Transcript

Intro

Stephan Shipe: Welcome back to the Scholar Wealth Podcast. This week, we’re bringing you a special episode, a little different than our usual format. Last week, about 60 of us gathered in Asheville, North Carolina at the Grove Park Inn for our annual personal wealth conference. If you’ve never been, it’s stunning. Historic property, incredible views of the Blue Ridge Mountains, and the perfect setting for what we do at our conference every single year. The conference is intentionally a small, private, curated gathering of investors, business owners, and successful families. Two full days of focused conversations on market strategy and long-term wealth planning. No sponsors, no sales pitches, no expo halls, just substantive sessions and real conversations among people who are actually working through this stuff.

We kicked things off Wednesday evening with a welcome reception, then ran full days of sessions on Thursday and Friday. The speaker lineup this year was absolutely amazing, covering everything from market valuations and private business investing to estate planning and portfolio. And between sessions, people were off at the pickleball courts, hiking, having dinner together. That’s a big part of what makes it worth the trip every single year. We also have a tradition of closing out the final day with the announcement of the following year’s conference location. And we’re excited to share that we’ll be gathering in Miami in 2027. More details to come, but if you want early bird access once registration opens, go ahead and sign up for our newsletter.

One of the things we did this year was record a live Q&A panel. Questions came in on the spot, handwritten slips of paper hitting the table. We had Deon, Derek, and myself fielding whatever came through. Topics ran the full range — home purchase, trusts, inherited money, real estate syndications, ISOs, hedge funds, talking to your kids about money — the kind of questions that come up when you’re in a room full of people who are genuinely working through this stuff. So let’s go ahead and jump in.

---

Live Q&A Panel – Asheville Wealth Conference

Stephan Shipe: Alright, so I guess we’ll be dragging questions from here until Erin tells us to stop. That’s the plan. So we’ll go. This one’s a handwritten one.

Should You Buy a Home Outright or Take the Mortgage?

Alright, regarding a new home purchase. Speak to the pros and cons of purchasing a new home outright rather than taking on a mortgage, assuming you can afford withdrawing money that will have little to no impact on your retirement or your lifestyle. Controversial topic to start us off. This is gonna cause some issues fast. But let’s go. Deon, kick us off with this one. You’ve taken out cash to purchase the home. If you can afford the cash, can you take out the mortgage for the flexibility?

Deon Strickland: Can I ask a question?

Stephan Shipe: Sure.

Deon Strickland: Is the mortgage less than $750,000?

Stephan Shipe: No.

Deon Strickland: I look at this as a cost of funds. And so right now, I would probably buy it outright because mortgages are running above 6%, and so given what we’re projecting for market returns, even on an after-tax basis, it would be cheaper. I think I would earn more basically not having the mortgage than having the mortgage. But if you could borrow, if for whatever reason we were in a different interest rate environment and you could borrow at that mythical 3% number, and I could deduct the interest, which would drive my after-tax cost down into the low two range, and my use of funds would put me at 6%, I would take the 6% and pay the two and a quarter or two and a half.

Stephan Shipe: I think that sounds good. Derek, for the rebuttal, is there a number, let’s say, is there an interest rate percentage that would change things? At what point does the interest rate get so low where you say take the mortgage?

Derek Cheshire: I think when it starts getting below like 6%, it starts to make more sense. Because then, as pointed out, you get the tax deduction, which is going to bring down that effective rate closer to, maybe below, what you would earn in a savings account, and you’re just going to go that route. Or if you were actually investing it in the market. Did I answer that right?

Stephan Shipe: Yeah, no, I think that sounds right to me. Around that point you start dropping below 6%, I think it really starts to make sense. You get down to that 4% effective after-tax rate, which even under a diversified portfolio starts to look attractive, of where we would want to pull that up. Of course.

Deon Strickland: Of course I do. The other thing is this is a mental accounting issue. If the mortgage acts as a disciplining mechanism that you might not otherwise have, right? So if you pay for it just out of your brokerage account and then you lack a mortgage, sometimes a mortgage I think acts as this anchoring mechanism for some people when it comes to their budgeting. That’s why when we ask clients frequently, we ask them how great is your budgeting skill? You have the client who says a 10, and I would say that’s fine. But if you had asked me this, I would give myself a one, and for me it would probably be a bad idea.

Stephan Shipe: I couldn’t agree more.

Annual Gift Tax Exclusions Across a Large Family

All right, let’s jump into another one. My in-laws want to give each of their kids and grandkids the annual gift tax exclusion amount every year. They’re like 14 people in the family. Is that actually a good strategy? Is there something better at their level?

Kids and grandkids, annual exclusion. Good strategy or better? I think it depends on whether or not the amount that they could give exceeds that, right? So if this is going to help significantly reduce their estate and they can afford it, I don’t see any issue with that being the limit. Depending on how old the 14 people are in the family, as you start going out further you’re running some risks there, but they add up.

Derek Cheshire: Yeah. I think when I look at that and I see about giving money to children, you could do that and it’s going to probably go to a custodial account. The issue becomes, most states that age of majority is going to be 18 years old. So once they hit 18, that money becomes theirs. So if you’re doing 14 people at $19,000 a year for a number of years, that could be a pretty substantial amount that a young kid who’s probably somewhat irresponsible could suddenly have all this access to. So you might want to think about maybe you set up a trust or something like that, rather than just putting it into a custodial account.

Stephan Shipe: You can always pull the don’t tell them the account exists

Derek Cheshire: and then you don’t have

Stephan Shipe: to worry about anything. Anything to add?

Structuring an Inheritance for a Young Adult Child

Alright, next one up. Our kids are 16 and 19. If something happened to us tomorrow, I don’t want my 19-year-old getting a lump sum of money. What is a good way to structure things so they get it gradually?

I think that’s exactly what we’re here for. At that point, you’d want some sort of trust established. But I’ll add to this question. Where is the line drawn of where you consider it to be too much money?

Deon Strickland: Oh my.

Derek Cheshire: When does that become an issue? When is it worth getting the trust?

Deon Strickland: I think it depends on the kid, right? I have a daughter who I wouldn’t have worried about. I have a son who maybe I would have worried about a little bit.

Stephan Shipe: Budgeting skills.

Deon Strickland: Yeah, budgeting skills. It turns out he’s done a pretty good job. I will say, going with what Derek said, I can use my own case. I set it up so my younger one would have to reach a certain age, which is a pretty classic strategy, I think. So my youngest had to get to 26 or 27, and that’s when the trust dissolved. So I think there’s, you have to make an assumption at some point that they’re going to reach a level of maturity that you have to trust. So you hope you’ve done the job. It’s like when my daughter started dating, I wanted to erase every male from existence, and my wife told me that I eventually had to simply trust that I had been the parent that I needed to be. I still didn’t trust him, just for the record.

Stephan Shipe: All right. Anything to add on structure there?

Derek Cheshire: Yeah. The only thing I would add is you mentioned dissolving at 26 or 27. You could also build it into a trust so they could use the money for certain purposes, like buying a new home, college, stuff like that. That’s probably the only thing I’d add to that.

When Co-Beneficiaries Disagree on a Trust Distribution

Stephan Shipe: All right. My brother and I are both beneficiaries of a trust our parents set up. He wants to distribute everything, close it out, be done with it. I think we should leave it alone. Do we have options if we can’t agree on the distribution strategy?

Unfortunately, yeah, that’s going to be ugly. So you want to distribute everything, close it out and be completely done. There are some tax issues with doing that. I think we should leave it alone. But my initial thought, and then I’ll hand it over, is you are thinking about several things. I think it’s going to depend on what type of assets are in that trust. Because if they are more illiquid assets or things that are going to have major tax implications of trying to remove them from the trust, then that could be a pretty big deterrent to just closing it out and being done with it. But depending on how that trust is set up, you might not have that choice of how it’s going to be distributed. And based on our conversations this morning, if it was set up correctly, they shouldn’t have a choice at all in whether or not they could take that money out at that point. But what are your additional thoughts on that?

Derek Cheshire: Yeah, I guess it would depend a little bit on how the trust is structured, but if the trust is set up where you could actually just distribute the actual assets, you don’t necessarily have to sell anything, so you could just distribute out the assets to each person and close it. But obviously it depends on how the trust is set up, and you’d honestly want to check with a CPA to make sure it’s not going to create some other situation.

Stephan Shipe: And if the assets are divisible.

Derek Cheshire: Yeah. If it’s a house you’ve got a problem, but if it’s a bunch of shares, then you split it evenly.

Stephan Shipe: I feel like we need to phone a friend and bring Aaron back up here.

Derek Cheshire: That’s great.

What to Ask When a Real Estate Syndication Underperforms

Stephan Shipe: All right, this is a good one. We invested in a few real estate syndications a couple of years ago and they’ve basically done nothing. The operators are still sending quarterly updates, but the returns aren’t what we were told. What questions should we be asking?

This one comes up regularly, unfortunately. From historical context, what ended up happening is when interest rates were really low and real estate prices started getting really high, in the 2019, 2020, the COVID era, you started to see a lot of these being pitched everywhere, these real estate syndications. To the point that we were looking at some where the pitch decks were just full of typos. It was a disaster. The people who were on the management team had never owned any real estate or done anything with real estate whatsoever. And things were getting pretty ugly there, which is always a great sign of a bad area to be investing in whenever you have all of that.

But unfortunately this is starting to become more common. Because when you get into these different types of private investments, whenever somebody throws out a projection of what they think is going to happen, there are always these really nice charts going up and to the right of what’s going to happen. And a lot of the assumptions at that time were that they were going to refinance. After building up the value, so buy an apartment complex for $10 million on a loan at 3 or 4%, or at that time maybe 5 or 6%. And the hope was we’re going to paint the walls, change out the floors, we’re going to double rent, and then it’s going to be worth $20 million. And then we’ll do a refinance at 3% and our return is going to go through the roof. And they would show these projections, and then interest rates went up and all those assumptions went away real quick on where the projections were. So what questions would you be asking, Deon, when you’re getting these quarterly statements from an investment you’re in?

Deon Strickland: We can’t go back in time, I’m presuming. No, I can’t go back in time. I can’t counsel my client not to do it. For God’s sakes, no.

Stephan Shipe: You’re getting the quarterly updates.

Deon Strickland: I’m getting the quarterly updates. Now this is one of those cases where an illiquid asset is a problem, right? You have to accept in some sense here, sometimes you have to wait it out a little bit, right? Because if you can’t find an easy buyer, you’re hoping that you got the advice at the time that this represented one or 5% of your portfolio, right? So that’s the whole benefit of limiting unusual assets like real estate, gold, other commodities, anything like that to 5 or 10% of your portfolio, so you have the wherewithal at that point to not have it tank your overall position. So I think this is one of those cases where you hope you did the right thing initially. I know I can’t go back in time and convince them not to. I think this is also an example where the problem with this kind of real estate, if the asset could freely adjust to changes in rates, it would be okay. But we find with real estate that it does not adjust as cleanly to interest rate shocks as other assets, right? So it’s much more like a bond than it is like an equity.

Derek Cheshire: Yep.

Deon Strickland: So I think you just, that’s why you have to really pay attention and say, what part of our portfolio needs to be relatively liquid, and what part can we afford to be illiquid?

Stephan Shipe: What other questions would you be asking?

Derek Cheshire: I don’t think honestly asking questions is going to do you much good. You’re stuck in it. The only thing I’d probably be asking is what’s the plan as far as liquidation? When is the goal to ultimately sell this property so then you can get back some of your money? Hopefully.

Stephan Shipe: I think that’s exactly what I would be asking. My concern at this point would be how bad were their projections, and really looking into them to find out whether or not their projections now actually make sense. Because what’s going to end up happening is if their projections are still bad, then you run the risk of a capital call. So it’s a reverse liquidity issue, it’s even a worse liquidity issue. Not only can you not sell, but they come back to you and say, hey, you’re one of the owners, we’re now in the hole this year, so we need you to put up an extra $50,000 to maintain your ownership in the property, or else you’re going to get diluted.

So there’s another risk that this continues down that road. That’s not uncommon with real estate private investments. The original plan is always an exit within seven years. If you ever look at any type of private investments, five to seven years is the typical timeline that they’re shooting for. So once they get to five to seven years and they haven’t sold yet, if there’s a reason they haven’t sold, they’re just going to hang onto it for the cash flow. So they’re just going to have this slow trickle of cash flow that continues to come in, and then they charge fees on all of it. So that’s not uncommon. To Deon’s point, at this point that would be the movement, and the questions I’d be asking are just making sure that there’s no additional capital that’s going to be needed in the future. And even then, that doesn’t really change anything. But if it hasn’t done well, that doesn’t mean you should go contribute more to it. Right. But at least you would know what the situation looks like.

AMT Credits From ISO Exercises

Stephan Shipe: Oh, this has Derek written all over it. I exercised a bunch of ISOs back in 2021 when my company was doing well and the stock dropped 80%. I have heard I may have generated an AMT credit. What is that and can I actually use it?

This is a regular one that comes in on that mismatch of the AMT credit.

Derek Cheshire: We should defer to a CPA on this.

Stephan Shipe: Exactly.

Derek Cheshire: Yeah. Why don’t you go through the AMT idea. Yeah. So when you exercise those ISOs back in 2021, that spread between the exercise price and whatever the value was, it’s not subject to ordinary income tax, but it can be subject to AMT, alternative minimum tax, which is the parallel tax system that the government set up to make sure that they’re getting theirs. So you basically pay the higher of each. So when you exercise, you may have created AMT tax. If you pay AMT tax, you can get a credit later on. So if you were to sell those shares, you’ll have an AMT basis in those shares. So when you sell those, you would be able to get some of that credit back based on whatever the basis is.

The other way you can get that credit back is in years that your regular income tax exceeds AMT, you can recoup it in those years as well. It just depends. I think the issue becomes around AMT tax, say you exercise this year, you have a bunch of income, you pay AMT, but then you retire a year later. Now you have low income. It’s unlikely that you’re going to be generating a lot of space to get that credit back from year to year. But if you do sell the shares, you can recoup some of that. So

Stephan Shipe: every dollar in retirement counts.

Derek Cheshire: Yeah. So as long as you still have the shares, you sell them, you can get some of that back.

Stephan Shipe: Anything you’d like to add?

When Should You Start Talking to Your Kids About Money?

I am 41. My husband’s 44. We have two kids and a combined net worth of about $8 million. At what point does it make sense to start talking to our kids about money? Our parents never talked to us about it and we don’t think that served us well.

Derek Cheshire: I did, but

Stephan Shipe: I don’t think there’s too early of a time to start talking to kids about money. I just think it changes over time, the type of conversation we have. The type of conversation you have with kids who are 40 is very different than the type of conversation you have when your kid’s four. Maybe you’re not bringing up trusts at four years old, but you’re starting to talk about other things around money, and what a penny is compared to a quarter, or what used to be a pitney, I should say, back in the day when they had pitneys. And I know you’ve got your panel on this tomorrow, so you’ll have to hold back all the secrets, but

Deon Strickland: I don’t have any secrets. But I will say this almost relates a little bit to a question I got a while back. It was about a wedding. You remember this? I had a question about a wedding, and I would say

Stephan Shipe: remind me, because

Deon Strickland: so the basic of the question was, how much did you spend on a wedding when the amount you spend on the wedding is unrelated to your plan’s success? Whatever you spend on the wedding, it would affect your retirement. That was basically the question, and I responded. I think Erin brought that question to me and I responded. I think they brought it to me because I had just paid for a wedding, so I was still traumatized. And I think what I said was something along the lines, and I think that applies here.

Stephan Shipe: Go big.

Deon Strickland: No, that’s what I hated. That’s not what I recommend. What I said was, and I think this applies to money in general, which maybe we’ll talk about some tomorrow, and it comes down to values, right? And so the early thing which you’re trying to give your kids is the values you want to instill in them, and the money simply gets reflected in their values, right? And so you can have that conversation with your kids later on. But the first thing you want to do, in my opinion at least, is instill in them intellectual curiosity, caring about people, all those things which we did around my dinner table. It was a really active dinner table, like we challenged each other. I would ask questions deliberately, I should probably say, to provoke responses, right? That was the kind of dinner table I had. And part of that was about generating values, right? So they could understand how their mom and I talked about things, what we understood was important, because the money will reflect what you think is important. And I think that’s the sort of notion there that I was trying to give my kids, not whether they should do a Roth conversion. I’ll do that with them later.

Stephan Shipe: Yeah, I think that’s a common theme that we always see, is that money amplifies behavior, right? And it amplifies values as well, right? So whatever has been instilled is what we continue to see generation after generation. And the conversations don’t have to be the direct money conversation as much as they are the values. The money’s just going to amplify that, unfortunately in both directions, if the values aren’t in the right place. But what about you, Derek? What are your thoughts? When does it make sense to start those conversations?

Derek Cheshire: I think Deon did a far better job of answering than I can on that one. Yeah, I think it’s probably never too early, I guess, as long as they’re old enough to be able to comprehend. But yeah, like Deon said, just instilling small values here. I know my kids, they get money in their pocket, they want to go buy a video game or something. I do my best to try to convince them not to. And to save it for later. You might need a car when you’re older. Never works. But I think having those conversations and maybe trying to get them to think about the bigger picture any time they do get some money, I think that could be helpful. We’ll see if it works. So far it’s been a loser, but

Stephan Shipe: I think the thing I’d add to this one is that I don’t think it’s universal, I think it is specific to each individual child. And I think that definitely starts at a young age. I’ve got one who counts every penny that goes to the bank account.

Derek Cheshire: Right.

Stephan Shipe: And will spend all day looking for a lost nickel because it’s not adding up.

Derek Cheshire: Right.

Stephan Shipe: And the other one’s out handing out cash like it’s his job. Mine too. So it’s different types of skills that need to be developed.

Derek Cheshire: It’s time for another topic. Yeah.

Stephan Shipe: Alright. Perfect.

Evaluating a Hedge Fund Investment

All right, this is a good one too. A friend of mine has been in a hedge fund for years and swears by it. I have a meeting with them next week. What should I be asking to evaluate whether it’s worth it?

So I think this gives a little bit of, not to plug my lecture from earlier, since I know everyone was wide awake for that. But the first thing is to determine whether or not it makes sense, right? The assumption that your friend’s finances are just like your finances and the capacity for risk is the same is a strong assumption. So making sure that actually matches is how I would think about the first step. And then trying to determine whether or not the evaluation of that fund or that investment actually makes sense. But what do you think, Deon? You’re walking into the hedge fund meeting next week. What kind of questions are you asking about their strategy?

Deon Strickland: I think you said the right word, strategy. If it was a long-only hedge fund, you’re going to have a really hard time convincing me that a long-only hedge fund makes sense. Whereas if it was, say, a long-short, or let’s say I have a friend who manages a hedge fund and he specializes in emerging markets, right? That one kind of makes a little more sense to me because it’s really hard for me to take positions in emerging markets in some places, right? I could buy an emerging markets ETF, but that’s not quite the same kind of thing he takes investments in. So for me, I would ask those kinds of questions. What kind of firms are you investing in? Are they names I know? Because I would be more likely to invest if it was names I didn’t necessarily know. And then of course, you want to look at the long run. What does their fee structure look like? Do they have an underwater clause, right? So if they go underwater, do their fees go away? Because as we all know, investors respond to incentives, or managers respond to incentives. So I think the first thing they would have to understand is have a really detailed knowledge of their positions, what kind of positions they’re planning on taking, and what kind of fee structure. And is it incentive compatible? Does it make sense if they don’t win, right? Because if I’m taking a position in the hedge fund, say it’s an emerging markets, super illiquid risky fund, I would want to know all those kinds of things.

Stephan Shipe: And the underwater, you’re talking high water mark. Yeah. So that way, for those unaware, if you go throw in a million dollars into a hedge fund, they get it up to $10 million and then they drop back down to five, and then it goes back up to 10, you’re not paying your fees to get it back up to $10 million again. They’ve hit that high water mark. You’re only paying your fees on any new profit that they’re able to generate. Otherwise you could just continue to bring it up and then back down and then bring it up and then back down and continue to rack up fees.

Deon Strickland: You create an annuity.

Stephan Shipe: Yeah, exactly. Like an annuity of fees. And then obviously the long-only portfolio of domestic stock doesn’t make a lot of sense at all. You have to start looking for inefficiencies. There has to be some semblance of an inefficient market for this to make sense. What do you think, Derek? How are you evaluating this hedge fund?

Derek Cheshire: I think the only thing I’d add to that, going back to the private equity or private real estate we talked about, is liquidity. I’d probably try to get an idea of whether they allow quarterly redemptions, something like that, so that you can actually get to the money if you need to. One thing to keep in mind is even if they do offer quarterly redemptions, if things hit the fan, they can just turn those off and say, we’re not doing redemptions right now, so you could still be stuck in there longer. But I’d still like to have an idea of how that looks.

Stephan Shipe: That’s a dangerous one. Because that one gets thrown around as a sales pitch for a lot of these, of it’s illiquid but you could, we have quarterly redemptions, tell us how much you want out and we’ll let you get out. And then there’s a clause in there that says if they don’t want you to get out, they can just turn that off. And now you’re stuck in there. So you’re not able to get out with the redemption anymore.

Planning for a Widowed Parent With $18 Million and No Plan

All right, there are a few more. Let’s try to get one more. My father passed away last year and left everything to my mother, which is fine. But now she has about $18 million and no plan. She’s 74, lives down in Florida. What should she be thinking about at this point? And how do I bring it up without seeming crass?

I think those conversations never get easy. Unfortunately. I think maybe you have a good opportunity to bring that up because of your father’s passing, and to discuss that and say, this is what happened and everything moved over to you. I’m worried about what’s going to happen next. With $18 million in Florida, I don’t think there’s a big estate tax risk, at least right now, as long as she’s spending what she should. If she’s not spending the money, then we could potentially run into problems. But at $18 million and 74, if she’s not spending, it could get up there quite a bit.

But I think I would be bringing up the point that she should be spending as much as she wants of that money, and then starting to discuss passing it down. Where I think that conversation gets really messy is if she’s not spending that $18 million. Because there’s always more of a need for the money now than there will be later, right? So you run into this kind of odd situation. That’s where the conversation gets a little tricky of, if you’re not going to need the $18 million, then why don’t you give $10 million now? Because we could actually use the $10 million. And it’s one of those things that I sometimes want parents to consider from the other end more, because when we bring that up a lot of times, they don’t see it that way. And a lot of the times it’s because this is the first generation of money. So they never felt that other side that their kids are in. They’re like, mom and dad have this big pile of money over there, and I keep telling them to take vacations and they refuse to take a vacation. And I’m over here struggling trying to pay bills and I could retire right now if I had a little bit of money hit my account.

So I can’t say there’s an easy way to have that conversation. But I will say the tried and true way to start that conversation is you blame us, right? You say that my advisor talked to me and I didn’t want to have this conversation, but Stephan said I need to have this conversation and this is what he said we need to do. And that, a lot of times, will break the ice pretty easily. But how do you have that conversation?

Deon Strickland: I agree with that, and I think the most difficult thing is that it’s likely she’s not spending what she should be spending. I think that’s the most likely result. There’s really excellent large-sample evidence. I’m always going to go back to the evidence, and the evidence suggests that most Americans are accumulators. People who accumulate are accumulators and they’re not very good at spending. And so there’s really good evidence that most people come to end of plan — that’s the language I like to use, come to end of plan — with more money than they started. And I don’t think that’s what you want, right? So I think you start that conversation just the way you said. I had a client and I said, you should pay capital gains. And I think they were a little surprised by that. And I’m like, you pay capital gains so you get to do stuff. You should never let a capital gains tax stop you from doing what you want to do. I always joke, and you know this in finance, paying capital gains is a high-quality problem. And so I like it when my clients have high-quality problems. And so that’s what that is.

Stephan Shipe: You’re going to have to balance not ruining your presentation for tomorrow, getting too far into it.

Derek Cheshire: Yeah. Deon’s giving insight into my presentation tomorrow, so that’s messing it up a little bit. But

Deon Strickland: you can’t mess up what you didn’t know yet.

Derek Cheshire: I would say, I think just having a conversation with your mom, or your dad, whoever, about what they want to do with the money. Talk more about, you don’t have to get into hey, you should give me some of that money. Just talk about, hey, let’s talk about maybe that trip you wanted to do. Stuff like that. Other things that they could be doing. It can be more about what she wants to do with it. Probably an easier conversation that way.

Stephan Shipe: Outside of the money aspect there, there’s also very much a practical aspect of having those conversations, so that way, is there an estate plan in place? Are there trusts in place? Who are you supposed to call? How are properties titled? There’s a lot of very practical things that have nothing to do with I want you to hand down some of the money early, and everything to do with, we just want to know so that way we actually have a plan, or know there’s a plan. You don’t even have to say what the plan is. I just want to know there’s a plan, and here’s who I’m supposed to call. So I think that’s a big area there. All right. I think we’re at time. Thank you very much for joining us.

Outro

Stephan Shipe: And that’s our show. Thanks for listening and we’ll see you next week!

Disclaimer: The information provided in this podcast is for general informational and educational purposes only, and is not intended to constitute financial, investment, or other professional advice. The opinions expressed are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the views of any affiliated organizations. Investing in financial markets involves risk, including the potential loss of principal. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Before making any investment decisions, you should consult with a qualified financial advisor who can assess your individual financial situation, objectives, and risk tolerance.