 All right, so you probably heard yesterday was that Elon Musk had bought 9.2% of Twitter stock. He is now the owner of 9.2%. I read somewhere how many billions of dollars that cost him. I don't know, but it cost him a lot of money. He's the largest shareholder of Twitter. He's a larger shareholder, significantly larger than the founder of Twitter and the former CEO who owns about 2%. He is a larger shareholder of Twitter than many of the institutional members, the institutional investors. It's quite impressive that he's managed to accumulate 9.2%. I haven't really pulled up a chart of Twitter stock. I don't know if he bought a cheap or an expensive. I mean, tech stocks have been driven down quite a bit over the last couple of months, over the last three months, so probably far from its peak. Wonder Freeman says that it cost him $4 billion to do it. Free trade has been a member for two months. I don't know. I don't think this counts as a super chat. Being a member is not good enough. It doesn't help you get to the 600 goal, as Catherine will know for you. But I will read what Free Trade says. He says, Musk is being hailed as a free speech champion on Twitter. In reality, he blocks people to destroy his antifossil field narrative. For example, Alex Epstein. So Musk is his argument for going on Twitter as he wants to make it better. There's a lot of discussion about having it edit buttons. You can change your tweets after you post them. Also, to eliminate some of the some things that Twitter does, which takes people off the platform or puts them or forces them to lead tweets or so on. So he's going in there with his own agenda about how he thinks a Twitter should be run. Now today, they announced that not only does he have 9.2% of Twitter stock, but today he was appointed to the board of directors. So Elon Musk is now going to be a power, a force within Twitter. Now, I have to say, this is beautiful. This is the beauty of finance. This is amazing. Put aside whether you agree with Musk or you don't agree with Musk, this could be judge Soros for all you know, right? But the very fact that an individual can take a large position in a stock, get on a board of directors, influence the direction of a company and fix, perceive problems with it that might be hurting its market value is one of those amazing features of markets. It's, I mean, one would hope that people do it, do it and the results are positive. The results consistent with what we would like them to be. Right? But they might, you know, if you're an advocate for Elon Musk taking a board seat and taking 9.2%, then what happens? Are you going to be offended when George Soros does the same thing and argues for a more leftist agenda for Twitter, for some social media company? The beauty of the fact that they are private means the shareholders, shareholders can buy into the platform, buy into the company, shareholders can therefore change its policy, shareholders can go on and determine the future of the company and it's not static. I did an interview today with somebody who was arguing with me that, you know, all these companies, all these social media companies are monopolies and what do you do about monopolies? Well, here's what you do about monopolies. Buy their shares and kick out managers and change their behavior to be more, I don't know, friendly, more profitable, more, we'll see. We'll see what Elon Musk actually does. We'll see what actually is motivating him. But one option rather than compete rather than spend the money to create a new platform that competes with Twitter and an alternative to that is to just buy and change it. And it might change for the good, it might change for the worse. I don't know. I mean, Musk seems to have the right inclination, so hopefully it changes for the good. But it's just one more way in which one deals with, let's say, corporate behavior that we think is negative, that we think is bad. So Elon is using his billions, I guess the money he lost, I guess the money he gained from selling a big stake of Tesla, much of that money went to paying taxes. And so that money has now gone into buying a big stake in Twitter and buying himself onto the board of directors of Twitter and now having an influence on Twitter. And it's going to be fascinating. It's going to be really, really interesting. Does he manage to change the policies of Twitter? Twitter, does he move Twitter in a different direction? Is it better? Is it worse? Will the stock price respond by going up? Will it go down? Will it be political? Won't it be political? It's going to be really interesting. So I am eagerly anticipating watching how this plays out. But again, this is one of the beauties of private business, private markets, is that you get these kind of changes without any government intervention, without government doing anything. Indeed, I would argue that government is preventing. Anybody know why he stopped at like 9%? Why didn't it take 12%? Or because you can accumulate up to 10% of a stock. Well, you really accumulate out of 5% of a stock and then you have to disclose your interest. You have to let the world know that you bought the stock. If you accumulate over 10% of a stock, you have to let the world know your intentions. You have to file a complicated SEC form that tells the world why you own 10%. Now, before these regulations came into place, and the regulations around what are called 13Ds and 13Gs, which are the different filing requirements, the 13Ds and 13Gs were put in place in 1968. And they were put in place in 1968 by the SEC, these are regulations that make it impossible for somebody, for example, to accumulate 50% of a stock, walk into the CEO's office and fire them because they're the majority owner now and basically replace the board because they own 51% of the company. Guess who lobbied to have those regulations put in place? Guess who wanted them in place? Guess who didn't want to get fired by people who accumulate 51% of the company stock? Managers. Managers of big companies. Managers of big corporations in America lobbied to have these regulations put in place in order to restrict the ability of people to take over their companies in a stealth way, in a way without everybody knowing, right? Imagine just buying 51% of the company stock on the market, in the open market, and then you're in control. Today, you can't do that. You have to buy five, disclose, and then 10, disclose, then you have to do a tender offer. You actually have to let shareholders know, look, I want to buy 51% of the company. I'm going to pay you X. That allows competitors come in. Supposedly this is good for shareholders because it creates a bidding war, but it also reduces the number of people who ever go into it. And it entrenches often. Bad managers. It often entrenches bad CEOs. So imagine a world in which Elon Musk, you woke up one morning and Elon Musk owned 51% of the company and basically it fired its management and was taking over. Can't happen today, sadly. But that's capitalism. You see, that's what a free market looks like. And it's things like that that suggest that we have no idea what business would actually be like under capitalism. We have no idea the dynamics of what it would be like, the competition, the insistence of managers to really try to maximize share of the worth because otherwise somebody is going to buy up the stock and fire them. Capitalism is so much more dynamic, so much more interesting, so much more focused than anything we see today. We do not have capitalism today. And that creates stagnation. It creates laziness. It creates incentivized managers to not innovate, to not stay on the cutting edge, to not completely dedicate everything they can to make you sure they maximize share of the worth. All right. As I said, I'm looking forward to Elon Musk who is not woke, who is not politically correct to see what kind of influence he can have on Twitter. I think it's exciting. I think it's a good day for social media. I think it's a good day for expression. Hopefully he opens up the platform. He allows more discussion, more debate, less sanctioning of people. And then maybe other social media platforms learn from that and take note of that. And if he's successful and the stock price goes up and people are happier with Twitter and he kind of eviscerates all the competition that is out there, even though it's marginal, then other social media will mimic him. And if he tells the politicians to go to hell, as he has done with the SEC on issues around Tesla and as he has with others, yeah, I mean, this could be a game changer. This could be a game changer. If we got the kind of sense of life and self-esteem of Elon Musk applied to social media companies, the world would be dramatically different. So let's see what happens. Go to uranbrookshow.com.com. I go to Patreon, subscribe star locals, and just making a appropriate contribution on any one of those channels. Also, if you'd like to see the Iran Book Show grow, please consider sharing our content. And of course, subscribe. Press that little bell button right down there on YouTube so that you get an announcement when we go live. And for those of you who are already subscribers and those of you who already supporters of the show, thank you. I very much appreciate it.