원문 보기
A supercycle is taking place in the field of AI . I am curious to know how you see this fitting into the overall situation . AI has significant positive potential . The problem is how much we need to invest to make that possible . There is massive demand for data centers , and while a data center can be built in six months, it may take 15 years to properly permit and operate a copper mine .
Well, I think the price will go up much more . And by the end of 10 years, we will be able to easily surpass it. Hello everyone, it is Monday, October 26th . Today on the Wolf Financial Show, we are joined by Peter Schiff, a friend of the gold market . We are going to talk about gold, gold mining companies, inflation, and mortgages and mortgage lenders, and why 2026 is more dangerous than 2008 , which is a very interesting topic.
Peter, there are so many topics to discuss. Interest rates are currently rising. People are talking about inflation . Your perspective on inflation seems to be quite different from that of most people. Would you please share your views on the current economic situation in the United States? Well, regarding inflation, I am just defining it a bit more accurately .
hmm. Most people do n't understand what inflation is. They only understand price increases resulting from inflation . Yes, that is indeed a result of inflation. However, that itself is not inflation . If you don't understand what inflation is, you ca n't understand why prices are rising. Inflation refers to the expansion of the money supply, including credit .
All right. The money supply and credit expand due to government policy, that is, the government's monetary policy . Ultimately, it is the government that creates inflation. In fact, current Federal Reserve Chairman Kevin Warsh also recently mentioned that inflation is a choice we make, and he repeated those words.
Yes, that is a choice made by policymakers. The Federal Reserve Board chooses inflation because it does not want to choose an alternative to inflation . So they constantly expand the money and credit supply . The main reason they do that is to cash out government debt . The government is recording a massive budget deficit and is causing inflation to financially cover it .
And the impact of inflation goes far beyond the price increases we experience . Because if there hadn't been such inflation, we could have enjoyed the benefits of falling prices . Therefore, inflation not only simply raises prices and takes away purchasing power , but also takes away the benefits that can be obtained when prices fall.
So that is still a big loss. Let's assume that the government did not cause inflation at all . If that had happened, prices might have fallen by about 3% . However, if prices rise by 2% due to inflation, it is effectively 5%, not 2% . I'm losing an additional 5% . It means we are effectively paying 5% more for goods than if the government had let prices naturally fall without causing inflation .
Now the government will say this. " If prices fall, something truly terrible will happen." "That is why we are protecting you ." That's what I mean. But this is nonsense . I do not need protection regarding the price of goods going down . I actually hope that the price of goods becomes cheaper . Isn't that right?
Because that means I can buy more . The lower the price, the more I can buy . As you know, why would the government try to protect us from such a situation ? Well, what I mean is that they are n't trying to protect anyone. That is just a lie to justify it. They claim that terrible things will happen if prices fall.
However, the United States has experienced falling prices for over 100 years without any problems. The reason our standard of living has risen is actually because the cost of living has decreased. So, the government is trying to justify its inflation policy . However, if you properly understand what they are saying , you will realize that it is nonsense.
Most Americans don't understand that, though. However, the inflation problem will become much more serious. yes . The amount of money to be newly created over the next few years will increase rapidly . That is exactly why bond yields are rising right now . That is also the reason why the price of gold skyrocketed.
Although it has undergone a correction recently, it is still at a much higher level than before because the market has already started to price this in . I mean this massive surge in inflation. Yes, and it looks like the situation will get even worse . As you just mentioned, U.S. debt has surpassed $40 trillion, and now the interest costs on that debt have exceeded massive defense spending, so this is truly hard to believe.
So it seems to be becoming almost a self-fulfilling prophecy . How can we break this mold ? Is it just about buying physical assets? Yes, actually, it is much more serious . We spend about 1 trillion dollars on military spending every year , so it's roughly that much. However, now $1.4 trillion is being paid out just in interest on the national debt.
However, it appears that by the end of next year, the interest on the national debt alone will reach $2 trillion . It's really ridiculous. That will be the largest item in the federal budget, not only double military spending but even exceeding social security spending . The worst part is that it is going to keep going up from here .
It’s not something that should stop at 2 trillion dollars . It will go up to 3 trillion or 4 trillion dollars . Eventually, a crisis will come . Because there is no capacity to divert a significant portion of tax revenue solely to interest payments on debt . Because you won't have any money left to spend elsewhere .
Yes, it is a really dizzying situation. It would be even worse if coupled with other crises that could occur simultaneously . As briefly mentioned in the opening , what is happening to mortgages and mortgage lenders ? How does that connect to all of this? Yes, there is a real crisis caused by the government .
This didn't happen in a free market . I just wanted to show you the national debt clock . We have now surpassed $40.5 trillion. So, that means we have already passed the halfway point to $41 trillion . yes . At this rate, it will probably reach $41 trillion in a few weeks . However, the problem with the mortgage market is a problem I warned about more than 10 years ago .
Because we knew we were creating this problem . However, most people focused only on half of the equation, that is, the positive side, and ignored the negative side behind it. Everyone focused only on the homeowners who were able to refinance their mortgages—that is, the debtors. hmm. And because we were able to lock in very low interest rates for 30 years .
Now that I had some spare money, this was a really good thing. If I can reduce my mortgage payments from $3,000 to $2,000 per month , I will have $1,000 in spare cash each month that I can use elsewhere. So, people considered this to be very good news. We are lowering Americans' mortgage repayments , which will help the economy by freeing up funds for other expenses .
However, what they overlooked and what I pointed out is that this is a minus or zero-sum game . This is because what the borrower gains is what the lending institution loses . Americans were refinancing their mortgages. For example, let's assume that I took out a loan at a 7% interest rate and then lowered it to 6%, 5%, 4%, and 3%.
In other words , the institution holding the loan received 7% , then 6%, 5%, 4%, and 3% . Therefore, the lending institution has suffered a loss equal to the amount the borrower saved . Right? So, the point is that free money didn't appear like magic . When the Fed kept interest rates at 0%, banks were still making a profit on mortgage loans overall, even though they were losing money on such refinancing .
However, the time has come to pay the price exactly as I said. Now that mortgage interest rates have risen significantly to the 7.5% level and the Fed rate is also rising from the 4% range , banks are losing money on all the mortgages they hold . Unrealized losses based on current market valuation amount to approximately $2 trillion.
Therefore, if all mortgage lenders are forced to sell their loan portfolios , they will suffer trillions of dollars in losses. This is a scale equivalent to about four times the losses they suffered during the entire period of the financial crisis . In fact, banks and lending institutions actually made money in 2008, 2009, and 2010 as well , because only 10% of loans were in default .
They lost about $400 to $500 billion due to the default, but 90% of the loans were not defaulted, and the unrealized book gains on those loans, or market value gains, were about $1.3 trillion. As a result, they gained more than they lost, but now they have no profit. They are losing 100% of their money on all mortgage loans .
hmm. Even loans that are being repaid on time are incurring losses because the value of mortgage loans has plummeted . Looking at the fixed-rate loans that still remain, there are over $8 trillion in fixed-rate loans with an average remaining maturity of about 25 years and an average interest rate of 4.6% .
Every single one of those loans becomes a debt for the lending institution. This is because the value has decreased compared to the principal amount lent. Yes, it is very good news for borrowers, but it is a disaster for lending institutions holding mortgage loans, such as banks, pension funds, insurance companies, and investors.
As interest rates rise, these losses will accelerate. If mortgage interest rates, currently at 7.5%, reach 8.5%, unrealized losses will reach $3 trillion. This is a very big problem. Because it means our bank system is in a state of bankruptcy. It means that even if people try to withdraw their deposits, they cannot do so because the bank has lost money .
The government will have to step in for a large-scale bailout, but where will it raise the money ? Well, I guess I'll probably have to make it . You will just have to print money . There will be massive inflation. That is exactly what is about to happen. Then why do banks continue to provide mortgage loans at this level ?
Well, since that is the bank's core business, they are probably offering loans at higher interest rates than before. However, I criticized the lenders for being really foolish for issuing 30-year mortgage loans at interest rates of 3 to 4 percent . Now, 7.5% isn't as bad a condition as it used to be .
you're right. From the bank's perspective. However, since interest rates will continue to rise, I think there will still be losses. I believe that mortgage interest rates could reach 8.5%, 9.5%, or even 10% . If 10% becomes the mainstream market interest rate, loans at 7.5% will suffer huge losses. How much further do you think it will go up ?
Loan products in the 3 to 4% range will cause the biggest losses. Then, what will happen to banks when real estate prices really start to plummet in the future ? It's definitely going to turn out that way . We are currently experiencing the most stagnant real estate market in 20 years, and transaction volume is also at its lowest.
It is because the prices are so high that no one can afford to buy a house . However, once prices collapse, many borrowers will default . However, the people who fall into default are probably not borrowers with interest rates in the 3% range . They are probably people with interest rates in the 5% or 6% range .
Therefore, banks will bear significant losses even on loans that are being repaid normally . However, loans that result in default are not the kind of loans that banks hope will be repaid in the first place . Banks would rather get rid of loans in the 3% range than loans in the 6% range . However, they will eventually lose money on their mortgage loans .
This is because the collateral value will be lower than the principal in the event of default . For example, if a bank lends someone $500,000 to purchase a house , but the value of the house at the time of foreclosure is $300,000, the bank must bear a massive realized loss . How much further do you think the Fed's benchmark interest rate could rise?
For the next two years, that is. Well, that depends on how high the Fed wants to raise interest rates . Even though the Fed interest rate needs to be much higher than 5.5% , I believe it will be difficult for it to go above that . However, there will be significant political pressure preventing the Fed from raising interest rates.
In fact, despite the situation where interest rates should be raised, there will instead be pressure to lower them , and the Fed should have already raised rates much more than they have now. In fact, they should not have stopped raising interest rates a few years ago . They stopped the process too hastily.
The economy may not be as bubbled as it appears on the surface, but it is true that a supercycle is taking place in the AI sector. I am curious to know how you view this fitting into the overall situation . New superintelligence may create jobs, but conversely, it may also cause job losses in other places .
How do you think this situation harmonizes with everything else you just discussed? AI has significant positive potential in increasing productivity, producing more, and consequently lowering prices and improving product quality . The question is how much we need to invest . hmm. How much investment is required to realize this, and when can the benefits associated with this cost be obtained?
And can the global economy afford this cost? I'm not sure . Because we are not in a situation where we have ample spare funds . We are already practically bankrupt . Governments around the world are burdened with massive debt . Therefore, securing funds for AI infrastructure development is in a position where it must compete with securing funds to maintain the social welfare system already established by the government.
So, we'll have to wait and see . As for the impact on employment, if AI is realized as promised, many jobs will certainly disappear . Because that is exactly how value is created . If I were a business owner, I would increase productivity by replacing employees with AI. Uh, so people will be fired .
Ultimately, as the workforce is released from these jobs, more opportunities may open up . We don't know what new jobs will emerge, what better or higher-paying jobs there will be, or what jobs AI cannot do . The problem is that AI could replace most jobs . Therefore, political pressure for the government to take some action regarding the unemployment problem will increase .
hmm. This is because AI inherently lowers the value of labor, especially cognitive types of jobs that require intellectual thinking . However, they are cognitive tasks of a more repetitive nature . They won't replace the CEO, but they are jobs that cover many of the duties of middle managers or tasks that can be done even if you aren't a rocket scientist—jobs where you shouldn't be too stupid, but you do n't need to be a genius .
Although some training and education are required, many of these tasks can be handled by computers. So, many of these jobs will disappear. Ultimately, many skilled labor jobs may disappear due to robots or be replaced by unskilled workers who simply follow the instructions of AI . For example, it is a method where, when you wear something like a VR headset, the computer observes the situation in front of you, guides your hand movements, and tells you exactly what to do .
So, there is no need to know anything at all . Because you just have to follow the instructions . Then, whatever you repair, you will know exactly how to do it. However, I think this increases the value of capital. It increases the value of resources. Looking at the factors of production, if I want to start a business, produce something, and generate profit, I must combine land, labor, and capital .
Usually, you have to hire staff to help with the work. Because I ca n't do everything alone. That is why labor is valuable and scarce . After all, labor, especially skilled labor, is not supplied infinitely , is it? The more skilled you become, the rarer it gets. But what if AI solves that problem , so that when I start a business, I won't need to hire anyone?
Labor is actually worth nothing more than that. I will just utilize everything from capital. That is a huge change. Now, looking at it from a long-term perspective, it is a positive development for humanity . However, in the short term, it is very destructive to those who suffer losses due to that change .
As you know, it was always like that. When the automobile was invented, the people who made carriage whips lost their jobs . He might have been a very excellent wagon whip craftsman . He could have run a very profitable business making the best wagon whips. But suddenly, his skills were no longer needed.
So, yes, it amounts to a loss for that person . Well, the world has gotten better since we no longer need to ride horses . Owning a car is much more efficient and much less expensive. But there were people who suffered losses in the beginning, you know . What was that again? Was it Schumpeter's creative destruction ?
Yes, but the problem with AI is that it has the potential to replace a much larger number of workers in a much shorter amount of time . The government may respond to the economy in a very destructive way . For instance, by creating a permanent welfare society or introducing something like the basic income that people talk about .
For example , it’s like saying that people who have lost their jobs should receive money from the government. That's right, the new theory is that if you lose your job, the government just gives you money . Hmm, that sounds good. Look, there is always work to be done in the market . What I mean is , machines wo n't do everything.
Well, it is just that the work left to humans may be different from the past. Well , but the good thing is that if AI leads to a productivity boom bringing an infinite supply of robotic labor and computers , everything will become cheaper . Everything we need must become more abundant and costs must be lower.
So, no matter what work we end up doing, we won't need to work as hard as we do now. Everything will be so abundant that it will become relatively free , so there will be no need for salaries to be as high as they are now . Because there are so many items now, the price will be much lower . So, people will no longer need to work as much or as hard as before to get the things they need and want.
It is hard to believe that prices will go down in a capitalist society, but I understand what you are saying . Capitalism does that. Capitalism lowers prices . The government raises prices through regulations or inflation , but that is not a byproduct of capitalism. The core of capitalism is to increase supply and lower prices.
That is what capitalism does . Capitalism makes things better and more abundant. You can see any example, but let's take my iPhone as an example. Look at this level of computing power in my hand. You know how cheap it is compared to 10, 20, or 30 years ago . If you wanted to have this level of performance 30 years ago, you would have needed a huge warehouse to house the mainframe computers .
It would have cost hundreds of millions of dollars to do what this little iPhone does. However, it is because capitalism has made it better and cheaper . That is exactly what capitalism does. Especially in electronic products. I agree that that is really true . This is true in all fields, but it is especially evident in electronic products .
yes . Because even if the government causes inflation, it cannot hide it . Prices are still falling. yes . If the government does not intervene, everything will be cheaper and better. Everything will benefit from increased efficiency and productivity . If the free market, rather than the government, provided these services, even the prices of healthcare and education would decrease every year.
People can check it out. There is a famous chart showing how prices change over time, and the items that have become much more expensive are all government-subsidized items . On the other hand, regarding items that are not like that , for example, TV prices are one of the items that have dropped the most, right?
Because the government absolutely never provides subsidies for TVs . That's why. If the government had been in charge of TV manufacturing, it would have been much more expensive and the quality would have been terrible . We really already know that. You can tell just by looking at communist countries.
What is TV like in Cuba? What about North Korean TV ? It's not very good. Well, they can't even make TVs at all . After all, the only TVs they have are imported ones, aren't they ? In another country, that is. yes . If the government takes responsibility for production , they won't be able to produce it properly .
I pay my respects to North Korea. Because there is no freedom and no market principles . There is no profit motive either . There is no price determination mechanism either . Nothing works properly in a planned economy or a socialist economy . Free market principles are necessary to achieve efficiency .
I heard that North Korean TV is incredibly cheap . Because there is only one government channel. Uh, yes. Now, considering that the wave of AI is rising, and there are also issues with mortgages, inflation, and interest rates. How are you currently allocating your capital? Where would you find it interesting to invest?
Well, I am still allocating my assets in the same way as before . They are investing heavily in gold and silver mining companies . In addition to precious metals, it possesses many resources . We also have industrial metals. The second largest portion of my asset allocation is energy and energy- related stocks.
Of course, we are also allocating funds to the technology sector, and we have put some funds into AI-related transactions . hmm. Through large-cap stocks? There are many companies among those I own that I believe will benefit from increased productivity. However, all the profits gained from AI so far have actually gone to the companies selling AI.
We are not seeing significant productivity improvements from people who purchase AI . Hmm. In the end, only the companies selling AI benefit, right? Their stock price rose significantly. However, their profits did not necessarily increase either . Because we are pouring all our costs into computing resources .
Therefore, the significant revenue growth came from hardware manufacturers that produce equipment purchased by various companies providing hyperscalers, NeoCloud, or AI . That's right, the money came from building infrastructure, isn't it? I mean companies that produce products like this. All right.
I understand. However, ultimately, productivity must be delivered to the end user to have true value . Yes, then, when gaining exposure in terms of AI , is it through large hyperscalers, or through companies like the 'pickaxes and shovels' that sell to them ? Yes, we also own some of those companies .
They don't have very huge corporations . Still, I recently invested some money in a fund that invests in AI, so I have some exposure to that area . So, that fund holds all those stocks . So, it amounts to me indirectly possessing it . Thanks to that, I also invested in Anthropic , but they have only just applied for an initial public offering (IPO) .
Unfortunately, I do wish I had invested in Anthro Pick earlier . I did invest, but actually, I wasn't even paying attention to it . A few years ago, my child told me to keep an eye on AI-related opportunities. But I just let it slide . I had no idea such an opportunity existed . Later, I realized that I could have invested a large amount of money.
If I had known they were working on an acquisition, I probably would have invested. If that had happened, I could have made a 100-fold profit. That would have been great. It must have been really good. Because it’s not common to make that much profit. Yes, it is a really great thing. Yes, it looks like the IPO will proceed within three weeks.
Yes, actually, there was one stock that yielded about 100 times the return, but since the investment wasn't large, it did n't have much impact on my overall assets. Yes, but I still think the biggest way for me to make a profit in this field is resource demand . In other words, I have a lot of copper .
I believe that copper will become a key metal in building AI infrastructure . So, I have a lot of copper . So, to build AI, you will have to buy my copper . Are you buying more copper itself, or are you investing in copper mining companies? Which approach are you taking? No, I do n't have much actual copper.
I own mining companies . Yes, I have gold and silver in physical form. Copper is too bulky to store, you know. Also, regarding what I have, how do you select the copper mining companies to invest in? Well, I just picked out some decent mining companies. Good companies that have a lot of copper buried underground and actually make a profit by selling copper .
And most of them are companies specializing in copper . So, they have copper, and they also have other metals, more industrial metals. However, globally, they are major copper mining companies. However, we have not been able to develop new mines for the past few decades . Therefore, the supply is bound to be limited .
That is one of the things I want to tell people . There is enormous demand for data centers , and while a data center can be built in six months, it can take as long as 15 years to obtain official permits and actually operate a copper mine . This time difference is really huge. So I agree as well. I have a feeling that copper will be depleted soon.
So, when you think, "I should invest $1 now," you will likely be wondering whether to invest in the gold you have been investing in for a long time—that is, physical gold . It is currently at the $4,000, almost $4,045 level. Compared to copper mining companies, do you see this as an opportunity for you ?
How do you plan to distribute that one dollar ? Yes, those two are a bit different. I'm not sure how AI could lower the value of gold . Assuming people hold gold as a hedge against inflation , if our productivity improves significantly thanks to AI, people might become less interested in inflation hedging .
Hmm, but who knows? Maybe machines or robots will come to need gold . Who knows? Because gold still has unique properties that are very useful industrially . And who knows what new use cases AI will create for gold? We can't know. Well, so I think that a financial crisis, a sovereign debt crisis, and a currency crisis will come before we can enjoy all the benefits of AI .
yes . That will cause a lot of funds to flow into gold . That is why I hold a lot of physical gold and gold mining companies . However, most of the gold mining companies I own also mine some copper . Of course, not all of them , but some of the largest copper mining companies are also gold mining companies .
Given the current situation, I think it would be good to wrap up by talking about gold. As you mentioned, we still view gold as an excellent inflation hedge and an asset that can be held directly . The spot price of gold even surpassed $5,000 at one point . It has now returned to the $4,000 level . Looking at the movements over the past year , it can be said that both gold and gold mining company stock prices have remained relatively flat.
What opportunities do you see right now? And do you have a separate price target for the late 2020s ? Well, I think the price will go up much more . By the end of the decade, it will easily surpass $10,000, which is more than double the current $4,000 . Well, and I think the best opportunities lie in the small-scale mining sector .
I think that sector was really overlooked during the last bull market . It is not that stock prices did not rise, but they rose less compared to large manufacturers. I believe that eventually, these small businesses will be acquired by large manufacturers. Generally, when a merger and acquisition occurs, the return is higher when holding shares of the acquired party rather than the acquiring party .
That is precisely why it is believed that major companies like Newmont, Barrick, and Agnico Eagle will make huge profits by selling gold . Because they will have to utilize that cash flow somehow . They will not stop at simply paying out the entire amount as dividends or buying back their own shares .
I think they will focus on expanding their reserves and increasing their production scale in the future . The way to do that is to acquire these small businesses. Hmm, I see. It is a much more reasonable approach than spending money on exploration work where it is impossible to know what will be discovered .
Why wouldn't it be okay to acquire a small business that lacks the resources to expand its reserves ? That is how you do it . From the perspective of large corporations, you see. We have sufficient cash on hand . Because it is a situation where that cash needs to be used . It is expected that there will be significant consolidation in the mining industry , which is good news for gold prices as it means that new reserves will not increase significantly .
Only the ownership of the existing reserves changes. However, I think this situation will be beneficial to small business owners . Of course, large corporations will rise as well . However, small businesses can rise more . Therefore, for that reason, our gold fund places a significant weight on small businesses.
The ticker symbol for the Euro Pacific Gold Fund is EPGFX, and there are no sales commissions. You can purchase at any discount brokerage. You can make a purchase directly on our website europac.com , and view information or prospectuses for the fund or all other funds we manage . I believe it will achieve very good results in a stagflationary environment .
And many people are not properly considering what will happen after the Democratic Party wins the midterm elections and takes control of Congress . Hmm, I see. I believe that pressure for a larger fiscal deficit will accelerate. If you thought the 'Big and Beautiful Bill' was bad , it was indeed bad because it significantly increased fiscal spending , but I think the bill the Democratic Party will pass will be much worse .
Why is that? And Trump will sign it . I won't exercise my veto power . The bill will be signed. So, I do n't expect it to end in a stalemate by chance. I believe Trump will cooperate with the Democrats in Congress to make the government much bigger than the Republicans did. Wow, that seems like a move that probably nobody expected .
Because they are pushing through a worse bill . and. In that case, it would certainly be a bullish factor for the gold market. It is also what you mentioned. I wanted to show people that they can also check out the europac.com website here . You can check asset management information about the company .
Is it true that I can directly purchase items like gold and Lee Na-eun on the website ? you're right. Yes, of course. To purchase gold and silver, please use SchiffGold.com. And my new business spun off from SchiffGold is TGold. Through this, we intend to build a platform where gold can be used not merely as a store of value, but as a means of exchange, such as for payments or salary receipts .
When providing goods and performing services, sell items and receive payment in gold from the customer . That is exactly what we need. We must move away from the fiat currency system and move toward real money. Yes, right here, people can also check out SchiffGold. Here, you can look at gold, silver, platinum, and even the TGold you mentioned .
It's the same here . Is it because copper is too bulky ? Well, if there are any pennies (1-cent coins) lying around, you could keep those too . I mean the pre-1981 penny . It is almost 90% copper . Those are now worth about 5 cents . yes . As for the new coins, well, you ca n't really lose anything.
A penny never loses value less than 1 cent, so you have nothing to lose. That is also the entire cost of making a penny. I applaud the U.S. government for making coins worth less than their production cost . Well, that's... I guess that's why they don't make it anymore. Production of 5-cent nickel coins will also soon be discontinued.
Because it costs more to make . Even if the nickel content is not high , using the old method would result in a loss for every unit of nickel , and most nickel is now made from zinc. However, even if you only consider the value of the zinc and copper contained within, it is now over 5 cents. So eventually, they will have no choice but to stop production as well .
But it is good news for metal enthusiasts. Because it means metal prices are rising. I like it. Peter, that was a really interesting conversation. It was also really good that they looked back on the situation in 2008, starting with the story of inflation. It was an excellent discussion on mortgage interest rates .
As always, thank you very much for appearing . Do you have anything you would like to say to the viewers before wrapping up ? That's all. Please remember to subscribe to the podcast 'The Peter Schiff Show', schiffradio.com, and my YouTube channel, and follow me on social media . X ( Twitter) has nearly 1.8 million followers, so please make sure to check it out .
If you follow Peter's X account, you won't have a dull moment, I guarantee it . Please do n't just follow, please repost as well. You need to repost my writing so that more people can read it . Please repost and interact. That's good, Peter. Thank you very much for appearing. I look forward to the new businesses you are preparing.
I look forward to the next conversation as well. Thank you for your time. Yes, that's good. thank you. thank you. All right.
Comments 0