AI Profit Pressure, Private Equity in Youth Sports, Strategy Bitcoin Investment Trouble, Upper-Middle-Class Financial Worries, Jobs Report Missing Story, AI Investment Bubble Concerns, Trump Account Investment Options & More

Competition for AI Is Coming From a Surprise Source That Could Pressure U.S. Companies' Prices and Profits

We tend to focus on the major AI companies in the United States and assume they will be the long-term winners. However, one competitor that cannot be ignored is China. Chinese companies are making rapid progress in artificial intelligence, and they could become a serious challenge to U.S. firms.

Don’t forget that China is a communist country and the government can put in a lot of capital to win the AI race. That ability to heavily fund AI development could help Chinese companies narrow the gap with, or even surpass, some American competitors in certain areas.

According to Artificial Analysis, which evaluates the capabilities of large language models, China's Z.ai ranked among the top three globally with its latest model release. Another concern is cost. Z.ai is reportedly offering models at less than half the price of many American rivals. Lower prices could make it easier for the company to gain market share while putting pressure on the pricing and profit margins of U.S. AI companies.

I certainly don't want to see American companies lose ground to Chinese competitors. However, as investors, we have to evaluate the competitive landscape objectively. U.S. AI companies have already committed hundreds of billions of dollars to infrastructure and development. If competition forces prices lower, it may take much longer for these companies to generate the profits needed to justify today's lofty stock prices and valuations.

The Business of Kids' Sports Is Changing and it May Not Be for the Better

Private equity has made its way into nearly every corner of the economy, and now it's becoming a major force in youth sports. The Aspen Institute has estimated that youth sports are now a $40 billion industry in the U.S, which is likely why private equity is now targeting the space. That's raising serious concerns about what happens when maximizing investor returns becomes more important than giving kids affordable opportunities to play.

As private equity firms buy up leagues, tournaments, training facilities, and sports complexes, critics argue the result is less competition, higher registration fees, and fewer affordable options for families. The average cost of youth sports has increased dramatically in recent years, leaving many children priced out of participating simply because their families can't afford it.

One thing that stands out is that this has become one of the rare issues drawing concern from both Republicans and Democrats in Congress. Burgess Owens, a Republican from Utah and former professional football player, pointed out “Investment is important, but it’s when the mission is our kids, not investors. We’re seeing too much of this. We’re going to lose the soul of our nation if we don’t get this right.” He also acknowledged that while some investors are doing it the right way, bad actors need to be kept out. While there are differences over how to address the problem, there appears to be broad bipartisan agreement that rising costs and reduced consumer choice deserve closer scrutiny.

Youth sports should be about developing character, teamwork, friendships, and healthy competition, not creating another industry where financial engineering determines who gets to participate. If the trend toward consolidation continues unchecked, more families may find themselves priced out of opportunities that should be available to every child, regardless of income.

Bitcoin Company Strategy Is in Trouble

Strategy, formerly known as MicroStrategy, changed its name after the company essentially became a leveraged bet on Bitcoin rather than a software business. As management shifted its focus almost entirely to buying Bitcoin, it dropped the "Micro" from its name to reflect that new identity.

CEO Michael Saylor spent years promoting Bitcoin and telling investors that owning Strategy stock was one of the best ways to benefit from its rise. To finance those Bitcoin purchases, the company repeatedly issued low-interest convertible bonds.

The next major maturity comes on September 15, 2027, when approximately $1 billion of convertible notes become due. If you're unfamiliar with convertible bonds, they allow a company to borrow money at lower interest rates because investors have the option to convert the bonds into stock instead of receiving cash repayment. For that to happen, however, the stock price must trade well above the conversion price.

In this case, the conversion price is about $183 per share, about double the current stock price of roughly $90. Unless the stock stages a dramatic recovery, those bonds are unlikely to be converted into shares, meaning Strategy would need to repay the $1 billion in cash.

The stock has fallen nearly 79% over the past year, and Bitcoin's decline has only magnified the losses. Bitcoin itself has dropped roughly 50% from its peak, falling below $60,000 depending on the day. When Bitcoin was making new highs, investor excitement seemed endless. Now that prices have been cut roughly in half, much of that enthusiasm has disappeared.

Michael Saylor has also been noticeably absent from major interviews in recent months. Whether that is because demand for his appearances has faded or because the company's performance has made those appearances more difficult is open to interpretation. Strategy stock reached a high of around $473 in late 2024 and now trades near $90.

We've discussed this company many times before. The concern has always been that Strategy is not creating meaningful operating growth as it is primarily just borrowing money to buy Bitcoin. Unlike a traditional operating company, it is not relying on expanding products or services to drive future earnings.

At the moment, there does not appear to be a clear catalyst that would significantly lift either Bitcoin or Strategy's stock price. If the shares remain well below the conversion price as the 2027 maturity approaches, investors are likely to become increasingly concerned about how the company will repay its debt. That uncertainty could continue to put pressure on the stock.

Upper-Middle-Class Americans May Not Be as Financially Secure as They Would Like

Upper-middle-class Americans, generally defined as households earning between $150,000 and $250,000 per year, may be in a stronger financial position than most, but many are becoming increasingly pessimistic about the future.

You may be surprised to learn that 86% of upper-middle-class Americans do not believe their children will have a better life than they have. Just seven years ago, in 2019, that figure was only 64%.

Many upper-middle-class households are also losing confidence in the economic system and the government. They increasingly feel that the odds are stacked against them, making it harder to continue moving ahead financially. In the most recent Wall Street Journal survey, 65% of affluent Americans said they believe the system is rigged against them, more than double the 29% who felt that way in 2017.

The news isn't much better for the middle class, generally defined as households earning between $65,000 and $235,000 annually. Only 25% said they have been able to save beyond an emergency fund. Roughly one in four also reported carrying credit card debt that they are unable to pay off in full each month.

Despite these concerns, there has still been significant upward mobility. About 75% of people in today's upper-income group said they now belong to a higher economic class than the one they grew up in. Among middle-class Americans, roughly half said they also grew up in a lower economic class than where they are today.

Views on higher education are changing as well. About one-third of middle-class Americans no longer believe a four-year college degree is the best path to financial success. Rising tuition costs, growing student debt, and the availability of alternative career paths have caused many to rethink the traditional college route.

No matter which income group people belong to, there is often a desire to improve their financial situation and move up economically. That ambition is a healthy part of human nature and is often what drives people to work harder, save more, and invest for the future. While constantly striving for more can sometimes make it difficult to feel fully satisfied, the pursuit of improvement can also provide a strong sense of purpose and accomplishment.

Did The Recent Jobs Report Tell the Whole Story?

At first glance, this weeks jobs report looked fairly uneventful. The U.S. economy added 57,000 nonfarm payroll jobs in June, and the unemployment rate fell to 4.2%. This was below the estimate of 115k, but it does follow three strong months of payroll growth.

After looking through the report, there are several numbers that raise some important questions.

The first is the labor force. About 720,000 people left the labor force in June, pushing the labor force participation rate down to 61.5%, the lowest since March 2021. Even more troubling is that if we exclude the Covid-era, it was the lowest labor force participation rate in exactly 50 years. When people stop looking for work, they are no longer counted as unemployed, which can make the unemployment rate appear stronger than it otherwise would.

Another surprising number was leisure and hospitality, which lost 61,000 jobs. June is typically one of the strongest hiring months of the year for hotels, restaurants, entertainment, and travel-related businesses. The Bureau of Labor Statistics attributed much of the decline to weaker-than-normal seasonal hiring, but it's still worth asking whether this reflects a temporary statistical issue or an early sign that consumer spending is beginning to soften. It is especially strange given the popularity of the World Cup and many speculated this would be a strong sector in the report. Goldman Sachs in particular estimated a gain of 40k in leisure and hospitality before the report was released.

Then there is the latest JOLTS report. Job openings stood at 7.6 million in May, showing employers are still looking for workers, but the question is if people are actually leaving the workforce can these jobs actually get filled?

One report never tells the entire story, but these numbers deserve a closer look. Was June simply an odd month because of seasonal adjustments? Or are we beginning to see a labor market that is slowing more quickly than the headline unemployment rate suggests? The next few months of data should help answer that question.

The Biggest Risk in AI May Not Be the Technology, it May Be The Economics

This week, Bradley Tusk and Ed Zitron raised important questions that investors shouldn't ignore.

Bradley Tusk (founder and CEO of Tusk Ventures and a venture capitalist) made an interesting observation: investors are treating frontier AI models the same. But China's AI companies are proving that powerful models can be developed much more cheaply and improve much faster than many expected. If lower-cost models continue to narrow the performance gap, AI models could become increasingly commoditized, making it much harder for companies spending hundreds of billions of dollars on infrastructure to earn attractive returns.

Ed Zitron (author, podcaster and tech industry critic) echoed a similar concern from a different angle. He argues that AI companies are engaged in an expensive arms race, pouring enormous amounts of capital into chips, data centers, and model development without proving that the economics will justify the investment. As he has said, companies are "burning money at an astonishing rate" while investors continue to assume future profits will eventually catch up.

This also ties into a warning from co-funder and CEO of Palantir Technologies, Alex Karp . He has criticized what he calls "token maxxing"—the idea that success in AI is simply about generating more tokens, building bigger models, and spending more on compute. Karp's point is that producing more AI output doesn't automatically create more business value. The companies that ultimately win will be the ones that solve real customer problems and generate durable profits, not necessarily those that consume the most GPUs or produce the most tokens.

History shows that revolutionary technologies don't always produce the best investments. The internet transformed the world, but many of the biggest companies of the dot-com era disappeared because expectations got too far ahead of profits.

AI will almost certainly reshape the economy. The bigger question for investors is whether the companies making the largest investments will ultimately earn the returns the market is expecting—or whether AI models become increasingly commoditized, leaving the biggest winners to be the businesses that successfully apply AI rather than simply build larger models.

Financial Planning: Trump Account Investment Options Released Ahead of $1,000 Seed Funding

Trump Accounts are expected to receive $1,000 of government seed money as soon as the 4th of July. If you have a child born in 2025 through 2028, you can apply online now at trumpaccounts.gov. This is basically a retirement account with a caveat, contributions can be made on behalf of children even if they don’t have earned income.  However extra contributions are made on an after-tax non-Roth basis so no upfront tax deduction and no tax-free growth. Instead contributions establish cost basis and investment earnings grow tax-deferred, but are ultimately taxed upon withdrawal at ordinary income rates. In practice, this tax deferral benefit is overstated. This week the Treasury Department released 5 investment options: SPYM, IVV, VTI, ITOT, and SPTM. These are virtually all the same investment, a low fee fund that is heavily weighted toward the largest US companies. This means there is no reason to sell or rebalance, so the only real option is to buy and hold.  Buying and holding can also be done in a regular brokerage account with tax deferred until sale, but at the lower, potentially 0%, long-term capital gains rates rather than the higher ordinary income rates. Some planning strategies involve funding the Trump account and later converting it to a Roth. However, those conversions would still trigger tax at ordinary income rates and potentially trigger the kiddie tax, pulling the income into the parent’s tax bracket. Since in every possible situation, the long-term capital gain tax rate is always less than the ordinary income tax rate, a better strategy may be to fund a brokerage account and use the future proceeds to make contributions to Roth accounts which likely could be done tax-free rather than funding a Trump account and eventually making Roth conversions at a higher rate. For this reason, while the $1,000 government seed contribution is worth it, additional voluntary contributions may be less attractive compared to already available alternatives.

The AI Buildout is Putting Pressure on Inflation

Artificial intelligence is expected to become a major cost saver over time, but getting there won't be cheap. The massive infrastructure buildout required to support AI is creating inflationary pressures across the economy today.

The U.S. currently has nearly 3,000 data centers, with another 1,500 planned over the next several years. The amount of capital flowing into AI is staggering. Companies including Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Oracle are projected to spend roughly $741 billion this year on AI infrastructure and related investments, a 75% increase from last year. By 2032, total spending on AI infrastructure is expected to reach approximately $8 trillion.

That level of investment is driving up costs throughout the economy. Consumers are paying more for electronics ranging from smartphones and video game consoles to computers, automobiles, and countless other products that rely on advanced chips and components. According to the Labor Department, consumer prices for computer software and accessories have risen roughly 15% over the past 12 months.

The labor market is also feeling the impact. Building AI data centers requires thousands of electricians, engineers, and skilled tradespeople. Wages for electrical and wiring installation jobs have increased about 6.5% over the past year, nearly double the 3.6% wage growth for the average private-sector worker.

The question I keep coming back to is whether the economics justify the spending. Industry forecasts suggest AI could generate roughly $1.9 trillion in annual revenue by 2032, That’s not profit, but revenue. Yet cumulative investment is expected to total around $8 trillion by then.

If those projections are anywhere close to accurate, when does the industry actually earn an acceptable return? Does the break-even point arrive in 2040? 2050? Or is so much capital being deployed today that investors will be waiting decades before seeing meaningful profits?

AI may ultimately transform the global economy, but in the meantime, the cost of building that future is contributing to the inflation pressures we're experiencing today.

Changes in the Housing Market

As we've discussed before, the housing market is slowing. Inventory is increasing, prices are stabilizing, and in some areas, they're beginning to decline. Even so, there is still a shortage of larger homes for young families.

The good news is that demographics may help ease some of that shortage over time. In the United States, about 27% of homes with three or more bedrooms are occupied by people who are 65 or older. Many older homeowners are choosing to stay in their homes longer than previous generations. Twenty years ago, about 19% of Americans age 65 and older occupied homes with three or more bedrooms.

Over the next 10 to 20 years, many of these homeowners will eventually downsize, move in with family, transition to retirement communities, or pass away. As that happens, more three- and four-bedroom homes are likely to come onto the market, creating additional opportunities for younger families who need the extra space.

Sometimes supply and demand take time to rebalance. It won't happen overnight, but demographics suggest that the housing market could gradually become more favorable for growing families over the coming years.

How about you? Are you or someone you know waiting for a three- or four-bedroom home so your family has more room to grow?