Figma’s IPO is Finally Here, Fed Holds Rates Steady & Amazon’s $20M AI Licensing Deal with the NYT

0:00:04 Is AI coming for your job? Short answer, maybe. This week on Net Worth and Chill,
0:00:09 I’m sitting down with Lucy Guo, the co-founder of Scale AI, founder of Passes and the youngest
0:00:14 self-made billionaire woman in America. Lucy has become one of tech’s youngest female founders
0:00:19 to hit it big. We’re talking nine-figure exit big. And she’s dropping all the gems on this
0:00:23 episode from her personal entrepreneurship philosophy to how the AI industry is shaping
0:00:27 the world. Listen wherever you get your podcasts or watch on youtube.com slash yourrichbff.
0:00:36 Today’s number, 10. That’s how many smartphones are stolen by monkeys per day at the Uluwatu
0:00:42 temple in Bali. According to researchers, the monkeys operate with quote, unprecedented economic
0:00:49 decision-making, identifying which items we value most and trading them for food. In other news,
0:00:54 Howard Lutnick was recently spotted in the jungle speaking to monkeys. According to reports,
0:00:56 he wanted to, quote, know what they know.
0:01:15 Welcome to Prof G Markets. I’m Ed Elson. It is July 31st. Let’s check in on yesterday’s market vitals.
0:01:21 The S&P 500 and the Dow declined following the Federal Reserve’s interest rate decision. More on
0:01:26 that later. The yield on 10-year treasuries climbed and the dollar rose for the fifth day in a row.
0:01:32 Meanwhile, the Nasdaq rose ahead of Meta and Microsoft’s earnings. Meta stock ripped 10%
0:01:38 in after-hours trading after the company reported a revenue increase of 22% year over year. That beat
0:01:45 out analyst expectations by nearly $3 billion. Microsoft stock got a 7% pop after posting a
0:01:51 powerful beat with Azure revenues up 34% year over year. The company also raised their CapEx guidance
0:01:57 for the year by $10 billion. Tune in on Monday for a full breakdown on all of the big tech earnings from
0:02:01 this week, including tonight’s reports from Amazon and Apple.
0:02:10 Okay, what else is happening? One of tech’s most anticipated IPOs is finally here. Design software
0:02:17 firm Figma is set to go public today, targeting a nearly $19 billion valuation. The offering is expected
0:02:27 to raise around $1.2 billion at current pricing. So Figma’s moment has finally come. We discussed this
0:02:33 IPO a couple of weeks ago. I explained why this is the only IPO in 2025 that we’re actually excited about.
0:02:41 We’ve seen a bunch of quote-unquote hot IPOs in 2025, but most of them have been unimpressive and mostly
0:02:46 crypto-adjacent companies, certainly not companies that we want to invest in for the long term.
0:02:53 Figma, however, is the exception. As we discussed, this actually is an impressive company. They’ve
0:02:59 built an incredible business. They have an amazing design product. They are, in a lot of ways, endemic
0:03:05 to the startup ecosystem at this point. In sum, great company. And if you want to hear more about
0:03:10 why we think that, go check out our episode from July 3rd, where we run through all of the numbers.
0:03:15 So that’s where we stand. And it appears that the market is beginning to feel the same way.
0:03:20 The IPO was originally priced at around $25 per share. That’s where they started the roadshow.
0:03:26 And then by the end of the roadshow, based on the feedback and the demand, they’re now pricing this
0:03:33 at a range of $30 to $32 per share. According to a Bloomberg report, the IPO is almost 40 times
0:03:38 oversubscribed now. So that really would make it the hottest IPO of the year. And therefore,
0:03:43 my prediction, we’re going to see a huge pop in the stock price today. And in my view,
0:03:48 a warranted pop, I think this company is worth at least $20 billion. And the current pricing
0:03:54 values it at less than $19 billion. But let’s give Scott a call. Let’s see if he has a prediction
0:03:58 for us. Perhaps he agrees with me. Perhaps he disagrees. Let’s find out.
0:04:07 Hey, Scott. How are you, Ed? I’m doing well. How are you? I’m good. I’m indoors where my air
0:04:12 conditioning is screaming at you. You’re asking a lot of me. I may break down at any moment. It’s
0:04:20 about 140 degrees here, Ed. It’s pretty hot here in New York. It’s terrible. Is your IC working? Is
0:04:27 that the problem? At the moment. But fortunately, I only pay $11,000 a month in HOA fees. So you get
0:04:33 what you pay for, which means my air conditioning can go out at any moment. Yeah, love it. Well,
0:04:39 we want to get your take on Figma, about to go public. I’m very bullish. I’ve made my case.
0:04:44 What are your views on this IPO? What do you think we can expect? Well, two people that I trust immensely.
0:04:51 The first is Catherine Dillon, who teaches a course on visual language at, um, people don’t know,
0:04:56 Ed Elson gets some of the credit. Scott Geller gets most of the credit, but the real strength here is
0:05:05 Catherine Dillon. And she’s a professor of the arts at, um, at, at, at Tisch. And she’s not easily
0:05:09 excited. And when we talked about Figma a couple of years ago, she said, the first thing I have my
0:05:15 students do is learn Figma. And then you weighed in saying that you thought it was a great IPO.
0:05:20 And I’ve been looking at it, by the way, just in the spirit of full transparency, I’m desperately
0:05:26 trying to find shares in this thing. And the funniest thing was I called a friend or a guy I’ve dealt with
0:05:30 at an investment bank that I have some money with. And he picked up the phone and said, Scott,
0:05:36 I cannot get you shares in Figma. He knew exactly what I was calling. He knew. He knew I was calling.
0:05:43 Look, so in a world of AI, everything looks kind of anodyne and you can create a website,
0:05:47 but design still is an enormous point of differentiation. And if you look at both
0:05:54 Atlassian and IBM, and I thought this was telling the ratio of designers to coders that they hire has
0:06:00 gone from like one to 50 or one in 70 to one in 10. And that is the corporate world realizes the power
0:06:05 of design. Adobe, which is an incredible company, some people would argue has become over engineered,
0:06:12 it’s got $150 billion market cap, they kind of own the space. Canva came out, I would argue Canva is
0:06:20 sort of the entry level, kind of clip art player. And then Figma has swept in. And it said, okay, there is a,
0:06:26 there is a middle ground, there is an E class in between the C and the S class. That’s a Mercedes metaphor.
0:06:35 But this company is just incredible. If you look at, look at Uber, Uber burnt $21 billion from 2009 to
0:06:42 2021. This company has raised $750 million and has a billion and a half on its balance sheet, meaning
0:06:49 that it’s, it’s operationally run incredibly well. And then there’s this, um, I think it’s called the
0:06:56 score or the SAS score. I forget what it’s called, but it’s essentially you add, or the rule of 40,
0:07:02 you add the growth rate plus, plus the profitability of the operating margins. And if it’s above 40,
0:07:09 you have a great SAS company. This company is trading at 64, which puts it at the top five in the top 5%
0:07:16 of all SAS companies. And then I was used to evaluate at the end of the year, L2’s metrics, my subscription-based
0:07:22 analytics company based on logo renewal and dollar renewal or what they call net retention. And the
0:07:29 net retention or the dollar renewal at Figma is 134%, meaning that if a customer is spending a hundred
0:07:37 dollars on Figma the next year, and you take out people who don’t renew on average, they’re spending
0:07:45 134 or $34 more per year. The metrics on this thing are just, are incredibly strong. It’s in a category
0:07:51 that’s growing. The metaphor I would use is that it’s open AI to search. And that is, I think Adobe
0:07:57 is going to be just fine. It’s still the market leader, a little bit over-engineered and the AI
0:08:03 or the open AI is Figma coming in with kind of a more, I don’t know, collaborative. That’s what
0:08:08 they’re sort of known for. They’re really good at collaboration. 80% of the Fortune 2000 are using
0:08:15 the product. I think this, and I want you to talk about this. I think this is the, every year we pick
0:08:21 an IPO. Last year we picked Reddit, the year before Lemonade, the year before Airbnb. This is my pick
0:08:25 for IPO of the year. I think this thing is going to scream out of the gates.
0:08:29 Yeah. I’m 100% with you. I think, I think we’re looking at the IPO of the year and we’ll see
0:08:34 throughout the day. Um, any predict, I mean, it sounds like you think the stock is going to
0:08:39 see a massive pop. Is that right? So managements have learned that in an IPO,
0:08:42 it’s not only a fundraising event, but a branding event. And they’re willing to,
0:08:47 they’re willing to price it below the market. I have, as I referenced before, I’ve been calling
0:08:52 around trying to find shares. I can’t find them. And the most recent number I’ve heard is that this IPO,
0:08:56 a good IPO is usually 12 times oversubscribed. People put in an order for a million dollars
0:09:02 thinking they’ll get clipped back. And so it’s 12X oversubscribed. The latest number I heard is this,
0:09:09 this thing is 40X oversubscribed. So I think this spring has wound so tight. And for people who are
0:09:14 fortunate enough to get into this IPO, I think you could see, and it’s dangerous to put numbers on it.
0:09:22 I think this thing could explode. I think this is the biggest IPO of what I’ll call a real company,
0:09:29 not a fashionable crypto company since a Reddit or an Airbnb. But yeah, I think my prediction here is
0:09:34 this thing is up dramatically on the first trade. What are your thoughts? What do you think is going
0:09:39 to happen here? Massive pop, huge pop, no question about it. I mean, there’s, there’s the demand that
0:09:45 we’re seeing, as you say, 40 times oversubscribed. I love that anecdote that you tried. I mean,
0:09:50 if anyone should be able to get in to the latest tech IPO, it’s you.
0:09:53 You know the most my brother.
0:10:00 Goldman and Jay, if they only cared what Ed Elson thought, I should absolutely have been this idea.
0:10:03 But no, they want to go with people like BlackRock and Blackstone.
0:10:09 The fact that you give Goldman a call, and not only is the answer no, but he knows what the question is.
0:10:10 He knows what I’m calling.
0:10:11 100%.
0:10:17 That to me tells me that the demand is just through the roof on this thing. So that’s the demand side of it.
0:10:20 But then you can also just look at the fundamentals of it. Just think about
0:10:25 a couple of years ago when we were discussing the acquisition of this company by Adobe.
0:10:32 And Adobe wanted to buy the company for $20 billion. And, you know, we talked about that at the time,
0:10:37 didn’t go through because the EU antitrust division didn’t let them, which by the way,
0:10:43 is a great thing for retail investors. And that’s another talk track. But $20 billion back in
0:10:52 2023, I believe. And since then, revenue has gone from $500 million to $820 million. And yet the
0:10:59 company is being priced below the acquisition price. We’re looking at less than $19 billion for this
0:11:06 thing. So both on a fundamentals level and in terms of the hype and demand, I think you’re going to see
0:11:12 a huge pop. We’ll see. I hope we don’t get proven wrong, but that would be my guess.
0:11:17 Yeah. But the observation here, other than a desperate professor trying to find shares in
0:11:26 a hot IPO, is the learning here is that regulation and antitrust are really important. And there’s a
0:11:32 certain trope fomented by the far right and by incumbents that, oh, no, you don’t need antitrust.
0:11:38 Just let your thoroughbreds run and acquire companies. I believe the acquisition offer was
0:11:45 late 2022. And it was valuing the company of 50 times revenues. Now investors, if you can get in on
0:11:51 this, are going to be able to buy the company for 16 to 20 times. And so investors win here. Investors
0:11:56 have an opportunity to invest in a company that’s growing faster, that it’s a disruptor,
0:12:01 and they get access to a different stock to diversify in the space of design, as opposed
0:12:09 to just piling into Adobe, which is a great company. Let’s talk about clients. Now organizations,
0:12:14 corporations have a second competitor that they can negotiate with, which forces Adobe.
0:12:19 Adobe Express is much more collaborative. The reason why they’re much more collaborative and
0:12:23 they’ve invested a shit ton of money in R&D to become more collaborative is they feel
0:12:28 Figma nipping at their heels. Figma, what’s so interesting about this is Figma got a billion
0:12:36 dollar breakup fee. They took $750 million of that, imported into R&D in 2024. So you saw R&D spending
0:12:42 go up. Employees win. Typically when a company is acquired, 18% of the people at the acquired company
0:12:52 end up leaving. In an IGO, you end up with hiring of 23%. So it’s an increase in employment. So clients,
0:12:55 corporations win because there’s more competition, which means people have to come up with better
0:13:00 products at a lower price, i.e. innovation. Investors win because they have another opportunity
0:13:05 to diversify and invest in a pure play that’s growing faster. And the employment market wins.
0:13:11 Tax, more tax revenue. I mean, this is just, this is why competition is so important. And the lesson
0:13:17 here is that good regulation matters and it works. And what’s most interesting I find about this whole
0:13:24 thing is that it wasn’t our FDC or DOJ that created a great independent company and competitor
0:13:31 that grows the economy. It was EU regulators. And that is the FDC and the DOJ and what it could best be
0:13:37 described as a deep slumber of antitrust in the United States was going to let this go through.
0:13:41 And then the EU said, sorry, girlfriend, we’re going to let this go through. And because they
0:13:45 wouldn’t let it go through, the deal didn’t go through. And here we are with an opportunity to
0:13:49 invest in a company at 18 times revenues, as opposed to 50 times revenues.
0:13:54 And remember what people said, people said, oh, the EU is suppressing innovation. Meanwhile,
0:14:01 Adobe invest more in R&D. You see massive AI investment from Figma. And now you get to invest
0:14:07 in this company and you don’t have to, I mean, now you can get some real exposure to this versus,
0:14:10 again, as you said, piling into Adobe and that would have been your option otherwise.
0:14:18 Yeah. This is a case study in that good regulation and competition create economic growth and wins
0:14:23 across our tax base, employee base, and give people better products at a lower price.
0:14:23 Yeah.
0:14:26 So let’s take a guess. So I’m comfortable saying that this is
0:14:32 Prop G Markets IPO of 2025, unless something else blows our socks off. We’re excited about this one.
0:14:36 Let’s take a guess. First trade, what do you think it’s up from the pricing?
0:14:39 I’m going to go 30% up.
0:14:46 Yeah. That sounds right. I’m going to go, I’m going to go 40 or 50. I think the spring has,
0:14:52 is wound so tight here. There’s been such a, not only is the mark, is there a dearth of IPOs,
0:14:58 as you have pointed out, there’s a dearth of great companies going public that aren’t fashionable,
0:15:03 not to ship post on circle, but it’s fast. Crypto is fashionable right now. This is not fashionable.
0:15:08 This is just a great company with great underlying fundamentals. They can sort of justify
0:15:14 you know, a, a above market valuation. So I’m, I’m going to take the over under here,
0:15:16 and I’m going to go that I think it’s going to be higher
0:15:22 than 30%. I think at some point during the day, it’ll be up 40 or 50% or more. I think that this
0:15:30 feels very Airbnb ish to me. Watch the stock tank. There we go. There we go.
0:15:36 Prompting markets. Good. Remember the inverse, the inverse index. Yeah, there you go. Well,
0:15:40 now I’m really praying for a, for a stock pop. Thank you for your time, Scott.
0:15:42 Thanks, brother. Good to see you.
0:15:52 After the break, a look at the Fed’s interest rate decision. Stay with us.
0:15:59 Support for the show comes from Found. Does it ever feel like managing your business finances is a
0:16:04 full-time job on top of your actual full-time job? Enter Found. Found is a business banking
0:16:08 platform that lets you effortlessly track expenses and manage invoices. You can even set aside money
0:16:13 for different business goals and control spending with different virtual cards. And Found doesn’t
0:16:18 just consolidate your financial ecosystem. They can also automate manual activities, including
0:16:23 finding tax write-offs. And the best part, no hidden fees. That means no account maintenance fees,
0:16:28 no minimum balance, and it’s free to sign up. And by the way, other small businesses are loving
0:16:34 Found, too. This Found user said, open quote, “Found is going to save me so much headache. It makes
0:16:38 everything so much easier. Expenses, income, profits, taxes, invoices even.” Close quote.
0:16:44 And Found has 30,000 five-star reviews just like this. You can open a Found account for free
0:16:51 at f-o-u-n-d.com/propg. Found is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services
0:16:56 are provided by Piermont Bank, member FDIC. Don’t put this one off. Join thousands of small
0:17:03 business owners who have streamlined their finances with Found. Support for the show comes from
0:17:07 Public.com. You might already use AI tools to refine your emails and streamline your workflow,
0:17:13 so why not see if it can optimize your investing as well? For that, you can check out Public.com.
0:17:17 Public.com is the investing platform that takes your money as seriously as you do. With Public,
0:17:22 you can build a multi-asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, and more. You can also access
0:17:28 industry-leading yields, including the 4.1% APY you can earn on your cash with no fees or minimums.
0:17:33 But what sets Public apart? AI isn’t just a feature. It’s woven into the entire experience,
0:17:39 from portfolio insights to earnings call recaps. Public gives you smarter context at every touchpoint.
0:17:43 And the best part? You can earn up to $10,000 when you transfer your existing portfolio over
0:17:52 public. Go to Public.com/provg to fund your account in five minutes. That’s Public.com/provg. Paid for by
0:17:56 Public Investing, all investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal. Brokered
0:18:01 services for US-listed registered securities options and bonds and a self-directed account are offered by
0:18:08 Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC complete disclosures available at public.com/disclosures.
0:18:15 What if you could make that stop? With LPL Financial, we remove the things holding you back and provide
0:18:19 the services to help push you forward. If you’re a financial advisor, what if you could have more
0:18:25 freedom, but also more support? Ready to invest? What if you could have an advisor that really understood
0:18:30 you? When it comes to your finances, your business, your future, at LPL Financial, we believe the only
0:18:33 question should be, what if you could? Paid advertisement Anna Kendrick is not a client of
0:18:37 LPL Financial, LLC, and receives compensation to promote LPL. Investing involves risk including
0:18:39 potential loss of principal LPL Financial, LLC member FINRA, SIPC.
0:18:49 We’re back with ProfG Markets. The Federal Reserve held interest rates steady for its fifth straight
0:18:54 meter. However, two Fed governors pushed for an immediate quarter point rate cut. That is the first
0:19:01 time since 1993 where more than one Fed governor has dissented. Well, first off, we’re going to take
0:19:08 a victory lap. Back in May when most of Wall Street agreed that we would get a rate cut in July, I took
0:19:13 the other side of that bet. I predicted we would not get a July rate cut. I predicted that the earliest
0:19:22 time we would see rates come down would be September. The expectations for a rate cut, which most traders
0:19:29 believe will happen in July, that actually came down a little bit. There was an 80% probability of a rate cut
0:19:38 coming in July, and that came down to 70%. So the net net is there is less of an expectation that we will
0:19:46 get rate cuts soon in the summer. But it’s still sort of a high probability. They think 70%. That’s what the
0:19:52 markets believe. I’m going to take the other side of this. The vibe I got here was that Powell is extremely
0:19:58 cautious. He said the words wait and see 11 times in the press conference. And I think what he’s doing
0:20:04 is he’s clearly waiting to get the data. He wants to see what is the actual impact of these tariffs.
0:20:10 And we haven’t seen that yet. So my prediction after this press conference, I think we’re not going to see
0:20:17 a rate cut until September. Because I think Jerome Powell is waiting for more data. Specifically, I think
0:20:23 he wants to see the Q2 GDP report. And that’s not going to come out until the end of July. And my view
0:20:28 is only then will he decide that he has enough data to actually make a decision, which would mean that the
0:20:34 next time that he could potentially cut rates, if that’s all true, would be September. Could be possibly
0:20:38 even later. But my prediction, this isn’t going to happen. We’re not going to get any cuts until
0:20:39 September, at least.
0:20:48 So there you have it. No rate cut. We’re still at a target rate of 4.25 to 4.5%. And according to
0:20:54 Jerome Powell, the Fed has, quote, “made no decisions about whether to cut rates in September.” Now,
0:21:03 why did he hold rates steady? Well, as I said before, I think Jerome Powell wanted more data. He wanted more
0:21:09 more information because, as we’ve discussed many times on the show, if you implement a tariff in April,
0:21:14 you’re not going to see the economic impact until sometime in the late summer or in the fall, because
0:21:20 it just takes a while for the cost of the tariffs to funnel through. So if you were to cut rates in July,
0:21:26 you would essentially be making a decision based on zero relevant information. And as we know,
0:21:33 Jerome Powell likes to make informed decisions. He likes to see the data and then decide.
0:21:37 And so that’s why a rate cut wouldn’t make sense here. Now, the question then becomes,
0:21:45 when will Jerome Powell decide that he is adequately informed? And that is an important question,
0:21:50 because as we also saw yesterday, the GDP data for the second quarter just came out,
0:21:57 and it looked pretty good. GDP grew 3%, which reversed the contraction we saw in the previous quarter,
0:22:04 and it also blew past expectations. So does that mean then that Jerome Powell now has his evidence?
0:22:12 Does he have proof that America’s doing well and that tariffs are no problem? Well, probably not.
0:22:20 Because unfortunately, the reality of this GDP report is that it is just as noisy and misleading as the
0:22:28 last one. You might remember in Q1, GDP fell 0.5%. And a lot of people were quick to say, look, the economy is doing badly.
0:22:36 But as we discussed, that number was actually quite misleading. It was, in reality, a byproduct of this wild swing
0:22:43 in our trade balance, where businesses imported tons of new products in anticipation of the tariffs,
0:22:50 which had this distorting effect on the GDP. Without getting too into the weeds, imports are a tricky
0:22:55 thing to measure. They’re technically subtracted from GDP in the GDP equation, but they’re supposed to be
0:23:01 accounted for in our measures of consumption and inventories. The trouble is, the government just
0:23:07 doesn’t have a great way of measuring inventories. They have to rely on estimates, which is why we saw this
0:23:12 huge mismatch in the data last quarter, which made things look way worse than they actually were.
0:23:19 So it wasn’t that the economy actually declined 0.5%. It’s that the volatility in trade made the data
0:23:26 extremely noisy, and as a result, unhelpful. And that’s why you’re likely to see some serious revisions to that
0:23:35 data in the coming months. So with this GDP report, the same thing is happening, but flipped. Tariffs have been
0:23:41 implemented, and imports have dramatically declined. So now we have the same mismatch, but in the other
0:23:49 direction. And that’s why GDP grew so sharply. Now, why does any of this matter? Well, because the question is whether
0:23:56 or not Jerome Powell is going to look at this GDP data and decide, yes, I should cut rates. And the answer to that
0:24:04 question is almost certainly no. The data is way too noisy, and it doesn’t really tell him anything. He needs to see
0:24:12 something else, specifically data that tells him the story of what tariffs are doing to prices.
0:24:19 That is what this is all about. It’s all about inflation. So yes, he might cut rates in September.
0:24:25 The markets are saying 50-50. I’m pretty skeptical. But if he does, it won’t be because of this report.
0:24:32 It’ll be because of the inflation data, most likely the PCE data, which is set to come out today. But even
0:24:37 if that’s good, it’s highly possible he’ll look at it and conclude, actually, this still doesn’t tell
0:24:44 me the story of tariffs. Because as we’ve seen, the pass-through is taking a really long time to show up,
0:24:49 and it takes even longer when your tariff policy is changing every five minutes. That’s the story
0:24:54 we’re hearing in earnings this week. All of these companies saying we haven’t raised prices yet,
0:25:02 because we still don’t really know what the tariff situation is, but the plan is to raise them. So is
0:25:11 that story going to be told in this month’s inflation data? No, it won’t. So in sum, we’re still not in a
0:25:17 place that is all that different from where we were three months ago. The data still isn’t telling us much.
0:25:23 And if we believe that Jerome Powell will only cut rates once he knows what the data is telling him,
0:25:29 once he knows what the real story of tariffs is, then I think if we were to place bets,
0:25:36 we would have to bet that he won’t cut rates next month. Once again, it’s a toss-up. The markets are
0:25:41 split on this. But given what I think I know about the guy, and given what I think I know about the
0:25:44 way he makes decisions, I don’t think he’s going to cut them.
0:25:58 A high-profile deal between a tech giant and a media heavyweight finally has a price tag. Amazon will
0:26:05 pay the New York Times between $20 and $25 million per year to license its content. The deal allows
0:26:11 Amazon to train its AI models on content from the Times and feature excerpts across its products. That
0:26:16 means that Alexa can now respond to your questions using Times reporting.
0:26:25 So this is the latest in this AI content licensing story that we’ve watched unfold over the past
0:26:31 couple of years. As you probably already know, a lot of these AI chatbots have been scraping data
0:26:38 from books and journals and newspapers, basically anyone who makes content. And the people who make
0:26:46 that content have understandably wanted to get compensated. And it’s been a struggle. We’ve seen
0:26:52 multiple lawsuits filed against the AI companies. We’ve seen actors and authors and journalists all
0:26:58 coming together to say, “Hey, stop stealing our stuff.” And then we’ve also seen some deals made. The
0:27:05 Financial Times, for example, struck a deal with OpenAI last year. So did News Corp. Reuters struck
0:27:10 a deal with multiple AI companies. But this is the very first AI deal we’ve seen out of the New York
0:27:17 Times. And the way that this deal has been presented, at least in the media, is that it is a big win for
0:27:23 them. According to the Wall Street Journal, the deal is a “meaty payday” for the New York Times. According to
0:27:31 the Verge, a big price tag, according to LinkedIn News, a mega content deal. And you know, maybe it is,
0:27:37 for the New York Times. But I do think it’s worth zooming out to consider what this means for the other
0:27:46 party in this transaction, what this means for Amazon. For context, Amazon raked in $640 billion in revenue in
0:27:56 2024. AWS alone did more than $100 billion. This deal is worth $20 million. Which means that, for Amazon,
0:28:05 it is equivalent to two months of revenue from one single client in the AWS division. And so you do have
0:28:12 to ask yourself, is this really a big price tag? Did the New York Times actually win here? Well, you could
0:28:18 certainly make the argument that they did. Again, $20 million for the New York Times is maybe a good
0:28:24 amount of money. It’s about 1% of its revenues. But even if that seems good to you, you still have to
0:28:30 think big picture here. You have to consider what these AI companies would be worth if the data they
0:28:39 used to train their models didn’t exist. And the answer is zero. These AI companies could not survive if they
0:28:45 didn’t have access to the content that lives across the internet. And that isn’t to say that a company
0:28:51 like OpenAI couldn’t survive without the New York Times. But it is to say that OpenAI couldn’t survive
0:28:57 if the New York Times had banded together with every other publisher in America, and they all said in
0:29:04 unison, no, you cannot access our content unless you pay us. That right there is the difference between a
0:29:13 valuation of $300 billion and a valuation of zero. And so you have to ask, what would that contract be
0:29:20 worth? Would it be hundreds of millions? Would it be billions? Would it be hundreds of billions?
0:29:27 I don’t know. But I’m pretty sure that whatever it would be, it would make a $20 million contract look
0:29:34 like peanuts. I don’t know for sure. But that would be my guess. So, sure, the New York Times had a
0:29:41 meaty payday. But if the New York Times were serious about this, a meaty payday would not cut it. If the New York
0:29:48 Times were serious, they’d be thinking of ways to double, triple, quadruple its market cap. That’s what’s at stake here.
0:29:56 And once again, despite the flashy headlines, the markets told us the real story here. The New York
0:30:02 Times stock initially jumped on the news about 4%. But by market close, that had completely reversed,
0:30:11 and the stock ended down 1%. Put another way, $20 million in revenue gained, $100 million in market cap
0:30:18 lost. So this wasn’t a win for the New York Times. This was an opportunity that they decided to miss.
0:30:24 Okay, that’s it for today. Thanks for listening to Prof G Markets from the Vox Media Podcast Network.
0:30:29 I’m Ed Elson. Join us tomorrow for our conversation with Kevin Gordon,
0:30:32 Director and Senior Investment Strategist at Charles Schwab.
0:30:57 Thank you for listening to Prof G Markets from the Vox Media Podcast Network.