Wealth Formula by Buck Joffrey

It’s been another interesting year in the world of personal finance and macroeconomics. As we look ahead to 2026… well, who really knows what’s coming? I’ll be sharing my own take—and making a few predictions—in an upcoming episode. What’s hard to ignore is just how unusual this moment in history is. We’re coming off COVID. We went through a rapid rise in interest rates, and now a pullback. Tariffs are back in the conversation. There are a lot of moving parts, and as usual, the consensus hasn’t exactly nailed it. Almost every expert was convinced tariffs would push inflation higher. I expected at least a temporary bump—some transient inflation while markets adjusted. Then the CPI report came out at 2.7%. That’s a lot closer to the Fed’s 2% target, and nearly half a percentage point lower than expectations. Clearly, something else is going on. At the same time, GDP came in at around 4.3% growth. That’s real strength. Inflation is coming down, growth is strong, and while the labor market is still a little murky, there’s no question there’s underlying momentum in the system. Investors haven’t quite felt it yet. It’s been a sticky environment. But my sense is that we’re getting closer to a shift—more liquidity, more money in the system, and markets that may start moving meaningfully again. Of course, we’ll see how it all plays out. For this episode, my producer Phil pulled together some of the highlights from the show in 2025—a look back at the conversations and ideas that stood out in a year when the data kept surprising just about everyone. I hope you enjoy it. And again, happy holidays. Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year. Transcript Disclaimer: This transcript was generated by AI and may not be 100% accurate. If you notice any errors or corrections, please email us at phil@wealthformula.com.  Welcome everybody. This is Buck Joffrey with D Wealth Formula Podcast, coming to you from Montecito, California and, uh, want to wish you, first of all, a happy holidays. Merry Christmas, happy new Year, all that. And, uh, yeah, it’s been, uh, it’s been another, uh, another interesting year in the world of personal finance and macroeconomics is what, what we talk about on the show. And as we look forward to 2026, gosh, who knows what’s gonna happen, right? Uh, well I’ll give you my take in, uh, show coming up where I’m gonna make some predictions. However, you know, it’s just, it, it, it’s just such an unusual time in, in history. Um, as we kind of look at. Coming off of COVID and having those high interest rates and then coming, uh, coming down and then having Trump elected and now the tariffs and well, gosh, who knows? Right? I mean, just for example, you know, almost every expert was pretty much guaranteeing that inflation would go up because of the tariffs. I mean, even if it was transient, which frankly I thought it was gonna be transient, meaning that there was gonna be a bump in inflation. For a period of time until there was a readjustment after tariffs. Well, TPI comes up most recent CPI is actually 2.7. You know, that’s much closer to the fed target of 2%. And, um, 2.7 was, you know, I think, uh, almost a half, half percentage point less than the expected, uh, CPI, uh, report. So that, that’s obviously something else is going on there. And then. GDP numbers came out and we had a four handle. It was like 4.3, I believe, GDP. So we’ve got incredible growth. We’ve got decreasing inflation. The labor market is still, I know, a little unclear, but it seems like there’s a lot of strength in this market. Of course, it’s really sticky investors. We haven’t quite felt that strength yet, but I do think you need to start anticipating. That markets are gonna come back pretty heavy, uh, with increased liquidity, uh, and a lot of money in the system. But we shall see, uh, this show. What we’re gonna do here is, uh, my, uh, producer Phil put this together, but it’s basically some of the highlights of, uh, the show in, in 2025. So hopefully you enjoy it. Uh, and again, happy holidays. Merry Christmas, new Year. And we’ll be back right after these messages. Wealth Formula banking is an ingenious concept powered by whole life insurance, but instead of acting just as a safety net, the strategy supercharges your investments. First, you create a personal financial reservoir that grows at a compounding interest rate much higher than any bank savings account. As your money accumulates, you borrow from your own. Bank to invest in other cash flowing investments. Here’s the key. Even though you’ve borrowed money at a simple interest rate, your insurance company keeps paying. You compound interest on that money even though you’ve borrowed it at result, you make money in two places at the same time. That’s why your investments get supercharged. This isn’t a new technique, it’s a refined strategy used by some of the wealthiest families in history, and it uses century old rock solid insurance companies as its back. Turbocharge your investments. Visit wealth formula banking.com. Again, that’s wealth formula banking.com. How do you approach the process of identifying stocks that are maybe best suited for consis consistent cash flow? Or do you just pick the stocks that you like and, and create the cash flow? Or are, you know, fundamental metrics that maybe you prioritize? Yeah, the, the, the first thing to determine. I think real estate investors understand this is if I were to invest in real estate, I’m gonna determine whether I’m gonna be a flipper, or I’m gonna try and buy low forced depreciation, sell high. Or if I’m gonna be a cashflow investor where I might invest in syndication, or I am, I’m gonna have tenants in property management. And the same is true with stocks. Most people start off by thinking about price rather than cash flow. They think about buy low, sell high, like a house slipper, and that’s, that’s less tenable in stocks because in real estate, if I buy low and sell high, I can do things to force appreciation. I can renovate, I can get new management, I can put in new appliances. I, there’s things I can do to force appreciation. But once a person buys a stock, there’s absolutely nothing you can do to make the stock price go up. But if you take a a, if you think of it like a real estate investor. You think about it like owning a business where the priority, as you mentioned these metrics, the priority is, Hey, what kind of cashflow will this produce be in terms of dividends and in my case, option premiums. And so some of the key metrics is, you know, if I, I’m basically buying a financial statement, same as real estate. You know, I, I, I, it is just a little different numbers in real estate. I wanna know what the net operating income is. In stocks, I might wanna know what the EBITDA is ’cause they’re essentially looking at the same types of things in real estate. I wanna know what the cap rate is in stocks. I wanna know what the PE ratio is, which is just the same number inverted. They just put the price on the top instead of the bottom. To me, I don’t see a difference between real estate and stocks, uh, in that they’re both a business or they charge someone for a good or a service. And there’s either cashflow there at the end of it or not. If people take a cash flow approach, they can begin to build on their passive income. And that contributes to that blueprint we mentioned earlier to get ’em outta the route race. So if you take a Warren Buffet approach, the most important number in that business is operational cash flow or earnings. Meaning does what they do, their operation. You know, you walk in there, a nice operation you got going here, you know, trucks are moving and you know, products are being built and shipped and, and nice operation. If they’re earning money, that means that’s the life flood of the business. That means it’s got a good moat. That means it’s pretty protected and that allows them to do two things for me. Number one is a dividend, which is exactly the same thing as a distribution in real estate. Uh, there is no difference, uh, in a syndication. I have a whole bunch of investors I’ve joined with where you have a share of this project and when the earnings come out, they distribute the, the distributions among the share shareholders. Same is true with stocks. They take the earnings, uh, we call it a payout ratio, and they take a, a, a significant amount of that money and they pay it in a dividend, same as a distribution. But what I do that’s a little bit unique buck is, uh, is I also have the options market on my side. Where I can use options to control risk, uh, to get guarantees where I can buy and sell, but even more importantly, I can offer, uh, and get paid for making promises to people. This is very much a Warren Buffet deal where it, it brings a significant increase to my monthly cash flow beyond the dividend, up to three, two and three times. Uh, the amount of money, two to 300% more cash flow. By being involved in the options market and that’s, that’s a nice secret sauce. The yield max Tesla option income, ETF, which is TSLY. And basically what it does is. Is it just does a series of longs and shorts and, and then generates what looks like to be kind of a, a ridiculous amount of, uh, dividend, uh, per, per month. So what are we missing here? What, what’s, well, you’re, you’re basically hiring those guys to mow your grass. It’s just like any other mutual fund or any other. They’re doing something you could absolutely do by yourself and not pay them a fee. There’s two cultures. There’s the advice culture and there’s the education culture and the advice culture. People say, look, I don’t wanna learn anything. Just gimme the advice. Well, you’ll pay for that in fees. And the problem with doing that is if you really listen to Warren Buffett, which 1% is enormous. Because in the wealth blueprint that we do for people, we use compounding. We use the compounding calculator to see what we’re gonna need. You drop that 1%, you give up 1% of your compounding powers as an investor over your life, it, it wouldn’t seem like 1%, but Buffet knows the truth. It’s enormous. So yeah, absolutely there are ETFs and there are funds that will do exactly what I do or what I teach people to do, but we have some advantages in doing it yourself because risk is about control. I trust myself more than I trust those guys any day of the week. And like I say, I’m doing this by month, so yeah. But it’s legit. How do you even make predictions? And second of all, I mean presumably you still have some forecasts over the next, uh, 12 to 24 months, and maybe you could tell us a little bit about that. Our methodology lends itself to times of uncertainty like this, and that’s the benefit of really relying on the leading indicators that we have. Now. We do have to take a little bit of a different approach. We have to look at data in a lot higher frequency today. You know, a lot of the data you get from government sources or quarterly data, monthly data, but we’re having to track weekly trends with the ever-changing environment that we find ourselves in. So we’re not surprised by the time any monthly or quarterly data comes out. The level of uncertainty that we’re dealing with is certainly unprecedented. I share an index each day, um, and we are three times more uncertain today than we were at the height of the pandemic. You know, put that in perspective, right? Yeah. So we do have to adjust, um. The, the way that we’re looking at data with higher frequencies, we also have to rerun a lot of these correlation analysis. Every single time we get a new data point to see are these lead times becoming more condensed? Do we have to make adjustments in our models as a result to maybe data reacting quicker than it might have in the past? So those are some of the ways that we’re, we’re continuing to evolve in these interesting times we live in. This relates to our forecast. Our team expected some weakness in the first part of this year, and, and we knew that coming in with the, with the tariffs that were proposed during President Trump’s campaign, we did have a weak first quarter GDP number forecast. Our team was 0.1% off of nailing that first quarter GDP number, so they were right on the money there. Uh, we were very impressed with that, but we do expect a sluggish first half of the year. We call it the recovery phase of the cycle. What we mean by that is our growth rates are still building momentum, but are still negative year over year. You know, ITR. Really known for its emphasis on leading indicators. So which of the leading indicators you guys rely on the most when and, and I guess which are flashing red or green right now? I’ll give you one of each. Uh, yeah. The one we’re in right now, we look at the purchasing managers, index isms, purchasing managers index. Now we look at at on a one 12 basis. What I mean by that is we compare the most recent month, the same month one year ago. The reason we look at it on that basis is it gives us 12 month lead time into the future when you correlate it to the economy. That index was recently rising until we got the most recent month of data, and then it dropped back down. So that is giving us the mixed signal of, hey, we need to be a little bit more concerned about the prospect for growth moving forward. Now the opposite is true when we look at an indicator called capacity utilization. What Capacity utilization measures, it’s about an eight month lead time to the economy. So still a nice view into the future, but what it measures is output over capacity, and that actually continues to improve meaning. And again, really all that means on a simple level is we’re utilizing more of our existing capacity, so we’re getting busier. If we look at the consumer side of inflation that the Fed’s more concerned about in terms of setting policy, we have inflation essentially flat this year from where we are today. Now, if you look at the CPI, it’s at 2.8%. Our projection for the end of the year is 2.8%. We don’t see inflation coming down much at all. As a result of that, that’s why you’re seeing Chairman Powell back off being able to cut rates and is holding these rates steady because he sees these higher inflation risks as well. And so from our perspective, it’s very unlikely you see any meaningful interest rate decline this year. Yeah. Now again, the second quarter, GDP number can have an impact on that. We do see a very weak second quarter chairman Powell alluded just a couple of days ago to some slack in the labor market. Maybe you can get a quarter point if we have a really weak second quarter, quarter point cut, but it just seems very unlikely given how persistent inflation has been. And so we tell all of our clients, prepare for interest rates to be relatively flat this year, and prepare for interest rates to rise through the balance of the second half of the decade. It’s not just tariffs, it’s employment costs, it’s electricity costs, it’s material costs. There’s a lot more driving higher inflation than just tariffs. What macroeconomic trends are you watching right now with regards to how they’re shaping the markets today? I think there’s really three things right over the long run. They’re gonna debase the currency, that’s gonna be a persistent tailwind for all liquid, uh, assets, including stocks. Bitcoin gold and bonds. And then I think that you also are going to have a, uh, very interesting dynamic around all these tariffs, uh, and kind of the administration’s economic policies. And then the third thing is that there is a whole technology, uh, trend to, uh, pay attention to. Uh, obviously innovation is very deflationary. Uh, we’ve got, you know, things from humanoid robots to rockets to gene editing, to uh, to crypto and everything in between. And so I think those three things really tell the story of where, uh, markets potentially go in the future. When I grew up, um. S and P 500 was the benchmark. There’s a risk-free rate in bonds. I believe that my generation and younger sees Bitcoin as the benchmark. And so, uh, it’s very simple. If you can’t beat it, you gotta buy it. And I think that there’s institutions around the country who are realizing they can’t beat the benchmark and therefore they will end up buying it. And really, to me, that is, uh, maybe the most interesting. Part of the entire conversation is that Bitcoin obviously has risen significantly on a percentage basis in appreciation. Bitcoin has kind of infiltrated every corner of finance, but most importantly is it has transitioned from a high risk, you know, kind of asymmetric type asset to now it’s becoming the hurdle rate uhhuh. And if you’re the hurdle rate, you suck up a lot of capital. Yeah. Because there’s not a lot of people who can beat you. And I think that that is a very powerful position for Bitcoin to be in. And that’s how you infiltrate into, uh, the institutional portfolios. Bitcoin will stop going up. When they stop printing money. I don’t think they’re gonna stop printing money, so I don’t think Bitcoin’s gonna stop going up. That’s kind of one huge component of this. The second thing is that Bitcoin is very unique in that the higher the price goes, the less risky it is deemed by the largest pools of capital. Mm-hmm. And so usually, you know, if NVIDIA’s at a $4 trillion market cap, people like, oh, it might be overvalued there. A lot of debate. Right. Bitcoin if it was at a $4 trillion market cap would be way less risky than it when’s at 2 trillion. And so there is a lot of structural advantages, both from the legacy world but also from the Bitcoin market that I think will continue to lead to these large institutional capital pools. Uh, allocating some percentage. And the beauty is right now we have very small adoption in that world. Uh, it’s only gonna get bigger. It’s only gonna get more normalized. And I think that one of the parts people really underestimate when it comes to Bitcoin is how important time passing is. You know, if you think back, uh, there is not anyone under the age of 16 that has lived their life without Bitcoin existing. If you’re keeping large chunks of money in savings account, paying less than 1% or any percent less than inflation, you’re bleeding wealth every single day. It feels safe. It looks safe, right? ’cause the numbers may not be moving nominally but it, but it’s not safe. It’s a bucket with a hole in the bottom and you don’t even notice until it’s almost empty. That’s why the wealthy don’t hoard cash. They own assets. They own assets that inflate with inflation. If you can’t beat ’em, join them. They buy things that grow in value as dollars shrink because they understand the system. They don’t fight it, they ride it. So you’ve said many times that the current monetary system is broken and headed for reckoning. So from your perspective, what are the core flaws in the system right now and how do we get here? Well, probably the largest and most obvious underlying flaw in the monetary system is the fact that the federal government just can’t balance its budget. And so they have to take on debt to cover the deficit that they run and that deficit. Well, you know, over the course of the last 20 years, it’s gone up and down. More recently, it’s gone mostly up and, uh. We just came through a period where, you know, it was reemphasized to everybody. Just what a problem this is. Because as you’ll recall, when Trump was first elected, they were talking about those, the Department of Government Efficiency and cutting expenses and you know, maybe 2 trillion or 1 trillion. Of course, then Elon got frustrated and left and the numbers have come down and you know, Trump and the Freedom Caucus was saying they were gonna try and balance the budget or at least cut expenses. And of course, what we know is that they just passed this big beautiful bill. Which really increases the deficits and they bump the debt, uh, ceiling up by another $5 trillion. So sadly, what do many of us have seen and been saying, which is to say they just can’t stop, kind of continue. Seems to be continuing. And, um, you know, the reason why that, just to close the full circle, the reason why that matters is they, they do this debt, they issue debt to cover these deficits, and then the debt requires interest payments and, you know, there’s not enough money to make the interest payments. And so. They more or less have to print the money, you know, and inflate the money supply to keep the system going. And that’s why it’s so important to hard assets. You know, we need to grow the economy at, you know, 4, 5, 6, 7% a year, which, which we’ve never really done on real terms. Well, I think that is kind of what they’re projecting it might be, but it, it’s gonna be harder than hell to achieve. I mean, it just, where you can’t just snap your fingers and create that growth. Now, don’t get me wrong, if you start to, if you ramp up inflation. If you have 10% inflation, well then the GDP number’s gonna get bigger, fast. And so really the model they’ve used, they call it the R Star model, is that they’ve got to have faster growth. Growth rate has to be higher than interest rates, or else you’re in a debt spiral. And so what’s been happening is, by the way, that’s why Trump wants to take interest rates down so much. You know, he is called for a 300 basis point cut. Imagine right now with inflation running at three plus percent, if they cut rates to one point a half percent or one point a quarter percent, I mean, it would be good for the economy. People would refi their houses. You know, there were all kinds of, you know, growth, right? Huge. But in turn it would be inflationary, very inflationary. That’s the trap. They’re really kind of caught in. It’s a seventies kind of stagflation sort of environment. You know, if they don’t keep rates low, they’re not gonna have any growth. If they want to get growth, they’ve gotta keep rates low. That’s gonna lead to monetary creation, which is gonna lead to inflation. Look how it all resolves is very complicated and none of us know. Yeah, sure. But what I do know with very high certainty, with a lot of confidence is this is going to be an inflationary decade. It’s already been an inflationary decade, and because of the way the math is today is very highly likely to continue to be an inflationary decade until we fix this monetary system. Well, we have less than 3% adoption. Three goes to six fairly easily. You know, human beings underestimate how long change really requires, and then we really underestimate how much change actually occurs. Think the internet like we are moving into a digital planet, right? Robots are not going to use credit cards, man. They’re not gonna use, they don’t need visa. We don’t need middlemen. The cool thing about Bitcoin, unlike the Rolls Royce, is you don’t have to buy the whole Rolls Royce. You can buy a fraction of it. You know, you don’t, maybe you guys partner with each other to do apartment buildings. Well, you’re already doing fractured deals on apartment buildings, so Sure. It’s not really that different. 2%, 3% goes to six. I mean, it does go to six. You have the largest ETF in the history of ETFs, okay? This supersedes the goal. ETF by orders of magnitude. I study markets very, very well, price. Really gets people’s attention. I think price is, uh, 90% of Bitcoin. Like I am truly a supply and demand guy. Oh wow. 21 million. And you guys have lost four. You lost 4 million coins. Oh, how’d you lose the 4 million? You lost the 4 million. I know how you lost it. You mispriced it. Bitcoin has been mispriced every day. Its entire history. Dude. 19 million coins have been issued. The addressable market is 8 billion people. You don’t need ’em all. Yep. You just need a small function of those 8 billion to go, Ooh. 21 million units and and four have been lost. It’s already mispriced. Okay. They’re pricing Bitcoin at one 15 Today, assuming there’s 21 million units, we know there’s not. There’s 17, so the supply shrunk. The market caps at 2 trillion. Hello. The standard deduction for a household is now, uh, what in a low 32,000 range. And it turns out that 60% of the households in the United States cannot take advantage of itemized deductions. That is when they take their mortgage interest, property taxes, charitable deductions, they don’t get that number. And so there’s not as much benefit to home ownership as there used to be in the United States. With our big institutional players, nobody wants their appraised values to be quickly marked down to market, because if your competitors don’t do the same thing and they’re part of the index and benchmark that you compete against, you’re going to underperform. And so we’ve traditionally had a lot. Appraised values for real estate among the institutional players, especially. You don’t get this out of the private market, but you get this from the nare players, the institutional type players, and, um, and everybody’s, uh, uh, fearful of underperforming that index. I would prefer as a private investor just to go ahead, bite the bullet and mark it down. Now take the pain if in fact you’ve seen it go down. Some markets have seen property values go down 30, 35% even in multifamily, but they’ve bottomed out in the transaction market and, and absolutely the, uh, the appraisers are gonna have to bring it down and the owners are gonna have to ease up that pressure and say, yes, I want a realistic appraisal. But, um, but there is that fear of underperforming the index and that’s. What’s holding up the American appraisal firms in 2008, 9, 10, 11, we saw a lot of deep distress. The the smart money was ready for it. Now, there’s a lot of people with dry powder, as we say. Ready to p on the market hoping for some distress from those who cannot refinance now, whose, whose CMBS loan or other money is, is rolling. A couple points there. One is, I think you’re going to see more loan modifications this cycle than last time because they realize it’s temporary and they realize that not all properties are in trouble. And these tend to be the higher leverage properties. The smart private wealth investors tended to use conservative leverage over the last several years knowing we’d hit a cycle and, and they probably are 65% or less. Leverage some of the, um, greener newer investment managers might have gone up to 80% and might have even used variable rate debt when they shouldn’t have. They’re the ones getting nailed. They’re losing all their equity and that property is distressed. So there’s not that much of it out there. But there’s a little bit, and I would certainly pounce on it if you can find it. There are often a lot of sort of hidden costs associated with buying versus renting. Can you talk about trying to weed through some of that? Sure some of the highest costs that we don’t think about when we own, although we do take cut down on risk. And also I think that’s come back to consumption. I, I is the fact that there’s the opportunity cost. So think about having 50%, a hundred percent of your home paid for. This, it’s the opportunity cost. You’ve actually taken capital out of play at higher returns to put it into something that perhaps, yes, you see it as a form of an investment, but it’s also partly consumption. And I think that’s why many people end up paying for their homes when they can, because there’s an old saying, and that is, you can’t go broke if you don’t owe money on it. Right? So if you, it’s hard for the lender to come get your home and you don’t really care, right? You wanna be able to. Have no debt on your home. It doesn’t make the typical financial sense if we argue at it from leverage and returns and maximization of returns. I think most people this high end level are looking at, you know, I, I, I, I have high net worth. I’m looking at both consumption and the investment side of the component. But very often the consumption wins and the investment is I can be safe and I can own this house. Outright in many states too. Your homeowner, the home that you live in, you are actually, if you’ve homesteaded the home, you’re actually protected against lawsuits and other things that are out there. Divorce cases will protect your position in, in terms of a homestead, so you can protect a significant portion of wealth by having a paid for home. What are some of those markets that are really overpriced versus. I guess underpriced right now. So when we look at the top 10 most overpriced markets in America right now, we look at their prices, where they are and compare them to where they should be statistically modeling them. We’re seeing the most overpriced markets are Detroit at 33.5% and then falling, falling, descending. Order of Cleveland, Ohio. New Haven, Connecticut, Akron, Ohio, Worcester, Massachusetts, Las Vegas, Nevada, Hartford, Connecticut. Rochester, New York, Knoxville, Tennessee, Toledo, Ohio. You’ll notice. And these are overpriced. These are overpriced. These, the overpriced mark. That’s so, that’s sort of counterintuitive, isn’t it? Ab absolutely. But yes. Wow. Okay. And then h how about the, uh, underpriced markets? I’m curious on that too. Sure. So when we then go to the opposite end of the spectrum, and usually now with underpriced comes risk and there’s risk in both of these markets, what you wanna do, both overpriced and underpriced, what you wanna be long term in a housing market. Uh, ’cause you want to be really close to that trend and not have these dramatic swings. It’s just like stock price. We don’t like volatility. Housing, it’s, it’s dangerous for performance. The most underpriced markets. We only have four markets in America right now that are trading at a discount relative to their long-term pricing trend. In other words, statistically, where they historically prices say prices should be today only four cities are underperforming. That that’s Austin, Texas at 3.1% below where they should be, or a discount of 3.1%. San Francisco at a discount of 6.5%. Wow. New Orleans, Louisiana at a discount of 8.7 and Honolulu, Hawaii at a discount of 10.3. Notice I’m not saying these markets are inexpensive. They’re just below where they’ve historically been. These are the best buys right now because they’re below their long-term trend. One of our other indices, we call it our price to rent ratio. It’s really a PE ratio for rents versus home ownership. And then so we can look at that. So if you’re in our a hundred markets, we know the average price, right? So it’s gonna be priced, divided by the annual average rent. So it’s gonna be how many dollars in price do you pay for every $1 and annual rent? And that gives us the relative difference between owning and renting. The higher that ratio. The, the more you should on in general be leaning towards renting, the lower that ratio, the more you should be leaning towards owning. And we used to do an old buy versus rent index for 23 cities. We now do it for 100 cities. And this price to rent ratio produces almost the same exact answer. So when we look at the average price to rent ratio in an area and we just compare, are they above or currently are you above the price to rent ratio? Uh, for Los Angeles, California. Are you below it? If you’re above that average for say the last 10 years, you’re gonna be rent friendly. If you’re below it, you’re gonna be bio friendly. I can do this very quickly. Pick a California market you’d like to know about. Why don’t we try Dallas, Texas. Okay. Dallas, Texas. That one’s in the top 100 in terms of population. So Dallas, Texas, uh, their price to rent ratio is at about a, just below a 6% premium. In other words, that trade off between renting and owning is about 6% above where it should be, so it slightly favors renting. I’ll jump to the next index. If we look at actual prices in Dallas, there’s a slight premium. So it’s, it’s, it’s telling me, Hey, that my price to rent ratio’s high, slightly favoring ownership, but it’s probably because prices are a little high and they might change. Uh, Dallas has had a bit of a. Premium right now. So I will now go look at Dallas rents. My gut feeling is they’re gonna be below average and they are. They’re at about a 4.5% discount. So that’s just market dynamics in motion right there. And we can do that for a hundred cities pretty quickly. Mm-hmm. You make a lot of money, but are still worried about retirement. Maybe you didn’t start earning until your thirties, now you’re trying to catch up. Meanwhile, you’ve got a mortgage, a private school to pay for, and you feel like you’re getting further and further behind. Good news. If you need to catch up on retirement, check out a program. M put off by some of the oldest and most prestigious life insurance companies in the world. It’s called Wealth Accelerator, and it can help you amplify your returns quickly, protect your money from creditors, and provide financial protection to your family if something happens to you. The concepts here are used by some of the wealthiest families in the world, and there’s no reason why they can’t be used by you. Check it out for yourself by going to wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Hope you enjoyed it and uh, once again. Thanks again for listening. Uh, I truly appreciate your support. I hope, uh, I hope it’s been entertaining for you and that you’ll learn something along the way and, um, you know, always appreciate your feedback. Shoot me an email, bucket wealth formula.com. Let me know if there’s things that you want me to do. Let me know if there’s things you wanna hear more about. Uh, but hopefully it’s gonna be a good year and we’re gonna keep plugging away talking about the, you know, try to get educated myself and pass along information to you on Wealth Formula Podcast. That’s it for me this week on Wealth Formula Podcast. This is Buck Joffrey. If you wanna learn more, you can now get free access to our in-depth personal finance course featuring industry leaders like Tom Wheel Wright and Ken McElroy. Visit well formula roadmap.com.

For years, gold was the asset nobody wanted to talk about. It sat there quietly while stocks and real estate continued to rip. Gold was for pessimists. For doomsayers and perma-bears.And then suddenly… gold didn’t just wake up. It launched. As of mid-December 2025, spot gold is trading around $4,300–$4,400 an ounce, depending on the market, marking a gain of roughly 60% over the past year and pushing decisively into record territory. The obvious question is: why now? The short answer is that gold isn’t reacting to one thing. It’s responding to a stacking of pressures that have been quietly building for years and are now impossible to ignore.Start with central banks. For the better part of the last decade, central banks were net sellers or indifferent holders of gold. That changed dramatically after 2022. According to the World Gold Council, central banks have been buying gold at more than double the pace of the pre-COVID years, and 2025 continues that trend, with hundreds of tonnes added to reserves year-to-date. These aren’t hedge funds chasing momentum. These are monetary authorities making deliberate, strategic decisions about what they trust to hold value. Why would central banks suddenly want more gold? Because geopolitics has re-entered the chat. We now live in a world where reserves can be frozen, payment systems can be weaponized, and “risk-free” assets depend heavily on political alignment. The World Bank has been explicit that rising geopolitical tensions and global uncertainty are key drivers of gold’s surge this year. When trust in the global order erodes, gold benefits. At the same time, the U.S. dollar devaluation thesis is no longer fringe thinking. It is reality.Gold is priced in dollars, and when real yields fall and the dollar weakens, gold historically performs well. That dynamic is playing out again. Reuters has repeatedly pointed to a softer dollar and declining Treasury yields as near-term tailwinds for gold’s rally . Bank of America’s research echoes this relationship, emphasizing gold’s inverse correlation to the dollar and the growing desire among nations to diversify away from dollar-centric reserves . In other words, gold isn’t just going up because people are scared. It’s going up because confidence in fiat discipline is eroding, slowly but persistently. So…Is gold still a buy or did we miss it? The truth is, both answers can be correct. Yes, gold is expensive relative to where it was a year ago. You don’t go up 60% without pulling future returns forward. But what makes this cycle different is that many of the buyers driving demand are price-insensitive. Central banks don’t care if gold is up 20% or down 10% in a quarter. They care about long-term reserve integrity. That’s why major institutions aren’t dismissing the move as a blow-off. Goldman Sachs has cited sustained central-bank demand and the potential for further ETF inflows as supportive of higher prices. J.P. Morgan continues to frame gold as a beneficiary of geopolitical instability and monetary uncertainty, and Bank of America is projecting prices as high as $5,000 an ounce into 2026. Of course, nothing goes up in a straight line. A shift toward tighter monetary policy or a sudden easing of global tensions could cool enthusiasm. Understand though, that gold’s breakout isn’t just about gold. There is a larger message that should be taken away from all of this. Hard money has come back into favor. Gold is the original hard asset. It’s scarce, politically neutral, and has thousands of years of monetary credibility. But it’s also heavy, difficult to move, and awkward in a digital world. Bitcoin exists on the same philosophical axis. Both gold and Bitcoin are reactions to the same problem: expanding debt, monetary dilution, and declining confidence in centralized control. Gold is the conservative expression of that view. Bitcoin is the aggressive one. Today, Bitcoin trades around $86,000, still volatile, still controversial, still misunderstood. But if gold’s surge is signaling a regime shift toward hard assets, then Bitcoin may simply be earlier in that adoption curve. In other words, gold may be leading the parade. And if history is any guide, when institutions start moving into the oldest form of sound money, they eventually begin exploring the newest. That’s the signal worth paying attention to. So this week, I interview Dana Samuelson, an old friend of the show and an expert in everything gold and hard money. Transcript Disclaimer: This transcript was generated by AI and may not be 100% accurate. If you notice any errors or corrections, please email us at phil@wealthformula.com.  Gold isn’t reacting to one thing, it’s actually responding to a stacking, uh, pressures, uh, that have been quietly building for years and, and really right now are impossible to ignore. Welcome, everybody. This is Buck Joffrey with the Wealth Formula Podcast coming to you. From Montecito, California and today. Uh, before we begin, just a quick reminder. Uh, there is a, uh, website associated with this podcast called wealth formula.com. And, uh, that’s where you go to get deeply more deeply integrated into this community, including our accredited investor club, AKA investor club for you to join. And, uh, once you get onboarded, all you do is you, you have an opportunity to see private deal flow, uh, that, uh, is not available to the general public. If you are an accredited investor, meaning that you have, uh, make $200,000 per year or $300,000 per year, uh, for the last two years with the reasonable expectation of continuing to do so, or you have a million dollars outside of your personal residence, a net worth, then you are an accredited investor and. All you need to do is sign up and join the club. Just go to wealth formula.com and sign up and get onboarded. Now, let’s talk a little bit about something that has been extraordinary this year. It’s gold. You know, for years, gold was the asset that nobody wanted to talk about. I mean, it sat there quietly. Well, stocks and real estate continue to rip. Um. Gold really is really, you know, was for the pessimists. For the doomsayers and the perma bears. I mean, I, I gotta tell you, I kind of am was one of those people, right? And then suddenly gold didn’t just wake up. It, it totally launched, exploded in his mid-December 2025. Spot Gold is trading around, I know, 4300, 4400 an ounce, depending on the market, gaining roughly 60% over the past year. Pushing decisively into record territory. Now the obvious question is why now? Well, the short answer is that gold isn’t reacting to one thing. It’s actually responding to a stacking, uh, pressures, uh, that have been quietly building for years and, and really right now are impossible to ignore. And this is an interesting shift because. The thing is that in the old days, and I’m even talking about 15, 20 years ago, uh, you would look at gold as something that didn’t really go up when the stock market was doing well, right? It was kind of a reaction. It was a fear-based thing. It still is sort of a fear-based thing, but now it’s not just fear of, you know, whether the stock market’s gonna crash. It’s fear of geopolitical concerns. That’s where the central banks come in, right? So for the better part of the last decade, central banks were net sellers. Or really indifferent of holders of, of gold, and that changed dramatically after 2022. So according to World Gold Council, central banks have been buying gold at more than double the pace of the pre COVID years. And 2025 continued that trend with hundreds of tons, uh, added to reserves year to date Now. These are central banks. They’re not hedge funds chasing momentum, right? They’re monetary authorities and they’re making deliberate strategic decisions about what they trust to hold value. And why would central banks suddenly want more gold? Well, because again, geopolitics has reentered that chat. We live in a world now where reserves can be frozen, right? Payment systems can be weaponized. Risk-free assets depend heavily on political alignment. Now of course, I’m talking about the United States when I’m mentioning all those things, right? Uh, how we can kind of just freeze assets of Russia and that kind of thing. I’m not, uh, pro-Russia, I’m just pointing out the fact that. Countries don’t like it when you freeze their assets. Right? The World Bank, uh, has been explicit that rising geopolitical tensions and global uncertainty are the key drivers of gold surges this year. And when trust in the global Ory roads, of course that is now when gold benefits and at the same time, the US dollar devaluation thesis is no longer just kind of fringe thinking. It’s reality. No one, no one even bothers to pretend that that’s not happening. So gold is, uh, of course, priced in dollars and when real yields fall, uh, and the dollar weakens gold historically performs well so that that dynamic is playing out again as well. In fact, Reuters has repeatedly pointed to a softer dollar and declining treasury yields as near term tailwinds for Gold’s Rally Bank of America. Uh, their research shows, uh, this relationship emphasizing gold’s inverse correlation to the dollar and the growing desire among nations to diversify away from the dollar centric reserves. In other words, gold isn’t just going up because people are scared. It’s going up because confidence in the fiat discipline is eroding altogether slowly. Persistently. So the question is, is gold still a buyer? Did we miss it? I mean, I just mentioned that it just went up by like 60%, right? So that’s a tricky question. It really is. I could certainly see some volatility there. But here’s the thing. I mentioned that central banks were big buyer, right? Central banks don’t care if gold is up 20% or down 10% in a quarter. They care about long-term reserve integrity. So they’re a price insensitive buyer. Um, and that’s why major, major institutions aren’t dismissing the move, as you know, just a big blow off. Uh, Goldman Sachs cited sustain central bank demand, and the potential for further ETF inflows is supportive of higher prices. Banks, uh, like JP Morgan and um, and, and Bank of America. I mean, they’re continuously talking about how gold is a beneficiary of this geopolitical instability. Bank of America is projecting prices high as $5,000 a ounce in 2026. So that’s still a big move, right? Of course, nothing goes up in a straight line. So shift toward tighter monetary policy or sudden easing of global tensions. Well, I, I could, they could cool enthusiasm, right? The less fear in the world. Well, that isn’t. That’s not good for gold. I understand though that gold’s breakout isn’t just about gold. There’s a larger message that should be taken away from all of this, and that is that hard money, real assets have come back into favoring, and gold is the original hard asset. It’s scarce, it’s politically neutral, tens of thousands of years of monetary credibility, but it’s also heavy, difficult to move and awkward in a digital world. Now, of course you know where I’m going with that. I don’t wanna make every gold conversation conversation about Bitcoin, but just as a reminder, Bitcoin exists on that same philosophical access, right? Both gold and Bitcoin are reactions to the same problem. Expanding debt, monetary dilution, declining confidence and centralized control. Gold is the conservative, you know, version of that, the expression of that Bitcoin is the crazy youngster, the aggressive one. They’re, they’re following the same rails. And today Bitcoin trades around $86,000. It’s still volatile, still controversial, still misunderstood, and really, listen, the market cap is 2 trillion bucks. Um, you know, no asset that has ever reached $2 trillion. Market cap has ever gotten to zero. But on the other hand, there’s it, it’s pretty small, and you could still move those markets really quickly, and that’s why you’ve got volatility. But if gold surge is signaling a, a, a shift towards hard assets, it’s really hard to not see that. Uh, Bitcoin may simply be, uh, you know, early in that adoption curve. In other words, gold may be leading the parade. And if history is any guide, uh, when institutions start moving into that, you know, oldest form of sound money, they eventually begin exploring the newest. And that’s, that’s a signal. Worth paying attention to. Anyway, this week what we’re gonna really focus on though is gold and hard money. We’ll talk a little bit about Bitcoin as well. My guest is Dana Samuelson, who is. An old friend of the show, and we will have that conversation right after these messages. Wealth Formula banking is an ingenious concept powered by whole life insurance, but instead of acting just as a safety net, the strategy supercharges your investments. First, you create a personal financial reservoir that grows at a compounding interest rate much higher than any bank savings account. As your money accumulates, you borrow from your own. Bank to invest in other cash flowing investments. Here’s the key. Even though you’ve borrowed money at a simple interest rate, your insurance company keeps paying. You compound interest on that money even though you’ve borrowed it at result, you make money in two places at the same time. That’s why your investments get supercharged. This isn’t a new technique, it’s a refined strategy used by some of the wealthiest families in history, and it uses century old rock solid insurance companies as its back. Turbo charge your investments. Visit wealth formula banking.com. Again, that’s wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Today my guest on Wealth Formula podcast ad Samuelson. He is been on the show before. He’s friend of the show. He is a professional. How do we see this numismatist since, uh, 1980. Working with some of the most influential, precious metals trading companies in the country. Before founding his own American Gold Exchange Incorporated in 1998. Uh, for nearly a decade, he was a personal protege of James U. Blanchard ii, one of the true giants of the industry, and the individual most responsible for re legalizing the private ownership of gold in the us. American Gold Exchange Inc. Is a national mail order, precious metals and rare coin dealership that makes competitive buy and sell markets in mainstream, modern, gold, silver, platinum, palladium, bullion coins and bars and classic pre 1933 US Gold and silver coins and World War ii European Gold coins. I don’t know if I left anything out, but welcome Dana. How are you doing? I’m doing great, buck. Thanks for having me back. I really appreciate it. Well, it was funny, we had a little conversation, uh, just before we started and I said, well, gosh, you know, uh, we’ve had you on the show before, maybe once, maybe twice. And, you know, and, and you, um, I think Apley described the gold market as watching paint dry. And I, I think that’s, I think that’s pretty adequate. Um, I mean, for, I mean, the last decade or so before this all happened. So, so let’s start talking about it. So, gold gold’s moved into price territory that, you know, very few people would’ve predicted even a couple years ago. So what, from your perspective, having lived lived through multiple gold cycles, what feels fundamentally different about this move? Uh, this market is a globally driven market and it’s focused on physical. There’s been a move into gold this year, and silver now platinum two. To a degree palladium, uh, in a physical level that we haven’t seen since the late seventies when we had the last really, you know, red hot market driven by fears over debt inflation. Geopolitics. Uh, you’ve got the bricks, nations that are trying to divorce themselves of the dollar, but they really can’t do it easily because there’s not a good viable alternative except for gold. And that’s been one of the leading drivers of this gold price surge that has really, you know, almost doubled in price since, uh, two years ago. A lot of it is, you know, underpinned by Central Bank Gold buying, you know, between 1950 and 2010, after the dollar became the world’s reserve currency backed by gold. And even after we un pegged the dollar to gold in the 1970s, 1971, central bankers had had gold on their, physically in their vaults from pre-World War ii when gold was money, uh, they shed that. From the 1950 all the way to 2010, they became net buyers after the great financial crisis due to the global debt explosion and primarily quantitative easing printing money outta thin air. But they were buy, they were modest buyers, you know, 500 tons a year until Russia invaded the Ukraine in 2022. And we sanctioned Russia and weaponized the dollar. The last four years, they bought, you know, almost a thousand tons of gold year or double. That really became material last year in price as the cumulative effects of their continually buying about a fifth of what the mines make every year started to really impact supplies and price movement. And now we’ve got President Trump this year, you know, throwing a monkey wrench into the World Trade order with his tariffs. And I think that that’s created a lot of uncertainty, some fear. And of course the debt just continues to go higher and higher. And now interest payments on our debt are over a trillion dollars for the first time ever. So debt servicing is starting to become problematic. The cumulative effects of all this have caused the, the people around the world, including central governments to buy gold at record rates. Um, but it’s not the phenomenon that’s happening in the United States. ’cause we don’t have a gold culture in our country, like almost every other country does. It’s interesting. Um, so what, you know, you’ve been talking about really is central banks around the world have it really been accumulating gold at levels we haven’t really seen in modern times. Right. And, and, uh, why do you think the US Central Bank. It doesn’t do the same because is it an admission of the debasement of the dollar? Because really the gold, gold is the anti dollar. I’ve always viewed it as the anti dollar maybe. Maybe that’s not the, you know, you may not agree with that a hundred percent, but I’ve always viewed it that way, and so why wouldn’t the US hedge and accumulate more? Well, we’re the world’s reserve currency. That Right. That’s, that’s created a paper culture in our, in our world. It’s now three generations old, right? Since 1945, when the dollar became the world’s reserve currency and we, the world went to a paper money standard instead of a gold money standard, which was the world’s standard from ancient times all the way till the 1930s. You know, the, our monetary system when the country was founded in 1793 was based on gold and silver coins. A copper penny was the size of a half dollar because that’s what one penny’s worth of copper was worth in 1793. Right. Um, you know, after World War ii, we had a couple things that the rest of the world didn’t have. We had a manufacturing, uh, industries that were, uh, unaffected by the, physically by the war. And we had, you know, the ability for markets to work properly, which should allow the dollar to become the world’s reserve currency. Backed by, you know, 8,200 some odd tons of gold, the biggest pile of gold that any country had. Actually, at that time it was more like 20,000 tons of gold. Uh, but by the time we got to the seventies and we un pegged from gold, we were down to about 8,000 tons. That’s still more than anybody else is supposed to have. I do think China could have more gold than that. Now they’re just not telling us they do. You know, officially they’ve got about 2,400 tons of gold, uh, and the second and third are, you know, 3000 tons of gold. So we, we still have a lot of gold. And there’s talk about auditing Fort Knox and monetizing it, but it only gets us about a trillion dollars. It’s not enough to really, you affect the 38 trillion, maybe pay the debt off for a year, or, you know, for six months. Six months, yeah. Something like that. Our, our debt is starting to matter too. You know, it’s doubled twice in the last 20 years. It gonna double again in the next 10 to 70 trillion, 78 trillion. People hear about the, the whole, uh, the bricks phenomena, right? And part of, part of what you were just discussing in the, uh, accumulation of gold. Explain that, explain what’s going on over there for people who aren’t paying attention, and you know how that is, how that is playing into all of this. Well, when we sanctioned Russia after they invaded the Ukraine. And seized their assets and threw them off of the Swift International Bank Transfer Payment System. We forced countries that were concerned that if they ran politically afoul of us, we could do the same to them. They forced them into thinking, oh, how do we get some independence from that vulnerability? Potential vulnerability? It’s not easy to replace the dollar. What they’ve, what they’ve been doing is replacing the Swift Bank transfer payment system with a payment transfer system of their own right so they can move money amongst themselves outside of the SWIFT system, number one. And since there isn’t a good viable alternative to the dollar, really the only other asset that makes sense is gold. Gold is a neutral asset. It’s not like you need it for oil or grain or steel. Nobody really needs gold, right? But it’s universally trusted. It’s immediately liquid, and it’s got a couple other things going for it that are unique. Number one, it has no counterparty risk. It’s one of the only assets. It isn’t simultaneously someone else’s liability. And number two, uh, gold in a vault can’t be seized or sanctioned. Right, so they’ve been going to gold, like they’ve been going to gold for, for centuries. It’s just, it hasn’t been that way since after World War ii. It’s a, it’s kinda like a back to the past kind of a situation. It’s sort of back to the future. It’s back to the past. That’s the allure for gold and the reason why they’re accumulating. In fact, they just launched their own currency unit called the unit. 40% backed by gold. The bricks nations have now it’s in its infancy and it’ll take a while for it to really, you know, work. But they’ve been building the components and the infrastructure to get to this point, creating the transfer of payment systems and all the components to go along with that so that they could announce something that they could use as a, as a settlement vehicle for trade, which is really what this is all about. And they’re backing at 40% by gold. Which is material and it’ll become bigger as time passes. Let’s, let’s try talk a little bit about that price movement. Huge. Um, is 60% in the last couple years, is that about right? This year alone, gold’s up 67% on a 12 month rolling basis, 67%. I mean, those are like bitcoin num, you know, type movements in the past. Right. They’re kind of crazy. So a lot of people are looking at those prices today and they’re thinking, well, I’m late to the party. Uh, are they late to the party? How do you, uh, what, what do you think’s going on there? I think the party’s about halfway through. We haven’t got to the late innings yet. I, I really do think this, and this is why this is the fourth major bull run in gold we’ve seen since we went off the gold standard in 1971. We had a a 20 to one run for gold in the seventies that was built on two oil shocks. 18% inflation and a crisis of confidence in the US then for the next 30 years. You know, 25 years a good part of my career. You know, watching gold was like watching paint dry. It traded routinely between three and $500 an ounce until we got into war, uh, following the nine 11 attacks, Iraq and I, Afghanistan, and we went into deficit spending. Then we had a second financial crisis when the great financial crisis hit another bull bull market in gold. Then we had COVID economic closures, another bull market in gold. Now we’ve got a fourth, but it’s lacking what the first three had, which was fear in the US over either economics or geopolitical events. So this gold price has essentially doubled since March or April of 2024. With no fear and a lot of complacency in the US markets. So my, my thinking is what happens if the economy slows down and, you know, the Fed’s gonna lower rates anyway. We know that’s coming with a new Fed chairman in the next five months, six months, number one, that’s good for gold. What happens if we go into a real economic slowdown and the Fed really has to drop rates, or God forbid, go to QE again, right? Or inflation rears its ugly head because the fed’s too accommodative in it. Situation where, you know, supplies are kind of tight still because of the monkey wrench, president Trump has thrown into the World Trade Order. You know, if we get fear in the US that’s when gold could go from 4,000 to, you know, 8,000. And I’m not saying that’s gonna happen, but I do think the trends have driven gold higher are not gonna change anytime soon. One of the things that you’re mentioning is those trends and like even. You know, in the last 15 years ago when I’ve been sort of involved in the investor world, the, the things that we talk about with trends with with gold have changed. I mean, usually you don’t see AI stocks going up with gold, right? Like, I mean, not that AI was around, but the point is tech stocks, that kind of thing. How is that thesis fundamentally changed? Um, I’m not quite sure I understand your question. Well, what I mean is like if gold was, gold used to be, I think it’s, you know, something again that people would buy when they were afraid of, of what’s going on in the equity markets. Right. Uh, that’s clearly not the case now. No, no, not at all. Right. Talk about that change. When did that change happen? How did it happen? This is a globally driven market. It’s not a US-centric market. This is fear around the world. You know, central banks started to underpin this market in 2022 when they stepped up their buying and doubled it. But this year, because of the uncertainty, uh, and some of the fear that President Trump’s tariffs and the way they’ve been deployed, kind of knee jerky, um, and inconsistently. Certainly not diplomatically, right? You know, it’s caused a lot of concern around the world. And for example, in April when President Trump announced the reciprocal tariffs on April 2nd, what happened? The bond market went into the complete dislocation, yields spiked from 4% to 4.5% in a week. The bond values tumble because investors started pulling money out of the, and taking it back home. Money that’d come in from Europe and Asia started to go back. So what did President Trump do? He pulled back the reciprocal tariffs on every country, but China and China said, well, we’re not gonna drop tariffs on you. And he said, well, we’ll ramp ’em up on you. So we went toe to toe with him. Until a week later, we were at 145% tariffs on China, and they were 125% on us. Well, if you’re a Chinese investor and you have real estate or stocks to invest in, and both of which have done badly since COVID or gold, what are you gonna do when your best customer suddenly says, Hey, we really don’t want your products, because that’s what 145% tariffs say to the Chinese. We don’t want your products. You can’t sell ’em here. You gotta go sell ’em somewhere else, but we’re their best customer. So they bought gold. They bought gold handover fist, and they drove the gold price up $500 by themselves during that month. That’s what I mean by fear outside of the us. Yeah. We don’t get it inside. Well, and and that’s fear outside of the markets too, right? I think that’s, that’s the fundamental shift I was trying to get at is true. It used to be that gold was, uh, gold would react on fear of the markets, but now there’s another level of fear, which is geopolitical. And it doesn’t seem like there’s any time soon that that’s gonna end. No, no. I, I, I’ve called it like a run on the bank only. It’s not a run on the bank of like George Bailey’s run on the bank and it’s a wonderful life. This is a run on the gold market, the physical gold and silver and platinum markets. That’s really what this is, and it’s a global rush to buy. And it’s not just central banks, it’s the public as well. Due to uncertainty, part of it’s fear of missing out now that we’ve had a big run in prices too. That’s FOMO in there too. That’s what I’m trying to, that’s part of what I was wondering too though, is like, you know, again, there’s people out there now who, um, are, are looking at this and they might even be listening to us going, gosh, yeah, it really makes sense and I happen to have no gold. What do I do? You know, what do I do now? Do I buy now? And, and I’ll, you know, and, and the next thing you know. I find out this was a frothy market and, and I’m down 20% for the next three years. I mean, that kind of thing. So I, I think it’s a, it is a tricky time, but, so that sort of, I guess, brings up when you think of gold, um, in a portfolio. I mean, you say, you’ve said in the past, it’s not about getting rich. Well, some people really did get rich this time. Uh, you said it’s about preserving wealth, right? So how should investors think about Gold’s role alongside stocks, real estate, and other assets right now? Well, even I think JP Morgan Chase has said this year, you know, instead of a 60 40 portfolio, you should have a 60 20 20 portfolio with 20% bonds and 20% precious metals. Gold in particular, because of what’s been happening. And now we don’t have a gold culture in our country, like most every other country does. So most Americans don’t get it. And that’s part of. We’ve ingrained because the dollar is the world’s reserve currency and it insulates us from currency shocks in commodity pricing primarily. Uh, without that insulation, you know, they might think things a little bit differently, but you know, any good financial planner will say you should have a little bit of precious metals as part of your portfolio, uh, as a hedge against financial uncertainty. And it certainly worked perfectly well during the great financial crisis. And when COVID hit because. Gold tends to counter cyclically, perform in price against stocks and bonds, and it’s always liquid. Now, you’re a real estate investor, you understand real estate. What couldn’t you get in 2009 alone? Right? Bankers wouldn’t give anybody money, right? But if you had gold, you could get liquidity, right? And gold, you know, almost doubled between 2008 and 2011 at the same time when most assets were dropping 50%. That’s an insurance policy for the rest of your money. That’s why I said, look, it’s a way to preserve wealth and have a hedge against financial uncertainty. But in the market that we’re in now, you know, having more than just the, the minimum, which is five to 10% of assets as a, you know, potentially an investment instead of just an insurance policy. That makes sense. But you’re right, you could buy and you could, you know, tie up money that won’t produce anything for a couple years, maybe longer. You also have an insurance policy in case the wheels do come off like they did during the great financial crisis or during COVID. Yeah. Yeah. I was listening to, uh, another podcast. I listened to the, these, uh, guys, the All In podcast, and, uh, Tucker Carlson was on there, and apparently he’s a, you know, huge, uh, physical gold guy. And, and he said, and I, I think he was serious. He said he buries it in his backyard and then he spreads a bunch of, um. Uh, a bunch of, you know, silver beads, uh, out there too, like, just in case no one can like, use a medical metal detector and find it is gold. Uh, let’s talk about that nuance of, of physical gold versus, you know, buying ETFs and all that stuff. What’s your take? I mean, what, what do you tell people when they say, well, gosh, you know, uh, it might be hard for me to store that gold and, and why shouldn’t I just get an ETF and, and talk a little bit about that? Well, I trade ETFs in my IRA account. When I think the, when I think I can harness price movement, that’s what I use ETFs for. You know, they’re a paper representation of gold, uh, that you can trade at the click of a button, physical gold. Is valuable. It’s, you have to find a place to store it. It’s pretty inert, so you can, you can bury it in your backyard, keep the elements out of it, but then there’s some risk there because it could be found, it could be stolen, so you do have to store it somewhere. You can put it in a bank safe deposit box, but I don’t really recommend that because what happens if there’s a banking holiday and you can’t get to it? So having a home safe or maybe, you know, maybe bearing it in the backyard. Is an option if that’s what you wanna do. Or there are independent professionally run storage facilities. There’s a few of ’em around the country that are run by precious metals dealers that are, you know, big entities. Uh uh. So I think they’re trustworthy and they certainly have the ability to service and aren’t properly insured. So that if something happens, you know your value is protected. And that’s primarily what you pay for as a storage fee is a percentage of value. Not so much number ounces that you have there, but the value percentage, because it is an insurance, uh, related value, right? The value goes up, they’ve gotta get more insurance so they get a higher storage fee for that same amount of metal if the value increases, which is unlike other assets. So I do have a couple of those I recommend that are run by professional. Companies that have been in business for years that we know would trust and have performed perfectly. If you wanna store, um, physical metal now gold is compact. You know, a hundred ounces is smaller than a paperback novel and it’s $450,000 worth of value today. You could, I could literally have one bar in each one of my coat pockets and be walking around with almost a million bucks in my pockets, and no one would know. Silver. You know, silver creates a bigger problem because it takes 70 ounces of silver to equal an ounce of gold. So there’s a lot more volume involved and a lot more weight, which is why sometimes these facilities make more sense if you wanna store something that’s more bulky like silver. But if you’re gonna store gold somewhere, that’s not easy to find. You wanna make sure somebody you trust behind you knows where it’s just in case something happens to you. Right? Yeah. Um. What, um, how difficult is it, uh, Dana, for someone to, I guess, say they wanna sell, say maybe they need to sell one of those bricks in your pocket there? Uh, and, and, um, is that a, um, a process that, I mean, it’s, you know, it’s not as easy as clicking a button at that point, right? But to make sure that you get the best possible price for your gold and all that, I mean, you’re not gonna go to a pawn shop and. Oh, that, so like, I, I’m just curious on the mechanics of that. ’cause I’ve, you know, I’ve, I’ve never sold, you know, physical gold for anything. So, so our, our company’s a physical dealer. We’re a hybrid between Amazon and a financial institution. And that, uh, we sell something online or over the telephone. The price is always changing on a minute by minute basis, but it’s like you’re buying shoes. It’s just, you know, you don’t quite know what the price is gonna be. So we physically, you know, figure out which product you should purchase, what’s best for you, and then we ship it to you if you want to sell it, it’s just the reverse of the transaction. You have to present it for delivery, which means you have to ship it back to, uh, your dealer, or, you know, physically deliver to them, and you get paid immediately upon delivery. So, um, you know, we, we do business like a financial institution. You can call us up, place a transaction over the phone. Uh, if it’s a smaller transaction, we’ll do that without deposit funds. If it’s a bigger transaction, we don’t know, you will want funds first, but once we lock in, that’s the price. Just like when you buy stock and then you pay the balance or, or we ship you the merchandise, whichever comes first. Um. You get it, inspect it, make sure you, you got what you’re supposed to get. In fact, it, you know, in the last two years with this gold price just climbing higher and higher, we’ve got a lot of clients that are complacent. They like the stock market that’s been hitting record highs, uh, and they’ve been shedding gold. We’ve actually bought more gold as an industry, not just our company, but as an industry in the last year than we’ve bought in a single year in 20 years. So it’s very easy to reverse the transaction. But what I would tell you. For your listeners is, and this is important, you should buy sovereign minted products, gold ounces, silver ounces, one ounce gold coins. They’re really just round bars made by the US Mint, the Royal Canadian Mint, the British Royal Mint. The Austrian Mint instead of refinery made. One ounce bars or 10 ounce bars or kilo bars of gold because we have a modest but growing problem with Chinese counterfeits. The Chinese can take tungsten and plate it with gold and pass it off as reel, and they can do that much better with refinery made bars that have plain design pictures stamped onto them. They can replicate those very well, but they cannot replicate the intricate pictures. The US Mint or the Canadian Mint, or the Austrian mint, British royal mint stamp onto that one ounce gold coin. We call it a coin. It’s just a round bar made by a mint that struck with dyes like a coin. And all of the mints around the world have introduced minute anti-counterfeiting design elements into the picture that they stamp on their coins to deter Chinese counterfeits. And it’s working. So the most important thing is, you know, do business with a reputable dealer that’s been around a long time, that has a good reputation, not a, not some new entity, right? You wanna find a, a trusted member of the community and develop a relationship that makes buying again or selling very easy. Once you have a relationship with a dealer, and we know the product you’ve purchased, we’ll take it back very easily. Uh, silver is, you know, people talk a lot about it in the context of, you know, the lump it with gold but has very different characteristics. Um, how do you think about silver today? I love silver today. Uh, it’s, it’s a metal at times as hard to love because every time it makes a big gain, it can give it up pretty easily. It’s more volatile than gold, but gold’s about 90% monetary metal in 10%. Commodity metal silver’s about 50 50, but what silver has going for it is, uh, a couple of unique characteristics that virtually no other metal comes, uh, as close to, which is conductivity of heat and electricity. Silver is amazing in that it’s the best at conducting both heat and electricity. I’ve got a one ounce silver coin on my desk here, and if you take this coin and hold it between your fingers and take an ice cube. You can literally cut that ice cube in half in about 6, 7, 8 seconds with a pure silver coin because the heat from your fingers gets transmitted to the coin and goes right through the ice cube. That’s just a simple example of how conductive silver is for temperature, and we have a structural supply deficit in the silver market that we’ve had for about five years now, where the industry. Is consuming more silver than comes out of the ground on an annual basis. So we’re eating into the above ground supply. Uh, so fundamentally that’s the supply and demand equation favor silver. Uh, plus because gold is moved up so much in price, silver is getting a rotation into it because it’s underperformed relative to gold until just recently where it’s played catch pretty sharply in just the last three or four months. If you measure. How many ounces of gold, uh, how many ounces of silver it takes to equal an ounce of gold, the gold to silver ratio back in April. That was a hundred to one, you know, which was an extreme. Today that ratio is a, is a little under 70 to one. It’s 67, 68 to one. So silver has played up in ketchup in price. Where is that historically? Uh, well. Normally it’s between about 40 to one and 80 to one with about 60 to one as the, as the pivot point where it’s in, they’re in equilibrium. But in the last four or five years with gold leading and silver lagging, we’ve routinely been in the 85 to 90 to one range. Uh, and we actually hit a hundred to one in April of this year, uh, which was the highest it’s been, um, except for when we had a kind of a knee jerk in the medals during COVID, which was an anomaly. Uh, didn’t last. So, but anyway. Silver is playing ketchup because it’s been undervalued relative to gold. Um, and we’ve seen, you know, people that wanna be in the metals, but think gold’s a little expensive. They’ve rotated out of gold, and we’ve seen some of that money move into silver and also into platinum. Now, platinum was under a thousand dollars this time of year ago, and it’s almost $1,900 announced today. So it’s almost platinum’s up, uh, almost a hundred percent now. This year where silver’s up 120% this year and a lot of this demand is driven globally. We’ve seen huge demand in silver in India this year because gold is so, has become so expensive, and that’s what I mean by a global run on the, on the bank. It’s not just China, Japan, it’s India too, and Europe as well. Physical buying and et f buying ETFs are available around the world in precious metals now that really haven’t been very impactful until this year. Um, but that’s what the world’s doing, you know? No discussion these days on gold is complete without at least mentioning Bitcoin. Uh, you know, and, and it’s, it’s interesting because, um, you know, even within the, uh, uh, gold world, I mean, there’s, there’s some prominent people who are really bought in to Bitcoin. Like I, Lawrence Lepert has been on the show multiple times now, and Larry’s all in. Um, just curious as a, you know, as a gold person, what do you see where, what do you see the role or do you not believe in this thing? Do you believe it is a, a parallel? Um, I, there’s so many things that you say about gold. That I’m like, yeah, you can say that about Bitcoin too and carry, you know, millions of dollars in your pocket. You can, you know, it’s, uh, there’s a very little amount of it. Um, obviously it’s new, right? Gold has been around for, since the beginning of time and, and now we’ve got 2009 for Bitcoin. What is your view? How are you seeing it? May, how are your colleagues seeing it in the gold space? Well, a couple different points to make here. Um, you know, when, when Bitcoin came out in 20 10, 20 11, you know, one of my friends in the, in the precious metals business told me I should buy it when it was 20 bucks and I didn’t get it. So I didn’t do it, and that was a big mistake on my part. But Bitcoin has one advantage that no other currency or gold has, which you can move serious money over borders easily. You’re right, you can carry it around in your pocket, in your wallet and, um, you know, you carry a lot of value around and transfer it at the, you know, click of a button. And no co counterparty risk, just like you said with gold, right? Yeah. Well, there’s some modest counterparty risk with, with bitcoin that you, you have counterparty risk with gold and theft as well. Um. Bitcoin is volatile. It’s, you know, it’s, it’s very volatile. It’s still the speculative investment. I mean, it was 124,000, you know, four months ago, and now it’s about 85,000, 90,000. So there’s volatility there that gold doesn’t have. But more importantly, what I’ve seen in my career is a generational divide. The older, older people, you know, 45 and older, like gold and silver. Younger people that grew up with phones in their hands like Bitcoin. The volatility in Bitcoin that we’ve seen in these two big selloff cycles in Bitcoin have not the first one, but the second one have helped to bring some of those younger people into the stability of gold, especially in the year when gold is doing pretty well. ’cause it then it kind of has a little bit of that Bitcoin allure, which is, you know, get rich quick. But, um. Bitcoin’s volatile, but it’s here to stay and it is now the most respected cryptocurrency. Like I almost bought Ethereum, you know, 10 years ago when one of my friends was explaining both to me and said that Ethereum basically had better fundamentals. But you know, it’s kind of inventing, it’s kinda like investing in a. What, uh, beta, beta max instead of VHS back in the day. Some of the older people remember that. You bet on the wrong horse, you know? Yeah, exactly. Well, you’ve, uh, you know, you built this, uh, firm on transparency, integrity, uh, in an industry that doesn’t always have the best reputation. Right? So for investors who decide that precious metals belong in their portfolio. Uh, how can they get a hold of you? Well, our website is, uh, A-M-E-R-G-O-L d.com. Uh, we don’t have, you know, 10,000 items on our website. We have a, we have a small listing of what available products are because we stick with mainstream items, products that are primarily easy to sell, uh, competitively priced, widely traded, and easily understood. Um, uh. Uh, email address is info I nfo@amggold.com. Uh, we have a toll, toll free number 806 1 3 9 3 2 3. Uh, we’re consultative in nature. We’ll, we’ll answer any questions. Happily, gladly, uh, no transactions too small or too large. What we really wanna do, uh, is help people because if we do that, we help ourselves. And when you treat people right, it, it comes back. And our industry does have a chair of bad actors. And, um, you, you wanna make sure that you do business with someone reputable that’s been in the industry a long time. And I understand some people may wanna do this locally where they can actually walk into a place of business. Do this instead of over the phone. So look for dealers that have, you know, longstanding, uh, businesses and good reputations. If you see a reputation that, uh, has some complaints, you know, there are other choices for you. But, um, we just try and help people buck. That’s really what we try and do. We certainly have the reputation for it. Dana. So thank you so much for being on Wellfor podcast. Well, thanks for having me. It’s great to see you again, and I wish you a great success in 2026 and a happy holiday season. You too. You make a lot of money, but are still worried about retirement. Maybe you didn’t start earning until your thirties. Now you’re trying to catch up. Meanwhile, you’ve got a mortgage, a private school to pay for, and you feel like you’re getting further and further behind. Now, good news, if you need to catch up on retirement, check out a program put out by some of the oldest and most prestigious life insurance companies in the world. It’s called Wealth Accelerator, and it can help you amplify your returns quickly, protect your money from creditors, and provide financial protection to your family if something happens to you. The concepts here are used by some of the wealthiest families in the world, and there’s no reason why they can’t be used by you. Check it out for yourself by going to wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to Show England. Hope you enjoyed it and, uh, I will. Uh, I should admit though, that if you go back and you listen on my, uh, past shows, this is one that I was wrong on. I, I’ve never been a gold bug. My biggest issue with gold. Um, has always been, you know, from an investment thesis that it doesn’t really do anything, doesn’t yield anything, and what’s the point of owning it rather than owning, uh, real estate. And actually, if you just look at what I said, it’s, it’s still, it’s still, it’s still kind of true, right? I mean, you can argue, well, yeah, the real estate markets really did, uh, did struggle over the last couple years. But listen, at the end of the day. The real estate market struggled because of leverage, right? Gold. There’s no leverage, no one’s borrowing, buying gold on leverage, and so it can go up and down and it doesn’t really hurt anybody. If you take the last couple decades and you know how much people made from, uh, real estate versus Bitcoin, even though there’s this huge, uh, huge uptick in Bitcoin now it’s, it’s probably the case that they come out pretty close. If not, uh, you know, real estate still being the winner. But anyway, uh, I do want to say and admit that I was wrong. That, uh, that the gold wasn’t really worth, uh, owning. I think, uh, you know, I wish I had owned some, just like a lot of people wish they’d own Bitcoin at $6,000, right? Um, in fact, I will say that one of the things in hindsight that I think of is gold in many ways for the last several years was on sale. And I haven’t really been talking about this as much, but I’ve been reflecting on this a great deal about making sure that as an investor you wake yourself up once in a while and ask, okay, well, what’s on sale? Well, gold was on sale for a while. Silver was definitely on sale. Right? Um, doesn’t mean you have to go in, have, you know, 50% of your portfolio in something like that, but when something’s on sale, it’s not a bad idea to look around. And maybe get, you know, get a little bit of exposure. I do think that real estate is there right now. I think real estate, you know, if you’re in the credit investor group, you’re seeing on a routine basis 30%, uh, discounted offerings from just a couple years ago. And I do think that’s on sale right now. But there are other things as well, arguably. I mean, I, I actually think that Bitcoin is, uh, uh, sort of on sale right now. I mean, sitting at 86,000, anybody who thinks it’s not gonna go to a hundred thousand at some point in the next, you know, 12 months is, I mean, I think it’s highly unlikely that it doesn’t go to a hundred thousand, right? So think about that right now. That’s like a 14% gain right then and there. Anyway, sometimes it’s good to just look around and see what’s on sale. Uh, that’s my message for this week. Uh, this is Buck Joffrey with Wealth Formula Podcast signing off. If you wanna learn more, you can now get free access to our in-depth personal finance course featuring industry leaders like Tom Wheel Wright and Ken McElroy. Visit wealthformularoadmap.com.

You know, the longer I’ve been an investor, the more I realize this simple truth: the biggest threat to your wealth isn’t the market… it’s your own brain. We’re all wired the same way—with instincts that were fantastic for avoiding saber-toothed tigers but are absolutely terrible for making good financial decisions. Take something simple like a marathon. If I asked you to predict next year’s top finishers, you’d look at last year’s results. That works. Human performance doesn’t flip upside down in twelve months. The best runners tend to stay the best runners. There aren’t that many variables to consider. When we try to apply that same logic to investing, it often blows up in our faces. There are way too many variables to consider when it comes to market behavior to make simple assumptions. Entire sectors rotate from darling to disaster in a heartbeat. Yet our brains keep telling us, “Hey, this worked last year, surely it’ll work again.”  In my view, nowhere is that psychological mismatch more obvious than in real estate right now. A few years ago, when real estate was on fire—cheap debt, rising rents, deals getting snapped up before lunch—everybody wanted in.  Fast-forward to today. We’ve had a rate shock. Values have reset. Properties are selling at steep discounts. And Construction starts have fallen off a cliff. Real estate got slaughtered. But look around now. The market has reset. Assets are selling 30 percent below where they did just after Covid. Jobs and population growth in places like the Carolinas, Texas, and Arizona look fantastic, and interest rates are falling quickly. Every macro indicator you can name is pointing to a major buying opportunity—one of the best in the last 15 years. So naturally… few people are paying attention. Markets that are bottomed out are not sexy. If it’s not frothy, it’s not newsworthy. This is human nature in a nutshell. When assets are expensive and risk is quietly rising, people feel brave. When assets are attractively priced, and future returns look great, people get scared. It’s recency bias: assuming whatever just happened will keep happening. It’s loss aversion: we fear losing a buck more than we enjoy making one. It’s herd behavior: we’d rather be wrong with the crowd than right by ourselves. And of course, it’s confirmation bias—where people seek out whatever headlines validate the emotions they’re already feeling. It’s not logical. It’s not strategic. But it is human. And that’s why this week’s guest on Wealth Formula Podcast is of value to listen to. He’s one of the leading experts in the world on investor psychology—someone who can explain, with real data, why even intelligent investors consistently jump into markets late, bail out early, misread risk, and miss the best opportunities… especially the ones sitting right in front of them. If you’ve ever wondered why you sometimes make brilliant decisions and other times do the financial equivalent of touching a hot stove twice, this conversation is going to hit home. Transcript Disclaimer: This transcript was generated by AI and may not be 100% accurate. If you notice any errors or corrections, please email us at phil@wealthformula.com.  There’s too many variables when it comes to market behavior to make simple assumptions. You know, you got entire sectors that can rotate, uh, from being the darling to the disaster in, in a heartbeat, right? You get our brains keep telling us, Hey, this worked last year, and surely it’ll work again, right? Welcome everybody. This is Buck Joffrey with the Wealth Formula Podcast. Coming to you from Montecito, California. Before we begin today, I wanna remind you that there is a website associated with this podcast, it’s wealthformula.com. And uh, if you would like to get more in the community, get involved with our, uh, credit Investor Group, investor club, uh, visit wealthformula.com and uh. Become part of the, uh, community rather than just, uh, uh, somebody who’s listening on the sideline. Again, that is wealth formula.com. Let’s talk a little bit about today’s show. Um, you know, the longer I’ve been an investor. The more I realize, uh, that there is a simple truth that, you know, sometimes the biggest threat to your wealth isn’t the market, it’s your own brain. And when I say your own brain, I’m not talking about just you. I mean, I have made some mistakes and a lot of it is really just, you know, uh, emotional or psychological traps and things like that. We’re all wired the same way. And you know, we have instincts. That we’re really, really good at saving us from the things that we evolved to avoid, like saber doth, tigers. But those same things are not great when it comes to. Financial decisions. You know, let’s just take the example, and we talked about this in the show today a little bit, but the example of a marathon, right? And if you ask someone to predict who, um, the top finishers would be, the first thing you’d do is you just go back and you look at, well, who were the top five finishers? Uh, or, or so be last year? Because human performance, it doesn’t really flip upside down in 12 months. I mean, the reality is that. The best runners stay. The best runners typically, um, there isn’t a lot of variables to consider. The problem is that when we try to apply that same kind of logic to investing, it often blows up in our faces and. And the reason for that is that it’s not a single variable issue. It’s not like, oh, how’s this runner doing? The runner’s feeling good this year not doing so good this year. Um, there’s too many variables when it comes to market behavior to make simple assumptions. You know, you got entire sectors that can rotate, uh, from being the darling to the disaster in, in a heartbeat, right? Get our brains keep telling us, Hey, this worked last year and surely it’ll work again. Right? You know, I’ll, I’ll say this again, in my view, there’s nowhere where the psychological mismatch is more obvious right now in multifamily real estate in particular. A few years ago when real estate was on fire, right? I mean, it was going crazy. It was frothy, cheap debt, rising rents, deals getting snapped up so quickly. Everybody wanted in right? Fast forward today, we had a bloodbath. We had a rate shock, values reset, property selling at steep discounts, 30%. Often is what we’re seeing through our investor group. Um, construction starts have, have fallen off of a cliff, but look around the market has actually reset. As I mentioned, assets that we’re seeing are selling 30% below where they did just after COVID jobs and population growth and places like. The Carolinas, Texas and Arizona, they look fantastic. And guess what? Interest rates they’re falling. They are. I mean, um, by the time, uh, this comes out, you’ll probably have your, um, your next announcement this December announcement for the rate cut. And you know, some people are like, well, I don’t know about the bond markets and how are they gonna follow guess? They stopped quantitative tightening last week. And guess what happens after that? Well, they start quantitative easing again. Go, you know, basically you’ve got the, uh, you’re gonna have government buying of bonds and that is going to, uh, drive yields down there as well. That’s my belief. And every macro indicator you can name is pointing in that direction. Um, so in my opinion. Again, it is my opinion. I do believe that a setup, this is a one of the best setups in 15 years, right? Since the whole 2008, 2009 debacle and everybody got crushed and across the board. I mean, this is the best setup for multifamily real estate since then. So of course. Few people are paying attention. Why? Because markets that are bottomed out are not sexy. And if it’s not frothy, it’s not newsworthy. No one’s paying attention. You’re paying attention to things like shiny things like gold even. It’s funny to say that because gold for so many years was just sitting there doing nothing, and that just exploded. Now everybody’s paying attention to gold, right? Um, it’s human nature in a nutshell. When assets are expensive. Uh, and, and risk is actually rising. People feel brave and, and when assets are attractively priced in, future returns look great. People are scared. What is behind the fact that that market is 30%, uh, discounted from just a few years ago? You know, and you look at something that’s up 50%, 60%, and you’re like, eh, I want a little bit of that, right? So there’s lots of things that at play when it comes to our psychology. You know, there’s things called recency bias, assuming whatever just happened will keep happening. Well, that’s what I’m talking about with frothy markets and stuff. There’s loss aversion. We fear losing a buck more than we enjoy making one. I think that’s, uh, very reasonable thing to do. I have, uh, I’m there myself, and then there’s herd behavior. We’d rather be wrong with the crowd than right by ourselves. And of course. There’s confirmation bias and that’s where people seek out whatever headlines validate the emotions they’re already feeling. It’s not logical. It’s not logical at all, but it is human and that’s why this week’s guest on Wealth Farm Meal podcast is, uh, going to be interesting for you to listen to. He’s one of the leading experts in the world. On investor psychology, someone who can explain with real data why even intelligent investors consistently jump into markets, laid bailout early, misread risk, and miss the best opportunities, uh, and also kind of why and how the whole system is ultimately sort of kind of rigged against us, the retail investor. Anyway, hope you enjoy the show. We’ll have that conversation right after these messages. Wealth formula banking is an ingenious concept powered by whole life insurance, but instead of acting just as a safety net, the strategy supercharges your investments. First, you create a personal financial reservoir that grows at a compounding interest rate much higher than any bank savings account. As your money accumulates, you borrow from your own. Bank to invest in other cash flowing investments. Here’s the key. Even though you’ve borrowed money at a simple interest rate, your insurance company keeps paying. You compound interest on that money even though you’ve borrowed it at result, you make money in two places at the same time. That’s why your investments get supercharged. This isn’t a new technique, it’s a refined strategy used by some of the wealthiest families in history, and it uses century old rock solid insurance companies as its back. Turbo Charge your investments. Visit wealthformulabanking.com. Again, that’s wealthformulabanking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Today. My guest on Wealth Formula podcast is Terrance Odean. He’s uh, Rudd Family Foundation, professor and former chair of the finance group at the Haas School of Business, university of California Berkeley. He’s a pioneer of behavioral finance, uh, famous for research showing how human psychology not rational markets, often drive individual investors poor performance. Uh, welcome to the show. How are you? I’m good, thank you. Great. Well, you know, let’s kind of just jump right into it, if you don’t mind. Um, let’s start at the core. What do you mean when you say investors aren’t rational? Exactly. And, and specifically how? Has Wall Street built an entire system that quietly profits from that irrationality? Well, I think in my earlier papers I used the word rationality, and I don’t use it now because I think it’s confusing. So economists, uh. Have a very specific definition of rationality built on, sort of on these axioms of rational decision making that Dr. Spock would use. And sometimes the behavior that looks rational to an economist, most of us would shake our heads and say, what’s wrong with that guy? So I, but I do think it’s fair to say that. Human beings often make decisions, uh, in ways that are biased, in ways that, um, don’t properly assess probabilities or are influenced in predictable, but not necessarily beneficial, um, ways from, uh, emo by emotions. So most of the work I’ve done has taken a look at, uh. Biases, ways of making decisions that, that my mentor and his, uh, research partner, Danny Kaman, I studied with and his research partner, Amos Diversity, they documented in the seventies and eighties. For example. Uh, people estimate probabilities based on how easily examples come to mind and sometimes. Sometimes that can be a bit biased. Like if I were to ask you to name five companies that went public and were wildly successful, you could rattle ’em off in no time. And then if I asked you to name five companies that went public and subsequently failed and became bankrupt, and were delisted. You might have a harder time, even though we know that more companies fail than end up like, uh, Google and Microsoft and Amazon. So if you are an individual investor thinking of buying an IPO and asking yourself, well, how likely is this thing to be successful? And you started judging the probability by the examples that came to mind, you would overestimate the probability of success. So then that would be one example. I also look at overconfidence. There’s a strong human tendency. It doesn’t affect everyone equally, but to have these self-serving biases where we think we’re a little better than we are, we think, uh, we have more ability than we have, and these are not entirely bad things. It’s easier to get up in the morning if you think you’re a good person with a little bit more ability than you have. But for an individual investor that can lead the investor to make trades that maybe they shouldn’t be making, maybe the individual investor says, oh, I have a great idea. And then doesn’t stop to say, but my idea is based on very public information that the Wall Street professionals had way before I had that information. So, uh, that overconfidence could lead to overtrading. Uh. These are the type of things I’ve, I’ve been interested in. When you talk about Wall Street sort of building an entire system that kind of quietly profits from that irrationality, can you tell us a little bit about that? Well, I don’t study so much how Wall Street exploits the biases, though obviously that happens. I do have a recent, uh, paper. Wrote with some co-authors about traders on Robinhood, and we look at the Robinhood environment. This was a few years ago, and the environment was quite simple, so they listed a lot less information about companies than some other brokerage firms. So that would make a novice investor perhaps feel like, oh, this isn’t so complicated. It was really easy to trade. I mean, I was sort of shocked. I opened up an account because I wanted to understand the thing I was studying, uh, through data, and it took a couple minutes to open up an account. I transferred some money in from my bank account. I thought, well, in a few days when the transfer clears, I’ll be able to trade. But no, I was able to trade immediately. This was still back in the days of digital confetti. I placed a trade and the digital confetti sort of rained on my, my phone screen. It was like, yes, celebrate. So I think that Robinhood is not alone in this, but they. They encourage lot trading. I mean, they make money through trading, so they make it easier. Uh, they make it feel like fun people. Uh, there’s research in psychology that shows that people are more spontaneous and less critical decision makers when they’re feeling happy and in a good mood. Uh, so I think there’s a lot of encouraging. Retail investors to trade very actively. And that of course is where a lot of that money is made. Yeah. It’s almost sort of like a gamification of the whole thing, right? Well, that, that exactly. I mean, that’s the term that, that we use and others use. It was like a gamification of trading and as you know, like, you know, games can be addicting. So if, if, because games can be a big thing, right? And then, uh, the idea being that, you know, if you can make something, you know, sort of fun. And in, in games, you win and lose. And people sometimes expect that too. Right? But then now they’re dealing with their own, their own money. So it can get outta hand potentially. Yeah. And I draw, so I teach personal finance. I, you know, I’ve, I just finished teaching 600 students. I’ve got three more, 300 more to go today. And we make a distinction, you know, I, I say. We are mostly focused in this course about things like saving for retirement, and we encourage students to buy and hold well diversified low fee funds, uh, such as target date funds. They’re not the only option, but that’s one that, that we discuss at length. And then I say, and if you find. Trading stocks to be say, as entertaining as instead taking vacation to Hawaii. Or, you know what? Whatever you might spend your fun money on and you can afford that, that’s fine. But segregate that money and segregate it in your mind so that when you lose money in your play account and make sure that it’s money you can afford to lose, you don’t, you’re not tempted to like start messing around with your retirement money. Um. There have been some, in my opinion, very disappointing changes in recent years on, uh, on Robinhood and uh, and at other brokerage firms encouraging a lot more trading and options and futures and encouraging trading ENC cryptocurrency. And currently you can. Place. They don’t call it this, but you can play sports bets on, on Robinhood, on your, on your, you can open up your, uh, Robinhood app. Buy, buy and sell stocks. Buy and sell options, buy and sell crypto, and play sports bets. And you know, to me that’s not investing. It’s interesting because again, now you’re placing it in a certain part of your brain, right? And it’s very intentional, and presumably it’s very intentional if you’re, if you’re thinking about trying to design something that made people want to come back, you know, you’re talking about sports betting. I mean, there’s something that’s clearly addictive as well. I mean, and, um, so that, that again, is a, uh, is interesting how. These platforms are using psychology in that regard. Um, sticking with the psychology concept, um, I think you’ve shown that retail investors consistently underperform in general. Is that right? And, and if that’s true, is that because, you know, why is that, is that because the system just kind of designed to trigger the worst parts of human psychology and walking to traps or what? I don’t think it’s through system design so much as. Human design. So for example, uh, most investors buy the stock or the asset or the mutual fund, uh, that they wish they bought last year, sometimes last week. But you know, usually, you know, it’s what did well last year and in a lot of realms of human endeavor. There’s a great deal of persistence in performance. I don’t know if you are a runner, but if you say are a runner and you went out to a track and you joined me and the class I just taught, you know, 250, 300 students and we all ran a mile. Well, I can tell you I would not be anywhere near the front, but if you ranked everyone. Then you came back a year later and had that same race, there’d be a huge correlation in the outcomes. You know, might not have the same person, number one, number two, number three, but whoever was number one this year would probably be in the top 10 or 20 next year unless they were injured. So basically what we’re talking about is, you know, cognitive traps. Right. I mean, I think that’s a great example. You know, in, in real life, winners often keep winning, right? You have, you know, professional sports, you have great teams. Well, they’ll probably be pretty good next year too, and maybe they won’t win the Super Bowl, but they’re not gonna be last place. And you know, what are some of the other, I guess, cognitive traps that, that people fall into that, that I think that are worth mentioning? Because I think, again, that’s a very. Useful one for people to just step back and think, is that the way? I think it probably is. I mean, you know, uh, such and such stock did so great last year. I wish I had invested. I’ll invest this year. They’ll probably win again. You know? Yeah. So let me say one more thing about that, and this is where the horizon speeds up. And one change that we’ve had over the last decades is. The horizons have gotten shorter and shorter. So suppose back in the 1970s, there was news. You don’t live in New York. You read about it in your local paper. A day later, you think you wanna trade. You call your broker, you have to talk to him. Maybe he doesn’t answer. He calls you back a little later, the market’s closed. You get your trade in the next day. Things, you know, maybe it took a day, maybe it took two days. Now things are boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. Uh, so now maybe if you’re an active investor on a site like Robinhood, you’re not thinking what went up last year? It’s what’s going up today. And Robinhood shows you that they have a list of the big movers. And we did a study, uh, where we looked at. The stocks that Robinhood investors piled into on a particular day, we called it herding, the ones they herded into. And not surprisingly, those stocks went up quite a bit. And then over the next few days they came down, but not back down to where they started. They came down a bit, but when we looked at the timing. It looked like the, on average, the Robinhood investors were losing money because they tended to be the people buying at the top. So this is where the psychology starts to interact with market dynamics. And you have some winners. Clearly, the people who bought early made money, you know, they, they bought early, they went up. They probably, they probably got out at a good price, but a lot of the investors. We’re doing a lot of buying near the top. Those are kinda like mini bubbles. Uh, you know, small reflections of what we saw in 1999 and 2000 when the least actor, you know, with some of the late comers to the market were people who were not sophisticated, at least in their understanding of market pricing and things. And they bought, you know, people who bought in January of 2000. It didn’t do so well when the market crashed in March. So that’s just a case where the bias can interact with markets in a way that doesn’t serve investors well. Another thing that we see influencing, uh, retail investor behavior a lot is limited attention. And Brad Barber and I wrote a paper where we, we asked the question, how do retail investors. Choose the stocks that they buy. And, you know, we realized the average investor isn’t systematically sorting through three or 4,000 choices, uh, reading annual, annual, or quarterly reports. Uh, the average investor is waiting for the stock to catch his or her attention, and then saying, do I like it or do I not like it? On the sell side, things are different because most retail investors fortunately only sell stocks that they already own, uh, because it can be very risky to start shorting stocks. So attention matters less because if you already own the stock, you’re probably paying some attention to it. And if a stock hits the news and you look at it and you say, oh, well that’s really not, I think people are overly optimistic about it if you don’t own it. You know, you know you don’t sell it. You’re only gonna sell it if you own it. So our hypothesis was that attention would affect the order imbalance, the buys, minus the cells. Retail investors in such a way is that retail investors would be on the buy side of the market for attention grabbing stocks, and we found that was overwhelmingly true. We used a variety of measures of attention and for everyone. You see the retail investors buying the stocks that catch their attention. Then in another paper, we take a look at what that means for returns, and we find that the combination of high trading volume. Retail investors being heavily on the buy side of the market leads to investor losses, significant losses. So you’ve got, you’ve got basically this smart bunny selling to, to retail investors is effectively what’s happening there. Right. So, uh, let’s talk about, um, the disposition effect. Uh, why do investors claim to losers and sell winners? Well, how do you feel when you sell something for a loss? Well, yeah. You don’t like it, right? You just hope it could, yeah, I’ve done that. I’ve done that recently. It’s hard to say to yourself, Hey, until I sell it, it’s not really a loss. We’ll call it a paper loss. You know, I’ve had people say this to me. I had a broker say this to me, so before I became an academic, I traded stocks a little bit. Not a lot of money. Fairly active. I didn’t, you know, I just did what my friends were doing. I, as so many people do, and at that time, that was before online trading, and I had a broker and he would talk like that. He’d say, you know, I, I, he’d have recommended something and it was down, and he’d say, oh, well, when the market figures out what we know, this thing’s gonna come bouncing back. I remember being on the phone one day and thinking. I don’t know anything. I’m getting the impression. You may know a little less, but, uh, you know, it’s, but it’s the language. It’s like it doesn’t count till you sell it. So what do people do? They hold onto their losers because selling them makes you feel bad. They sell their winners because you feel a little better when you sell your winners. I did a study of that as basically as part of my dissertation. No. 20 some years ago, and I found a very strong effect for retail investors here in the us. I’ve done studies, I did a study later in with Taiwanese investors. Other people have studied in, uh, dozens of countries. You just find the same thing over and over again. You actually find the same effect for institutional investors, but it’s much less pronounced. So institutional investors, they’ve come to realize that, that we have this emotional tendency to hold onto our losers. And so, you know, the companies will establish protocols to try to push back on that tendency. You know, you might have a, a rule that is, at least for new traders, if you’ve lost 10%, you gotta sell or something like that, so that people don’t just clinging to those losses. And on the other side there’s the, the selling the winners thing, right? I think there’s some sort of, um, I don’t know if it was Warren Buffet or somebody had an interesting analogy about going into your garden and, and basically, and just growing the weeds and pulling out the flowers, you know, effectively doing the opposite of what you should be doing. Right. In academic finance, our mathematical models often treat buying and selling as symmetrical. You just stick a minus sign in front of the buying to make it selling. For human beings, it’s very different. Selling is mostly backward looking. You know, how am I gonna feel if I sell this, you know, because it’s been down. I bought, did I make money? Did I lose money? Even, even the more. Uh, sophisticated investors are asking themselves about is this the right time to take a tax loss? So, you know, they may be thinking about differently, but they’re still largely backward looking. Buying is all about what you hope is gonna happen. Now, you might be basing your beliefs about the future on what’s happened in the past, but your orientation is forward. The selling, your orientation seems to be backwards, and you find that institutional investors, I’ve seen, uh, probably not academic, but I, I’ve seen some studies of this that suggest that institutional investors, uh, especially like money manager, uh, money mutual fund managers do better on their buying than on their selling. In other words, they tend to buy stocks that do well, but. They often sell stocks that subsequently do quite well because when they’re doing the analysis to sell, many of them don’t say, if I didn’t own this, would I buy it? They just say, oh, well I need to raise some money for some great idea I have. And so, uh, I think the way I’ll raise it is by selling one of my winners. Yeah. Then you feel like you actually won. Yep. Right. Um. How does this work? I mean, you mentioned a little bit about IPOs, but when people go into private deals, real estate, same biases, same biases, uh, more complex markets. Yeah. So let me talk one aspect of, of of, say real estate. Mm-hmm. People talk, you’ll often hear, like in in books, they say that riskier investments on average earn more money. I actually don’t think that’s true. I can’t prove it, but I don’t think it’s true. What I do think is true is that investments that tend to earn more money tend to be riskier, but there are a lot of risky investments that are very unlikely to earn you much. And the reason for that is in most markets, if something is underpriced, people are gonna buy it and move the price up. If something is overpriced, there’s not much you can do about it. So in the stock market there, there is short selling and we see a lot written about it. And as I say, I don’t recommend it for retail investors, but short sellers serve a purpose in the market. When a company stock gets too high or when there’s evidence of. Maybe fraud or at least, um, uh, a little bit of misstating of, of how rosy the prospects are. Short sellers come in and they kind of put downward pressure on the price, so there’s a little bit of equilibrating. You know, the buyers tend to have more market power, but there’s something pushing down when you think a stock is overvalued in real estate. Lot of real estate. There is nothing like that. Uh, for example, say there’s a house for sale near the beach in Key West, and let’s say I, I live out here in California and I think, whoa, you know, this place could be underwater in 30 years. I wouldn’t think, I’d never dream of spending $2 million for that house, but the person who buys it, the person selling it, probably spent a lot of money and, and. Isn’t worried about, uh, climate change, the person buying it, perhaps not worried. What I think doesn’t affect that cost at all. The cost of that house will only start to be affected by issues like climate change. When banks and insurance companies start coming in and saying, we want more to insure this house. Or, you know, we’re going to, you have to have a bigger down payment or something like that. So there are a lot of markets where. Things can get priced pretty high. And if your opinion is those prices are too high, there’s really not much for you to do about it. I’m not a big fan of cryptocurrency, but I’m not gonna go and start shorting cryptocurrencies. You know, my, uh, my capacity for losses is not that, not that great, and I don’t really know, I mean. I don’t know what the right value should be, but my point is whatever I think doesn’t really affect those prices. So there are a lot of markets and those markets create opportunities for losing money because it’s not that the stock market is, in my opinion, efficiently priced. There are mispricings. But they’re probably not as dramatic as they are. When you start going into things like private equity, going into places where there’s less information, less regulation, and less, you know, the market forces that might keep prices reasonable are less strong. Yeah. You know, going back to the whole Robinhood gamification thing, one thing I wanted to ask you is if you were designing a platform. Did that help to people to protect themselves? What, what would that look like? Uh, I don’t know. vanguard.com? Yeah. I, there, so I, I’d say this my, so, you know, Robinhood, um, I think their mission statement was something like to democratize investing for all. And in my opinion, that was done, that was done, uh, done by Jack Bogle. Jack Bogle founded Vanguard. What did Vanguard do? Vanguard made it really inexpensive, like brought the fees way down on mutual funds and made it easy to buy a well diversified portfolio with low fees and buy and hold it, and that democratized investing for all. Now, Robinhood did do something I, I am not trying to say Ro Robinhood has a huge effect in markets. Mm-hmm. It made it really cheap. To actively trade. Uh, so it kind of democratized speculation for, all right. So one last question for you. So, you know, I know you teach this stuff and it’s not a simple one question thing, but you know, if you think about like the psychological edge that investors can actively cultivate and to think about. Um, what would that be? Just maybe one or two things that you, you’d think, like, you know, work on this psychologically. How, how would you, how would you suggest When I took Danny Kahneman’s undergrad class conman, I, I remember he stood there, he said, Amos and I have largely so discovered all these biases, and I fall prey to every one of them, every day. So it’s not as simple as saying, oh, I know there’s this bias. My recommendation would be when it comes to investing, the vast, vast majority of people should be taking a buy and hold approach with a lot of diversification and paying attention to fees, and those who want to trade actively for entertainment or. They enjoy doing it. They, again, they should segregate the money that they have for retirement from the money they’re playing with. And then if they want to be smart, they can start saying, okay, before I impulsively do something, ask myself, why is the person on the other side of this trade selling to me when I’m buying? And who do I think that person is? Because in the US the person or the computer on the other side of the trade is. Probably owned by a large company or working for a large company that makes lots of profits every year. And so while you might make money on any given trade, people like you on average are losing and a little bit of, uh, acknowledgement of that. Uh, another thing to do is before you tell yourself all the reasons to do a trade, spend a little time thinking about reasons you might not want to do that trade. You know, this is, I, this is true for so many parts of life. My students come in, PhD students come in with an idea for, you know, I’m gonna prove this and here’s all the evidence in favor of it. And I say, okay, then I’ll give a little bit of thought as to how you could try to disprove what you believe. And if you really can’t disprove it, maybe it’s right, but you know, before you say, oh, I know this thing is going up, uh, ask yourself, well, why might it? Go down right. Sometimes you only get that, uh, through experience in, in the sense of making sure you ask the questions. You know, as Mike Tyson said, everybody has a plan until you get punched in the until Yeah, punched in the nose. So, yeah, that’s a good line. So sometimes it does take a little bit of, uh. It does take, uh, uh, you know, some scar tissue to get into that mentality. But yeah, the one thing I say about this, I hope that most young people who are great choose to learn from their own experience rather than the experience of others do it with money they can afford to lose. Yeah, absolutely. Um, uh, Terrance, where where can we learn, where can people learn more about some of these topics that you, um, that you study and write about? Huh, well, some of what I’m talking about, uh, I, I’ve got, I made like 50 videos on issues around investing and personal finance. Uh, they’re on YouTube. I, I think my site is called Making Smart Financial Decisions. Okay, great. Um, yeah, so I talk about investing, I talk about my research on investing, and then I talk also about some other, uh, finance topics I talk about, you know, like questions you should ask a financial advisor if you choose to have a financial advisor. Thank you so much for being on the show today. Appreciate it. Thank you. I really appreciate being invited. Thank you. You make a lot of money, but are still worried about retirement. Maybe you didn’t start earning until your thirties. Now you’re trying to catch up. Meanwhile, you’ve got a mortgage private school to pay for and you feel like you’re getting further and further behind. A good news. If you need to catch up on retirement, check out a program put off by some of the oldest and most prestigious life insurance companies in the world. It’s called Wealth Accelerator, and it can help you amplify your returns quickly. Protect. Your money from creditors and provide financial protection to your family if something happens to you. The concepts here are used by some of the wealthiest families in the world, and there’s no reason why they can’t be used by you. Check it out for yourself by going to wealthformulabanking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Hope you enjoyed it. Yeah. When you listen to that show, when you listen to that conversation, how many times did you say, yeah, I hate do that. I’ve done that before. I’m, uh, I’m no different. I definitely am no different. There’s a lot of, uh, there’s a lot of bad decisions in the past for sure, but all you can do is you can learn from those and you continue to move forward. You try to look at what reality is, what the real data is, and make the best decisions. That’s what investing is all about. Anyway, that’s it for me. This week on Wealth Formula Podcast. This is Buck Joffrey signing off. If you wanna learn more, you can now get free access to our in-depth personal finance course featuring industry leaders like Tom Wheel Wright and Ken McElroy. Visit wealthformularoadmap.com.

Homeownership has been baked into the American Dream for nearly a century. Politicians, parents, and banks all tell you the same thing: “Buy a house as soon as you can. It’s your biggest asset.” But as a real estate guy who actually understands how wealth is created… I’m not convinced it makes sense for everyone—especially early in your career. Let me explain. Say you finally start making some real money—maybe you’re a doctor fresh out of residency. The cultural script kicks in immediately: Buy a house. Build equity. Feel responsible. But here’s the part most people forget: your primary home is not an asset. As Robert Kiyosaki puts it, if something takes money out of your pocket, it’s not an asset—it’s a liability. According to Bankrate and the Census Bureau, U.S. homeowners spend around $17,000 per year just to maintain and operate their homes—and that’s before you make a single mortgage payment.  That’s property taxes, insurance, utilities, landscaping, repair bills, HOA fees… the list goes on. If your house is worth $1.5M, even the bare-minimum 1% annual maintenance rule hits you with $15,000 a year just to keep the place from deteriorating. Add insurance, taxes, utilities, and everything else, and you’re looking at $30,000–$40,000 per year in unavoidable, non-negotiable carrying costs. And that still doesn’t cover the roof that fails, the appliances that die, or the curveballs Mother Nature throws at you. None of that feels like an “asset” to me. Now, to be fair, people don’t usually buy homes as investments. They buy them for stability, a place to raise kids, a sense of being “settled.” It’s emotional. It’s psychological. And it’s real. But if you’re young—and especially if you haven’t hit your first million—it’s worth asking yourself a tough question: Is buying a home right now the best financial move… or just the most familiar one? Because historically, U.S. home prices appreciate around 4.3% a year (Case-Shiller). Meanwhile, the S&P 500 averages closer to 10%. And if you’re in real estate investing? A solid multifamily value-add deal often targets 16–20% IRR—plus tax advantages your primary home will never give you. So if you’re just getting started, it might make sense to delay that home purchase. Invest first. Build your passive income. Let your assets—not your salary—pay for your lifestyle.  Then when you do buy a home, you’ll be doing it from a position of strength, not strain. The irony is this: waiting often gets you to the dream home faster because your capital compounds instead of being trapped in drywall, windows, and a backyard you barely have time to enjoy. This Week on Wealth Formula Podcast, I interview expert Dr. Ken Johnson, who digs even deeper into this question—and lays out why homeownership isn’t the golden ticket people think it is, especially for high earners early in their wealth-building years. Linked mentioned: Beracha and Johnson Housing Ranking Index: https://www.ares.org/page/beracha-johnson-housing-ranking-index Waller, Weeks and Johnson Rental Index: https://www.ares.org/page/waller-weeks-johnson-rental-index Price-to-Rent Ratio Report: https://therealestateinitiative.com/price-to-rent-ratios/ Top 100 Housing Markets – Inflation Adjusted: https://therealestateinitiative.com/housing-top-100/ Learn more about Dr. Ken Johnson: https://olemiss.edu/profiles/khjohns3

Zach Havansall, CEO of Rise48 Equity, dives into the current opportunities in multifamily real estate, likening it to a Black Friday sale. He discusses how many investors overlook valuable assets while chasing high-priced stocks and gold. Zach highlights the historical trends of real estate recovery, emphasizing that the best buys often emerge during downturns. With insights on interest rates, supply dynamics, and the unique potential in North Carolina, he demonstrates why now is the perfect time for savvy investors to seize discounted apartment buildings.

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

When you invest in real estate, you’re not buying what it is today—you’re buying what it will become a few years from now.  That’s especially true in multifamily, which, despite all the noise, remains one of the most compelling long-term plays out there.  Unlike stocks, you don’t get a live ticker reminding you every five seconds what your property is “worth.” And that’s a good thing. Real estate moves slowly, and that patience rewards people who can see the story before it unfolds. The national headlines are confusing right now—depending on who you read, the sky is either falling or it’s never been brighter. The truth, as usual, is somewhere in between.  Mortgage rates are still above six percent, affordability is strained, and national price growth has flattened. But beneath the surface, there’s an entirely different story playing out—one that favors multifamily investors who understand that real estate is always, always, about location. Some markets are clearly soft. A few urban centers built too much too fast, and it’s showing up in higher vacancy and flattened rents. But other regions—think the Carolinas, Texas, parts of Florida—continue to thrive because people are still moving there in droves. Jobs, climate, taxes, and lifestyle continue to pull migration south and inland, and those people need somewhere to live.  When you combine growing populations with a shrinking construction pipeline—new multifamily starts are down roughly 40% from their 2023 peak—you’re setting the stage for tightening supply and rent growth in the right markets over the next few years. That’s the part that separates pros from spectators. Anyone can read a national report and call it a trend. But the investors who win are the ones who know their markets intimately—who’s building what, where the jobs are moving, and how local policies are shaping demand. In that sense, real estate offers the only kind of “insider trading” that’s perfectly legal. The better you know the ground, the better your odds. For passive investors, that means something simple but crucial: partner with operators who live and breathe their markets. You want people who are plugged in at the street level, not just reading spreadsheets. Because in multifamily, the difference between a mediocre investment and a great one can be a single zip code. Real estate, especially multifamily, rewards patience, perspective, and proximity. You can’t control interest rates or the national narrative, but you can choose where—and with whom—you invest. And if history is any guide, those who make smart, localized bets while everyone else is sitting on the sidelines tend to be the ones who look like geniuses a few years down the road. This week on the Wealth Formula Podcast, I talk with a former professor and renowned real estate analyst who’s been studying these patterns for decades. We break down which markets are setting up for real opportunity, where caution is warranted, and what the next chapter of multifamily investing really looks like.

A few years back, I bought some very expensive sports coats. I wore them at first and enjoyed them. But over time, they kind of lost their luster.  As I have found often to be the case in my life, I don’t tend to care that much about fancy stuff—fancy jackets, fancy shoes. My true self regresses to a fairly simple jeans and flannel circa 1992 style—not expensive.  Realizing that these fancy clothes were just rotting in my closet, I recently sold them on a well-known second-hand site with only designer stuff. And I was shocked when I realized I was only getting 10 cents on the dollar for what I paid!  But then again, I guess I shouldn’t have been. Buying new fancy clothes has an extremely low likelihood of being a good investment. It reminded me of my good friend in town here who’s made millions of dollars in his life. He only buys nice stuff. But he almost never buys new things. The furniture in his house is incredible. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of mid-century modern gems. And he buys vintage cars rather than new supercars off the lot. He also has a 7-figure collection of rare watches. It’s all really nice stuff.  The difference between what he is doing and what I did with those clothes is that he was investing while I was spending. While he’s bought millions of dollars of cars and watches, he’s always made money with them because he has focused on their future value.  Maybe I’m a bit dense, but I never thought about stuff this way before meeting him. And I still have to remind myself of this paradigm. It’s a different way to look at luxury and one that is certainly smarter when it comes to your pocketbook.  My guest on today’s Wealth Formula Podcast teaches people how to live this kind of lifestyle with cars and watches. I’ve interviewed him before, and I’m doing so again because so many of you have engaged in this way of buying nice stuff that I get regular requests to have him back on the show. 

Frank Gallinelli, founder of RealData and a seasoned real estate educator, dives into the nuts and bolts of identifying solid real estate deals. He emphasizes the danger of ignoring expenses and relying on past trends in uncertain markets. With a focus on analyzing market fundamentals over a property’s structure, Frank shares insights on essential metrics like cash flow and IRR. He advises investors to prepare for surprises with stress tests and clearly define their investment goals before diving in.

Buck Joffrey chats with Robert Wood, a seasoned tax attorney and managing partner at Wood LLP, who specializes in tax strategies for high-income individuals. They dive into the intriguing short-term rental loophole, which allows depreciation losses to offset W-2 income—an essential tactic for high earners. Robert also discusses tax reduction strategies, the ins and outs of qualified small business stock, and how to navigate capital gains taxes. Plus, he highlights the importance of proper CPA guidance to maximize these strategies!