Copyright Lawsuit against generative AI company Perplexity, Apple’s Management Drain, It’s time to put some commercial property into your portfolio, The Benefits of Capital Gain Harvesting & More

Another lawsuit against generative AI company Perplexity for copyright infringement

The New York Times has had enough, and they have filed a lawsuit in a New York Federal court. In October 2024, the Times sent a notice to stop accessing and using their content and then followed up with another notice this past July. Perplexity continues to ignore the warnings and a spokesperson for the company, Jesse Dwyer, said publishers have been suing new tech companies for a hundred years starting with radio, TV, the Internet and social media, but that has never worked out for them. I think this is a little bit different since AI pretty much takes the content directly from the publisher and publishes it for people to read. The Times is also including infringements for use of its videos, podcasts and images. The Times said in the lawsuit they are seeking damages, which at this point is unknown and injunctive relief which includes removing all of the Times content from Perplexity’s products. This would be a major problem for Perplexity if they were to lose this case because the whole AI system pulls information from all across the web, and this would leave a big hole in the end result of Perplexity’s information. The Times is not the only publisher suing Perplexity, other lawsuits have been filed by Dow Jones and the New York Post. If one company were to win in court that would be a major problem for AI companies like Perplexity. First it would set a precedent and other publishers would likely sue, it could also lead to less accurate information as there would be less sources to pull data from. 

Just when Apple corrected their major problems, it looks like there’s a management drain

Apple did a great job handling the proposed tariffs on its products, which would have devastated the company. Also, in court they managed to keep the $20 billion a year they receive from Google. But now, they seem to be fighting a management exit by some of their top executives. Over the last couple of weeks, it was announced that both their General Council and Head of Policy will be retiring next year. Another major concern was also announced in that timeframe that their Head of Artificial Intelligence and Strategy is also going to retire. Making matters worse, their Chief Operating Officer said he’ll be retiring in July of next year. Don’t worry about CEO Tim Cook being age 65, he said he is not considering retirement, and people at the company said he is not slowing down at all. It was also recently announced that Meta has taken from Apple a top designer named Alan Dye. Also Jony Ive, who is a Steve Jobs protégé and helped build the iPhone along with the Apple Watch, is heading over to OpenAI to help Sam Altman. It’s not just the top people leaving though as apparently dozens of Apple engineers along with designers who are knowledgeable in audio, watch design, robotics, and much more are also finding a new home at OpenAI. Running a major technology company like Apple and striving for new innovation makes it difficult when a company is losing top management and star engineers and designers. I don’t think this will cause a major drop in the stock short term, but it could be difficult longer term for the company when it comes to innovation and new products, which could concern investors in the years to come!

It’s time to put some commercial property into your portfolio

You may be questioning why would I put real estate like commercial property in my portfolio that over the last five years or so has had a return of maybe 7% versus stocks that have done much better? The simple answer is the basic investing principle of buying low and selling high. Looking forward, I believe commercial real estate over the next five years should get better returns than artificial intelligence considering the fact that it is very pricey. Data from MSCI revealed that year to date large investors have purchased $4.6 billion more US commercial property than they sold. That is the first time that has happened in three years, and deal activity is still low compared to history. US commercial real estate values are off from the peak in 2022 and are now down on average around 17%. Looking just at commercial offices, there is a better discount considering there are down around 36% from their peak. History shows this could be a very good opportunity. There’s only been two times over the last roughly 50 years or so when commercial property prices were down more than 10%. You have to go back to the early 1990s, which was about 35 years ago, and who could forget the 2008 great recession. How should you invest in office buildings and commercial property? The best and the easiest way is to use public real estate investment trusts, which are known as REITs. Please do not let your broker sell you private real estate of any sort so they can get paid a big commission. REITs that trade on the market are commission free and completely liquid unlike private real estate deals. With public REITs you can many times receive good investment yields between 4% and 6%. However, make sure to understand the fundamentals to insurethat dividend yield is safe. A history lesson shows that commercial property under performed from 1997 to 2000 when the tech boom was happening, but when the tech boom ended and went bust, commercial real estate did very well. Could the same thing happen now as there are signs that the AI rally could end? If you do invest in a good quality public real estate investment trust, you should have at least a 4 to 5 year time horizon to hold that investment.

Financial Planning: The Benefits of Capital Gain Harvesting

While many investors focus on tax-loss harvesting, harvesting capital gains can be just as valuable especially when you fall into the 0% long-term capital gains bracket. For example, in 2025 a married couple filing jointly can have taxable income up to $96,700 and still pay 0% on long-term gains. Because the standard deduction ranges from $31,500 to $46,700, and itemized deductions can be even larger, a household’s total gross income can potentially exceed $150,000 while still remaining in the 0% capital gains bracket. If an investor wants to keep the same investment, they can immediately repurchase it, since wash-sale rules do not apply to gains. However, even though the gain itself is taxed at 0%, the added income may increase the taxation of Social Security benefits, pulling more of those benefits into taxable income. For those who don’t face that issue, gain harvesting resets their cost basis and reduces the taxes they will owe later if they sell in a higher-income year when their capital gains rate jumps to 15% or even 20%. This strategy can also make sense for those currently in the 15% capital gains bracket who expect to be pushed into the 20% bracket later. Overall, capital-gain harvesting can be a powerful tool in years of temporarily low income.

Should Meta Platforms change its name again?

It’s been about four years since Meta changed its name from Facebook as they thought the metaverse was the place to be. Since 2020, Meta has seen operating losses of over $77 billion in what is known as its Reality Labs division; this includes the metaverse work. One can’t knock Mark Zuckerberg too much; he has built a tremendous social media network and has made billions of dollars. His current net worth depending on the movement of his stock is around $230 billion.... a little bit more than my net worth. But I have to point out he seems to be lacking in technology advancements; he is no Steve Jobs. He is now switching to AI wearables and believes this will be the next major computing platform, and he wants his company to be a big part of it. He has had some success with the Ray-Ban AI glasses, which have had about 2 million pairs sold this year, and he predicts next year they will sell 10 million pairs. The company seems all over the board because internally they are cutting roughly six hundred AI jobs. However, the AI division is offering $100 million pay packages to AI specialists to join his Superintelligence Labs. He has hired 50 people for these positions. If you do the math, that is $5 billion per year just in salaries. Maybe this will work out for him, maybe it won’t. But my question is should they change the name of the company to something with AI in it? Or should he drop his technology pursuit and stick with social media marketing and go back to the old name, Facebook!

Competition is coming for Nvidia chips!

Nvidia has been on top of the mountain for quite a while, but there are signs that other companies are beginning to gain momentum against the number one chip designer. If you think that can’t happen, realize no one company can stay on top forever. Just look at the history of Intel as an example. At one point no one could touch them. Amazon has come out with an AI Chip called Trainium3 that is produced by their AWS Annapurna Labs custom design business. They claim it can reduce the cost of training and operating AI models by up to 50% compared with systems that use the equivalent Graphics Processing Units or GPUs. The main function of the chips is to provide a stronger backbone of computing power for software developers. This has to be somewhat of concern for Nvidia, which virtually controls the GPU market. Google also recently announced that Meta was talking to them about buying billions of dollars of advanced AI chips known as Tensor Processing Units or TPUs. Open AI has made some deals now with AMD and also rather new to the AI market is Broadcom for custom chip design. Nvidia had a post on X that stated that their company chips offer greater performance, versatility and fungibility compared to the more narrowly tailored custom chips made by Google and AWS. We will see how this plays out going forward, and I would not be worried about Nvidia collapsing or going broke, but a stock decline? Maybe? Competition is part of business, but the problem for Nvidia is it could slow down the growth in their business.

The risk in AI bonds is increasing as the AI build out continues

People may be getting concerned with the heavy concentration of AI stocks in the S&P 500 now accounting for roughly 40% of the index. So maybe they feel it would make sense to reduce some of their stock exposure and put it into a bond index for safety. Well, surprise! You probably forgot that many of the companies building out the AI infrastructure are borrowing billions of dollars to construct the data centers and other needs as well. Investment-grade corporate bond indexes have seen the concentration of AI bonds increase by around 26% from just five years ago as the concentration in the index has climbed from 11.5% to 14.5%. It is estimated that at the current trend AI bonds could make up roughly 20% of the investment-grade bond indexes over the next five years. An investor may feel safe because many expect interest rates to fall going forward, which would increase the value of bonds. However, if AI companies who borrowed money to build out their infrastructure begin to struggle, don’t forget that a bond also has credit risk and that can lead to downgrades. Even though interest rates could be falling, a downgrade of a bond would have a greater magnitude than falling interest rates on the price of the bond. So if you’re looking at diversifying from the higher risk AI stock investments, and you’re thinking bonds would be a safe haven, you may want to look at buying funds or ETFs where the manager can control the amount and the type of bonds in the portfolio rather than just an index.

Should you do a year end review for your investment portfolio?

It seems like the obvious answer is yes, but I know time does go by very quickly and before you know it, the holidays are over and you never looked at your portfolio. Unfortunately, many investors just add or delete a piece throughout the year in the portfolio never taking a look at the full portfolio for balance and over concentrated positions and many times they miss the most advantageous way to manage the portfolio for taxes. I do want to point out an investor should never make taxes the primary focus as your goal should always be to increase the value of your portfolio and then see if there are ways you can reduce taxes. Investors should look at their portfolio at least at the end of the year to see if they have too much of any one type of investment. This could include too much in financials, real estate or with the recent run up in technology, obviously you want to look at that to see if you should pair it back to reduce the risk going forward. Since you are reviewing your investment portfolio, it’s a good idea to look to see if you just have too many accounts scattered around and figure out if it's making your life difficult keeping track of all of them. If you’re married the most you should have would be seven accounts which would include a retirement account at work for you and your wife. You may also have an IRA rollover you each set up along with some Roth IRAs and as a couple you may have another investment account that would be set up as either joint tenants or in your trust if you have one. There are always special circumstances, but try to keep your life easy by having as few accounts as you can for your situation. Lastly, when looking at your tax situation you only have a couple more weeks to do tax loss harvesting. If you understand what you are doing in investing, this can be a great opportunity, but don’t get focused on saving $1000 in taxes when next year that same investment may have grown by two or three times your tax savings.

More concerns around private credit

The private asset-backed finance market has doubled since 2006 to now over $6 trillion and it is expected to top $9 trillion by 2029. This market is now larger than the syndicated loan market, high-yield bond and direct lending markets combined. Asset-backed finance is when lending is done against an income stream, loan, or specific asset like aircraft, warehouses or even music royalties, rather than lending to a company based on its cash flow. While this should in theory help reduce the risk, with the massive increase the concern is the assets that are being collateralized come with lower standards and are increasingly exotic. As an example, after the recent bankruptcy of First Brands it is believed the same receivables were pledged to multiple lenders. My concern with all this being done in the private market is if there's a slowdown there could be problems beneath the surface no one knows about until it's too late. My advice is to again avoid the private market as the risk of the unknown is just too large!

Why investing in hype names or stocks with no fundamentals is dangerous

It can be so tempting when you see something with what you think is a can’t miss opportunity based on the name of the investment. Unfortunately, that is your emotions taking over and not your brain warning you about an investment that has no earnings and probably has no chance to ever be profitable. An example of this is investing or speculating on anything with the name Trump on it. This is not a political statement against the President, but an example of how even well-known names can have investments that falter. Reality has now set in on stocks like Trump Media & Technology Group Corp which trades under the ticker DJT and has fallen around 70% since the Presidential Inauguration. The large decline now has people questioning their investment. You may have also tried to latch on to the Trump family's crypto venture through a token called World Liberty Financial but since September that has lost around 40% of its value. Other types of gambles like Trump's meme coin is down around 90% from its high, and Melania Trump's meme coin has lost almost all of its value as it's down 99% from its high. The Trump coin, depending on the source had a high of over $100 and the Melania coin at one point had a market cap of $2 billion. I must ask what were people thinking? If you lost money in these investments, just come to the reality that you were gambling and not investing and your risk of losing money was very high. Maybe you like the thrill and the excitement, but if you want to grow a good portfolio, don’t invest in any investment or stock that is losing money and has very little chance of making money in the future!