve, the rates should still be more promising than the money market accounts. The big thing you need to understand here is the duration risk and the further you go out on the yield curve, the larger the impact rising/declining rates have on the price of the bonds. If it is truly for short term money, I wouldn't use any ETF or mutual fund that has maturities that go out more than a few years. Be sure to comb through all your accounts, like your checking accounts and your brokerage accounts as sometimes you may not realize how much you have sitting there, earning very little for you. Make sure you move your liquid funds to either a higher yielding money market or again the short-term funds and then longer-term monies should be utilized for investing. You can also search the Internet for high-yield savings accounts but be sure to read the fine print that you’re not getting a teaser rate and then next month you’ve got to do the process all over again. Also, you may want to look at some financial institutions that have CDs from 6 to 12 months. Some financial institutions may need to increase their capital and will pay slightly higher rates to get that money into their institution. Be careful not to go over the FDIC insurance limit just in case that institution was to fold. Some of them will even offer a CD for a certain timeframe but may have a special provision to get the money out without a penalty. Again, be careful of being enticed into long-term or higher yielding bonds that have greater risk due to the rating and duration. If the yield sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Going to an elite college does not guarantee you’ll be in the top 1% of earners in the United States I believe parents and some high school counselors put way too much weight on kids going to elite colleges like Harvard or any one of the Ivy League schools. It seems like both parents and counselors feel that going to an elite college guarantees success and will get you into the top 1% of earners in the country. That current threshold comes with earnings of around $700,000 a year. Yes, going to an Ivy League school does give one a slight advantage, but if you look at the numbers such as a study that looked at the CEOs of the Fortune 500 companies, only 34 of the CEOs came from elite colleges. Both Duke University and Brown University had three graduates on the list, but so did Ball State, Louisiana State and San Diego State University along with many other similar schools that would be viewed as less prestigious. David Doming, who is an economist at the Harvard Kennedy School, did a study on the differences between those students attending an Ivy League school versus selective public flagship schools like Ohio State, UCLA and the University of Texas. What he discovered was in the beginning of their careers those that attended an elite college did outperform those who did not. They were 60% more likely to have earnings in the top 1% and they were three times as likely to work for a prestigious employer, such as a top law firm or consulting firm, but when looking at the average income of Ivy league graduates it was pretty close to the public flagship schools. It was also revealed that not all graduates were chasing a job on Wall Street, some big consulting firm, or the most recent Silicon Valley startup. Most students, when they graduated, stayed close to where they either grew up or graduated from. It was also pointed out that employers generally want employees who remain with them for a while, and sometimes when you have a student that comes too far from home or where they graduated from, they end up leaving. What generally doesn’t make the headlines is the number of students who work hard and outperform the elite school graduates that sometimes might feel they don’t have to work as hard when they get to the interview or in the job. If you look at most successful people that are in the top 1%, the one thing they generally have in common is they do not just work the basic 9-5 and put in 40 hours a week. Not everyone wants to work 50 to 70 hours a week, but if you love what you do and you have the discipline you may not need that degree from Cornell University to be in the top 1% of earners.

Retail sales are still surprisingly strong Although the labor market has been softening and consumers say they are worried about inflation, people are still spending money. August retail sales were up 5% compared to last year and if the annual decline of 0.7% in gasoline stations was excluded, sales would have increased 5.5% compared to last August. Strength was broad based in the report and outside of gasoline stations the only other major categories that saw declines were department stores where sales were down 1% and building material & garden equipment & supplies dealers, which fell 2.3%. Non-store retailers continued to be a dominant category as sales climbed 10.1% and food services and drinking places still saw impressive growth of 6.5%. It's because of reports like this that I worry the Fed may make a mistake if they cut rates too quickly. If they overstep, they run the risk of overheating the economy and putting added pressure on inflation. Are quarterly reports necessary for public companies? President Trump floated the idea of switching company reports from quarterly to semiannual. It appears Trump believes this will help companies focus more on the long-term business performance rather than fixating on short-term quarterly numbers. There's also hope this will save time and money for public corporations. The SEC acknowledged they are actively looking into the plan as a spokesperson for the agency stated, "At President Trump’s request, Chairman [Paul] Atkins and the SEC is prioritizing this proposal to further eliminate unnecessary regulatory burdens on companies." Being a long-term investor, I can see the benefits of changing this requirement as one quarter should not dictate your decision on whether you should buy, sell, or hold a business. Ultimately, a change like this wouldn't have a real impact on my investment philosophy and if this enabled companies to focus more on the long term and helps with costs, I would be in favor of giving companies the option to make this switch. In terms of the long-term focus, both Jamie Dimon and Warren Buffett have spoken out against not necessarily the quarterly reports, but the quarterly guidance. In a 2018 op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal, the pair said, “In our experience, quarterly earnings guidance often leads to an unhealthy focus on short-term profits at the expense of long-term strategy, growth and sustainability.” As for the regulatory burden, I'm sure there is hope this would help entice companies to come public. There has been a huge shift in companies staying private longer and I do believe the compliance piece deters some from coming public. I'm sure there are other reasons for staying private, including control and other liquidity avenues that weren't as prominent years ago. Nonetheless, it is concerning that the number of publicly listed companies in the U.S. has fallen from more than 7,000 in 1996 to around 4,000 today. Is your financial advisor "quiet retiring"? You may not completely understand what “quiet retiring” means, but a few years ago, my son Chase and I were on the Dr. Phil Show because they were doing an episode on what they called “quit quitting”. Chase and I were on the pro side for business and working hard, while the other side essentially felt they should still get paid the same amount and not work hard. So, I have coined the phrase, “quiet retiring”. I have been seeing this happen in the financial service industry, especially considering the fact that the average US financial advisor is 56 years old. I have noticed more of them feel they deserve to play more golf or travel more than the average person since they seem to be in retirement mode. They are not telling their clients this and they have their admin staff handle most of the routine details so you, the client, really don’t know that they are not working that much behind the scenes. Hence the term "quiet retiring". Something you definitely should find out is how much your financial advisor is working? Especially if they're in their mid to late 50s because you may not have the person with the most experience watching your investments. This is very important when it comes to preparing for and weathering through difficult times. If your financial advisor is talking about retiring in the near future, be sure to understand fully what the succession plan is and who you will be dealing with. It has now been known in the industry for a few years that the average age of financial advisors is getting older and less younger advisors are coming into the industry. Be sure you understand who your financial advisor really is, who is watching your portfolio and is your investment advisor one of those that is quiet retiring? Understand the risk of low rated bonds Some investors rightly so have started selling some stocks and they are not excited about buying more stocks at this time. As we’ve been saying for quite a while now, we think this is a wise move to sell some stocks that are overpriced, but unfortunately, it seems investors got used to the high returns and they have turned to low rated high-yield bonds. According to JPMorgan Chase, issuance of junk rated bonds and loans hit a monthly record of $240 billion in July. In 2025, $930 billion has been raised through junk bonds and loans. Add that to the over $1 trillion in junk bonds from 2024 and you can see that the risk for investors is starting to increase. Most investors will not buy these individual junk bonds, but they have been plowing money into the high yield mutual funds and exchange traded funds, also known as ETFs. If you dig a little bit deeper, you find some companies are raising money foolishly like a company called TransDigm Group. The company issued nearly a $5 billion high yield bond in August to pay a dividend to their shareholders. We like companies that pay dividends, but it should be from cash flow not from borrowing money that has to be paid back. Business development companies are also back in the news, and these businesses make private loans to small and midsize companies. Over the 12-month period ending in June, private loan activity increased by 33%. I have similar concerns with business development companies and private credit, which I believe will have a crash sometime in the future and cost investors more money than they anticipated. The current default rate on higher yield bonds is 4.7%, which is not bad, but it is not good either. If interest rates on the long end were to increase, which I think is a good possibility the need for debt increases. This could slow the economy and cause some of these smaller companies that have these high-yield loans to default and file bankruptcy, which means investors would lose money. It is nice to get a 10 to 20% return on your portfolio, but sometimes when things are expensive, you have to be conservative and while that may cost you some of the upside, the downside can be a lot nastier than you realize! Financial Planning: Dealing with underwater cars About a quarter of vehicles traded in today carry negative equity, with the average shortfall around $6,500. This happens because cars depreciate quickly, and the trade-in value offered by a dealership is the lowest number you’ll see—less than what you might get in a private sale, and well below the dealer’s eventual resale price. Because of this depreciation, about 40% of financed vehicles on the road carry negative equity. While it’s possible to roll negative equity into a new auto loan, that often creates a deeper hole: you’re financing more than the car is worth, and the new vehicle immediately begins its own depreciation cycle. Lenders may approve the loan, but the higher loan-to-value ratio can lead to higher interest rates or tighter terms. GAP insurance can be used to cover the difference between a car’s actual value and what’s owed in the event of a total loss, but it doesn’t prevent the financial strain of trading in too early, and it comes with an extra cost. With so many vehicles underwater, the safer move for most people is to keep driving the current car until the balance catches up with its value rather than trading in and compounding the problem or bring more cash to the deal, so you don’t have to finance as much. Who will benefit the most from the Federal Reserve rate cut this past week? You may think it is people looking to buy a home, but that is incorrect because mortgage rates generally follow the longer-term 10-year treasury yields rather than overnight rates. Real Estate developers, who borrow on the short term to develop different projects will benefit from the short-term lower rates. Who benefits the most will be the United States government with their massive $37 trillion in debt. This is because they should be able to get a better rate on short term debt issuance. The other concern with the federal debt is roughly 61% will mature in a little over two years. This puts the government in a precarious situation as they will need to determine how to best finance these debt maturities. On the current path, by 2029 the interest the government pays on their debt would be close to 4% of GDP. It is also estimated that on the short term, a one percentage point cut in rates would lower interest costs by 0.51% as a percent of the current GDP. Other than the psychological advantage, the consumer will not benefit much. The reason for that is chief global strategist at JPMorgan Asset Management, David Kelly, noted in a research note that the reduction in interest rates reduces household income more than what they save on interest expense. His calculation is that a one percentage point drop in short term rates would be a decline in interest income for household of roughly $140 billion annually in money markets alone. This number does not include all the short-term CDs and T-bills that will come due in the near term at lower rates as well. In 2025 who is performing better gold or Bitcoin? One would think with a higher risk, Bitcoin would be outperforming the more conservative inflation hedge of gold. But that is not the case, year to date gold is up a surprising 39%, which is almost double Bitcoin's gain for the year of 22%. There is still crazy talk of companies like Eightco Holdings that announced a private stock sale and said it plans to use the money to buy Worldcoin, which is a cryptocurrency that is backed by OpenAI founder Sam Altman. I guess that’s more competition in the crypto world for Bitcoin? Bitcoin currently has a market capitalization of around $2.2 trillion, and I was surprised but also disappointed to see that corporate treasuries now hold roughly 6% of the total Bitcoin supply. If you do the math that is roughly $132 billion of Bitcoin. It’s important to note that the aggressive company called Strategy, which used to be MicroStrategy, run by Michael Slayer holds over half of that amount with an estimated value of about $72 billion. I couldn’t resist but take a look at the market capitalization of this company and discovered it’s at $95 billion, not much more than the cryptocurrency it holds. It looks at this point that if you want to hold cryptocurrency, you’re far better off to hold it yourself rather than buy this stock, which had a high this year of $543 and is now down 39% from that peak. On a side note, the company has been denied membership in the S&P 500. I was glad to see that this crazy company got rejected from what should be a more conservative index. If you like going to concerts, you may have interest in investing in StubHub You may enjoy going to concerts and events and feel like you’re spending a lot of money on the tickets through a well-known company called StubHub. In 2024, in the United States total concert and event sales were nearly $430 billion. I’m sure you have thought about how great it would be to get a piece of the action. One possible way is by buying StubHub, ticker symbol STUB, since it is now a public company, but based on some recent information I saw about the business, I would recommend you just spend your money on the tickets, not on the stock. If you ever wondered how much StubHub gets from the fees, it’s around 20% of the total price of the ticket which averaged around $200 last year. That may sound enticing, but competition in the secondary ticket market is coming on strong from companies like Ticketmaster and Live Nation. The Federal Trade Commission is now requiring total fees for tickets to be displayed at purchase to avoid what is known as bait and switch tactics. Even the musical acts themselves are tired of the premiums charged for tickets and some tours have invalidated any tickets that were sold at a premium on the secondary market. The primary ticket market, which is much larger and is around $150 billion annually, is currently dominated by Ticketmaster with a market share of over 50%. StubHub just recently entered this market last year and is hoping to gain share, but once again there’s heavy competition, which is not a good thing for an investor in a business. We don’t like competition because there’s no moat to prevent people or other companies from reducing prices to take some of your market share and reduce or eliminate your profits. It looks like the market may have seen some of these concerns as it was not overly excited by the IPO considering the price action was quite lackluster. The IPO price was $23.50, and the opening trade came in at $25.35. While it did climb as high as $27.89, it actually ended the day below the IPO price at $22. Can the Trump administration fix the housing emergency? Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently said the administration may declare a national housing emergency. This may sound very appealing to the roughly 75% of American households that can’t afford a median priced new home, this data is according to a builder's trade group. I would believe those numbers considering we have a housing shortage that started back in the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis. Since then, 20 million households have been formed, but yet only 18 million new homes have been built. There was a lot of concern from builders that they could get hit hard like they did in the 2008 Great Recession, and they became more hesitant about building too many homes. They didn't want to get stuck with them or have to sell them below their cost. The question is, what could the US government do to help bring down prices? A large portion of the housing prices come from local laws and zoning along with a difficult permit process to build homes. These roadblocks come from local governments and are quite the revenue generator for them. I doubt that they would be willing to give that up to let the federal government control the process. Another problem in many high demand areas such as the Northeast is would they be willing to give up local regulation over control of safety and environmental concerns. I do believe a push in this direction would lead to unfortunately more court challenges that cost more money and tie up our legal system and while an emergency may be announced nothing will likely get done. Will we get more bank mergers? This has been talked about for the past year or so and the number of bank mergers has increased with 118 bank mergers so far this year worth almost $24 billion. In 2024 for the entire year, 126 deals were completed for $16.3 billion. In 2023, only 96 deals were made with a total value of $4.1 billion.1998 was the peak of deal making for banks when 500 deals were completed. There is talk that we could see as much as $100 billion in bank consolidation within the next few years. The table appears to be set for that to happen with the Trump administration reducing many of the stringent merger guidelines and providing a more favorable attitude towards such activity. We also have the prospect of lower short-term rates, which helps in deal making because funding costs are less expensive and at this time we have favorable valuations with potentially higher multiples. Many banks have stronger balance sheets than they did just a few years ago, which allows them to make more deals. With over 4400 banks of different sizes in the US, we have the most banks of any major country around the world, but even that number is down 75% from 1986 when we had over 18,000 banks in the United States. Generally, when a bank acquires another bank, the bank being acquired increases in value. Some potential names that look like they could be absorbed would be Zions Bank Corp. in Salt Lake City, Eagle bank Corp. in Maryland, First Foundation located in Irvine, Texas, and BOK Financial in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Before taking advantage of any of these potential bank takeovers, be sure they have strong fundamentals. You want to make sure that in case a takeover doesn't happen, your investment will give you good dividends and growth in the years to come.

Should members of Congress be allowed to trade stocks? I recently saw there was a bipartisan bill presented in the House that would ban lawmakers from trading individual stocks. I feel like we have been hearing about this for years, and according to NPR, “For more than a decade, a series of bills have been proposed to address such trades, but differences about the details and a lack of support from top congressional leaders stalled past reform efforts.” The question is, will this time be different? The bill made me curious though about how active congress was when it came to trading and let’s just say I couldn’t believe the numbers! In 2022 154 members of Congress made 14,752 trades, in 2023 118 members made 11,491 trades, in 2024 113 members made 9,261 trades, and through July of 2025 108 members made 7,810 trades. That is a crazy amount of activity and I’m not sure how they even have time for that. Their returns were also quite impressive with Democrats producing an average return of 31.1% in 2024 and Republicans producing an average return of 26.1%. For reference, the S&P 500 was up 23.3%. The numbers were quite staggering when you look at the individual performance of some of these politicians. In 2024, Rep. David Rouzer (R-NC) was up 149.0%, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) was up 142.3%, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) was up 123.8%, Rep. Roger Williams (R-TX) was up 111.2% and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) rounded out the top ten with 70.9% return. These are hedge funds that are beating returns in several cases! Personally, I think it is ridiculous that politicians can trade individual stocks, and I hope there is finally action in Congress that ends it! There are risks to Nvidia stock that you may not realize! There is no denying what Nvidia has done has been extremely impressive, but one major problem with the company is the revenue is extremely concentrated. Their top customers made up 23% of total revenue in the recent quarter, which was up from 14% in the same quarter last year. Their second largest customer made up 16% of total revenue, which was up from 11% in the same quarter last year. Sales to four other customers contributed 14%, 11%,11%, and 10% of revenue respectively. This means that six customers accounted for 85% of Nvidia’s total sales. My concern is what if one of them drops out of the AI arms race or if a few of them pull back spending, that could really slow Nvidia’s business. I also believe that China is a risk to Nvidia. While sales have been hindered in the country due to political constraints, I believe many investors are looking to China as an area of potential growth for the company. All I can say to that, is do you really think the Chinese government wants Chinese companies using Nvidia chips? It was reported that Alibaba has recently developed an advanced chip, and I’d assume Huawei and other Chinese companies are racing to compete against Nvidia. While Nvidia stock essentially just keeps climbing, it’s important to realize there are several risks that could take the stock down! Understanding more about AI and why it's becoming more expensive We are no expert on artificial intelligence, but we have learned that while AI has gotten smarter it has also gotten more expensive. It is now broken down into a unit of AI which is known as a token and while the price of tokens continues to drop, the number of tokens needed to accomplish a task is increasing dramatically. There are two basic attributes to AI, one is called training, and the other is AI inference. The increase in cost is coming from the training side that has to use large models and demands even more costly processing. AI applications are using so-called reasoning and new forms of AI double check queries on their answers, which may include scanning the entire Web. Sometimes they write their own programs to calculate things all before releasing an answer that may only be a short sentence. Delivering meaningful and better responses takes a lot more tokens to complete that process. Looking at examples, basic chatbot Q&A requires 50 to 500 tokens. Short document summaries can be used anywhere from 200 tokens to 6000 tokens. Lawyers and paralegals who use legal document analysis require 5,000 to 250,000 tokens. If one is trying to do multi-step agent workflows, well now you’re looking at 100,000 to over 1 million tokens. Please understand when we talk tokens we’re not talking about anything that has to do with cryptocurrencies, and this is a different token pertaining to AI. Some big companies are spending $100 billion a year or more to create cutting-edge AI models and building out their infrastructure. However, for all that investment there needs to be a return on investment, and businesses and individuals will eventually have to pay more for artificial intelligence. The CFO of Open AI said last October that 75% of the company’s revenue comes from your average person paying $20 a month. Currently the cheapest AI models, which includes Open AI‘s new ChatGPT – 5 nano is costing around $.10 per million tokens but go to the top-of-the-line GPT -5 and that costs about $3.44 per million tokens. What they are trying to figure out is what the consumer will pay for AI. There is also concern about how long the big giants can keep up this spending when they’re competing with their own Financial Planning: 529 Withdrawal Pitfalls A 529 plan is a tax-advantaged savings account designed to help families pay for education costs, with contributions growing tax-deferred and withdrawals tax-free when used for “qualified education expenses” such as college tuition, fees, books, and room and board. A qualified withdrawal avoids taxes and penalties, while a non-qualified withdrawal means the earnings portion (not contributions) is subject to federal and state income tax plus a 10% federal penalty. The IRS also allows up to $10,000 per year, or $20,000 in 2026, per student for K–12 tuition, and under the One Big Beautiful Bill signed on July 4, 2025, Congress expanded 529 qualified expenses to include not just K–12 tuition, but also fees, books, and required supplies for primary and secondary education. However, California does not conform to this expansion and continues to treat K–12 withdrawals of any kind as non-qualified, taxing the earnings and applying a 2.5% state penalty. This mismatch means California families using 529 funds for K–12 costs may face unexpected taxes and penalties despite the new federal flexibility. Keep this in mind if you are considering funding a 529 plan. Should you buy the new iPhone or work with what you have? On Tuesday, September 9th, Apple launched their new iPhone and while there was a lot of excitement around the event, I just don't see what's exciting about the limited changes. If you are excited about the new features though and if you’re a techie, you probably want to get the new iPhone just to brag about it. But if you want to be financially smart, you need to think about maybe you really don’t need a new phone. The new iPhone 17 is supposed to be the best ever, which is of course what they are going to say. The cost of the new iPhone 17 is expected to be between $800-$1200. If your phone is seven years or older, you may start running into problems with updates, which could include security fixes and updated software. Apple may not support your phone so maybe it would be wise to buy a new one. Your phone may be feeling slow or short on battery life, but there are repairs that can correct that situation for you and are far cheaper than buying a new phone. Repairs could be anywhere between $100-$350 and be sure to check out a good independent shop but be aware they may use third party aftermarket parts. You may be thinking, "what’s the big deal? It’s only $800" but it’s important to remember that a few hundred dollars here and a few hundred dollars there adds up and before you know it, you're way over your monthly budget. Also, think about what you’re saving on repairing your phone versus getting a new one. That is money that you can put away into your emergency fund or hopefully invest it for long-term growth to increase your net worth. Think about how it will grow over time and when invested properly, you’ll be very happy that you didn’t waste that few hundred dollars extra on a new iPhone. It will be interesting to see how "different" the new model really is! Here’s another indicator showing how overpriced the S&P 500 is! There are four main valuations used when valuing a public company or a stock. The most common one is what investors are paying for the earnings, that is known as a price to earnings ratio. Another one that is fairly well known is price to book value, which looks at how much you are paying for the assets, minus the liabilities of a company. The price of cash flow is not as well known, but we believe that cash flow is very important for businesses and like the other ratios, we don’t want to overpay for it. The last one that has been around for many years is the price to sales. This can be one of the best indicators because unlike price to earnings, there’s no way for a company to pad or manipulate the sales, they are what they are. As of now the S&P 500 is trading at 3.23 times sales, which is an all-time record high. When it comes to the price to earnings, the ratio is also high at 22.5 times projected earnings. While this is not a record, it is well above the average of 16.8 over the last 25 years. Some people are ignoring the valuations saying that the companies are worth these higher values, but as I said they are well above historical averages. The other problem is many of these popular names pushing the indexes higher are crowded trades and it seems like everyone is in those stocks. The problem is, if almost everyone is in those stocks and there is a pullback for any reason, there are not many people that have extra capital to step in and buy more. We have also talked about margin hitting a record high of $1 trillion and the problem here is if people have margin on their accounts, they could be hit with margin calls perhaps taking away what little cash they had left or they could be forced to sell out of the stock, which would create more downward pressure. No one knows what will cause the bad news for a fall, but it will likely come out of left field. That could then lower future expectations and that is when valuations will matter. The decline could be larger than people realize. It’s always important to understand what you are paying when you are buying stocks. Remember they’re not gambling chips; they are small pieces of large companies that trade based on valuations. Does the BLS need to change the way they calculate the job numbers? While we know the labor market has been softening, I was quite surprised to see annual revisions to nonfarm payrolls data for the year prior to March 2025 showed a drop of 911,000 from the initial estimate. This is a huge change considering the average pace of seasonally adjusted employment gains went from 147,000 jobs a month over the period to a bit over 70,000! This means instead of adding about 1.8 million positions as originally reported, the U.S. economy created just 847,000 jobs. It also marked the largest preliminary revision on record going back to 2000 and when looking at it as a percentage of total jobs lost the revision represents the largest since 2009. To be clear, while this is troubling, this is not the final revision, and it is just the preliminary part of an annual process in which the BLS updates the job figures from its monthly employer survey using more comprehensive data from state unemployment tax records. The official revision will come in February, and large changes can still occur. As an example, last year's August revision of negative 818,000 was revised to a final reading of negative 598,000 in February of this year. With how much technology has changed, I would expect these monthly reports would get more accurate over time, not less. Maybe instead of relying on a survey of about 121,000 employers there is a better way to get this data? The BLS pointed out that the revisions were so large because businesses within its survey reported higher employment in its survey than they did in their quarterly tax reports and that businesses that responded to its survey had stronger employment than those that had been selected for the survey but didn’t respond. While this all may seem extremely troubling, I have continued to question how payroll gains could be so large without a good pool of people to fill those jobs. I still believe that though the labor market has softened more than we initially thought, I still believe the economy is in an alright spot considering the unemployment rate remains historically low. Does the de minimis rule affect you? You may have never heard of this rule before and if you’ve been buying packages online that were less than $800, you probably didn’t realize that they could enter the US tariff free. Well, that has now changed, and you may have to pay tariffs on that small package depending on the country of origin and the type of product it is. It also is important to know how the product was delivered, did it come through a post office or a commercial carrier like UPS or Federal Express. If you buy small items overseas such things as fishing poles, pens, or small statues, and even some types of shoes, you may have to pay additional tariffs when your package arrives. It’s a little bit unclear about who and when the tariff will have to be paid. It is possible that you could receive a package from UPS and when they come to your door, you may be asked to pay the tariff right then and there. Whether you knew about it or not. You will have the right to refuse the package. When you are shopping online, you should look on the seller's website closely to see who is responsible for paying the tariff and when. The tariff can be very high if you’re buying yoga pants from Vietnam at $98 a pair, your tariff would be 56% or about $55. Expecting a child and you found a great stroller online coming from China for $399. Be prepared to pay over $540 because of the 36% tariff. If you’re trying to stay healthy and found some great deals on nutritional supplements from Canada that were only $37, by the time you pay the tariff of 63% you’ll be paying $60 for those nutritional supplements. Inflation reports likely cements Fed rate cut next week The Consumer Price Index, also known as CPI, showed August headline prices rose by 2.9% compared to last year and core prices, which exclude food and energy, saw an increase of 3.1%. Both readings were essentially in line with market expectations. Annual core price inflation was essentially in line with last month's reading, but the headline did climb from an annual rate of 2.7% in July and the August number marked the highest reading since January. This was largely due to the fact that food prices rose 3.2% compared to last year and energy is no longer providing the same benefit it did earlier in the year. Energy has largely seen deflation this year, but in August there was an annual increase of 0.2%. Gasoline was down 6.6% compared to last year, but electricity prices increased 6.6% and utility gas service rose 13.8%. What I would consider is that tariff impacted products are still surprisingly seeing little change. Apparel was up 0.2% compared to last year and new vehicles only saw an increase of 0.7%. I was surprised to see prices for used cars and trucks increase 6% though. As I've said for many months now, shelter continues to provide a large headwind in the inflation report as prices climbed 3.6%, but the positive here is it has been steadily declining, and it is well off the recent peak around 8% at the beginning of 2023. We also got the Producer Price Index, also known as PPI, earlier in the week and that came in largely better than expected. Headline prices showed an increase of 2.6% compared to last year and core prices climbed by 2.8%. Looking at all the inflation data from this past week, I wouldn't say it was overly impressive, but I believe it does enough for the Fed to justify starting rate cuts considering the concerns that are being discussed around the labor market. Is Elon Musk worth $1 trillion? Tesla is asking shareholders to approve another huge pay package for Elon Musk. Based on the maximum payout assuming the share count remains, the total package would be worth $975 billion. Looking at the details, it is quite ambitious so I'd say if he ends up hitting these targets maybe he would be worth that amount. Operational milestones for the award include: 20 million Tesla vehicles delivered, 10 million active FSD Subscriptions, 1 million robots delivered, 1 million Robotaxis in commercial operation and a series of adjusted EBITDA benchmarks. The more challenging milestones revolve around the market cap of the company. These milestones are separated into 12 tranches with the first benefit coming at a market cap of $2 trillion and the final benchmark coming at a market cap of $8.5 trillion. I believe to achieve these lofty goals Telsa will have to execute on both Robotaxis and their Optimus robot. In the past Elon has said he believes Optimus can make Tesla a $25 trillion company and he recently said roughly 80% of Tesla’s value could eventually come from Optimus. These goals would be needed as I believe the car business will not be enough to get him to even a $2 trillion market cap, especially considering the problems they are having with slumping sales and declining market share. It was just reported the Telsa accounted for just 38% of total US EV sales in the month of August. This was the first time its market share has fallen below 40% since October 2017 and it is well off the records it had over 80% just a few years ago. From an investment perspective, Elon has proven me wrong before, but this stock is definitely one of the highest risks/speculative bets that investors can make. For me it's more like gambling and while it's entertaining to watch what Elon says and does, I wouldn't touch the stock.