Title: A Market Reversal Is Inevitable | Chance Finucane @OxbowAdvisors
Show: Thoughtful Money (Adam Taggart, YouTube)
Guest: Chance Finucane — CIO, Oxbow Advisors
Date: 2026-07-16
URL: https://youtu.be/V60SNgaL3Hk
Length: 1:10:17
Note: Fillers (um/uh/you know/stutters) removed and mis-transcriptions corrected ("Kimball Royalty" = Kimbell Royalty / KRP); wording otherwise verbatim. Host Adam Taggart discloses he is an Oxbow client.

(00:00) When there's greed involved and a potential bubble, as long as people want to keep chasing prices higher and keep talking themselves into it further, it can keep going. But the reversal of this trend of the last few years, and it's accelerated even more in the last few months, the reversal is inevitable. >> [music] >> Welcome to Thoughtful Money.
(00:27) I'm Thoughtful Money founder and your host Adam Taggart. Welcoming you here for a special discussion with the chief investment officer of Oxbow Advisors. This is Ted Oakley's firm. The chief investment officer there is Chance Finucane. Chance, great to have you return to the program. How you doing, sir? >> Doing great, Adam.
(00:46) Thanks for having me back on your show. >> Hey, it's a real pleasure. One of the things I love talking to you guys about is obviously you're very smart guys and you do a great job of servicing your clients, of which full disclosure folks, I am one of Oxbow. You guys are a high net worth firm and we'll talk maybe a little bit about that later on in this discussion.
(01:09) But one of the things I really appreciate you guys for is you help take the counsel that high net worth families get to receive and share it publicly here in these videos as well as in the videos that you do on your own channel. And so I really value your mission in terms of just trying to help as many people as possible.
(01:34) So in that vein, we're at a point here right now, Chance, where the markets appear to be caught back up in another big speculative fervor here, and I'm referencing the AI trade. I know it's something that you and Ted have been talking about a lot recently. >> [sighs] >> You guys do such a good job of saying, look, over the long scope of your investing careers, and Ted's got a few more decades on you.
(02:09) Money is made mostly by not making big mistakes and being well positioned when malinvestment gets flushed out of the market, valuations come down to attractive levels, sometimes extremely attractive levels, and to deploy capital then. Give me a sense of where you think we are right now in the markets with this AI trade, and do you see this as another cycle like that? Is this one of those moments in the market where things are getting too distorted to the upside due to excessive speculation and you are
(02:44) expecting a big corrective event at which some point you guys would hopefully step in and get some, I don't want to initially use the word generational values, but at least very attractive values to then ride the next up cycle with. >> Yeah, we would agree with that.
(03:01) I think if you just look at the second quarter, that was the best quarterly performance for the semiconductor industry of stocks in its history. In the last 14 months, the semiconductor index has appreciated by more than 230%, which has only happened one other time, which was the last 14 months of the dot-com bubble.
(03:19) Momentum stocks have outperformed minimum volatility stocks by more than any time on record in the last 30 years. So there's a lot of examples that just say that this move and this chase into the hot AI trend has probably run too far, but I don't know that we're trying to time when exactly this ends.
(03:38) When there's greed involved and a potential bubble, as long as people want to keep chasing prices higher and keep talking themselves into it further, it can keep going, but the reversal of this trend of the last few years, and it's accelerated even more in the last few months, the reversal is inevitable. And so, for us, we've actually been looking in other places to try to allocate money in a reasonable way at good valuations, and continue to generate a decent return for our clients.
(04:08) But at this point in the cycle, where you've already had a significant appreciation in people's stock portfolios, we're starting to explain that it's important to focus on preserving capital, because despite this move from say the end of 2020 up until now, about 5 and 1/2 years, a 140% bull market, you can give almost all of it back.
(04:31) And so, if you've been lucky enough to participate in the upside over the last half decade, you need to really be mindful of how much you still are invested in stocks, maybe rebalance, maybe rebalance within stocks to some other sectors that have been unloved. It's okay to take some of those chips off the table so that you can get through whatever the next bear market is that we think could be more severe than just a typical bear market.
(04:55) You can get through that okay, preserve most of the capital you've appreciated, and then you're ready for the next time to buy in at cheaper valuations. >> All right. So I want to talk about that in just a moment, which is what I hear you saying is, as much fun as maybe people are having right now in the market chasing FOMO, you think this really is more of a time to play defense versus offense for the reasons you just mentioned.
(05:20) I pulled up a chart, I'm going to pull it back up here. You referenced this. This is the move the semiconductors have made. You can see just how incredibly swiftly and viciously returns have jumped in that sector. Really back to its all-time high, at least in this data set from the late '90s.
(05:44) It's a very cyclical sector, as I know you know, Chance. And so this is kind of what's driving the AI stock complex right now, right? The hyperscalers have been doing the majority of the work over the past couple years, but they have kind of started to stumble. Some are starting to refer to the mag seven as the lag seven now as a result, but semiconductors have picked up the baton and they're off to the races right now.
(06:13) Now, you can see from this very cyclical sector that big gains like this don't last very long. Your question earlier is, is this the top? Nobody knows. But my strong sense is you probably think this can't go on for too much longer. A few other things here, too.
(06:32) I mentioned the mag stocks are underperforming right now. But there's a ton of leverage that's driving this. And where was the other? Here we go. Momentum stocks are on a record run. Right here we're at a five standard deviation overshoot, which appears to be the most extreme in this chart history since 2000.
(06:56) So this chart includes both the dot-com bubble and the housing bubble. And it does show, I don't know what we called it at the time, but it does show how overvalued things were in 2021 before they started rolling over in 2022. Obviously, I imagine you look at this, Chance, again and say, look, I don't know whether we'll get to a six standard deviation overshoot or not, but this thing has to revert to the mean.
(07:21) And because it's so far from the mean right now, excessive overshoots generally have excessive retracements, correct? >> Yeah, that's correct. So just sticking on the momentum chart as an example, we don't know if this run ends today or six months from now, a year from now, two years from now, but the reversal is inevitable just because that's the way markets work in their cycles.
(07:44) And if you look at these previous examples on the chart, March 2000, June 2008, and then the beginning of 2021, those reversals were severe back through the trend line. And that semiconductor chart that showed the 230% appreciation in 14 months, that was a good one to look at as well for the example that peaked in March of 2000, because if you look from the top left chart, the 233.
(08:09) 9, now watch the line go down. That was a two and a half-year bear market before things bottomed. And Ted and I have looked at this: when you have an industry or a series of stocks kind of go through a bubble type move where there's a ton of excitement and a stock goes up by hundreds of percent in a short period, after it peaks, it tends to be about two and a half years that you go down until you make a new bottom.
(08:34) Cisco Systems was a good example. Even Nvidia was a good example in the dot-com bubble. It takes a couple of years. So whenever this semiconductor cycle peaks and starts to go down, it's probably going to be pretty severe and it's going to take a while to play out before there really becomes a place you want to actively look in again.
(08:52) >> So, okay. First off, a two and a half-year bear market, it is not unusual in history. But kind of in living history, it is, right? I mean, investors haven't had to live through one pretty much since, as you said, coming out of the dot-com bubble. Even the 2008 bubble, that bottomed in March of 2009.
(09:18) And so it hurt for sure, but it was a relatively short bear market in the stock market. So again, this is one of the reasons why I love talking to you and Ted. Ted has lived through more of them than you or I, Chance. But he talks about, by the time these things typically end, because they're so long, 2 and 1/2 years is enough time for people to have had a number of false rallies in there, reenter the market, get burned again, get their hopes dashed again and
(09:50) again. That by the time they end, people kind of swear off stocks. And that's almost a feature of bear markets, is you kind of need the general investing population to capitulate and say, man, I used to get a lot of gains out of them, but those things have just turned sour on me and I'm never going to touch them again.
(10:08) That's kind of the sentiment indicator where it's like, all right, now it's time to maybe start deploying some capital here. So anyways, well, exactly. Pardon me? >> One follow-up, I just wanted to add to that point about the 2 and 1/2 year bear market for these bubble stocks or where the hot money was.
(10:24) That doesn't mean there aren't other parts of the market that can do okay. And I'm sure you've talked about it in other videos, where in the dot-com bubble from 2000 to 2003, the index in the market was declining, all the tech stocks were falling significantly, but you could actually make money during that period because there were plenty of sectors in the late 1990s that were sold off that then outperformed and actually appreciated in value.
(10:48) And that's what we've been trying to do over the course of the last year, is try to find those areas that can actually see where money is going to shift toward when the money inevitably leaves the semiconductor and AI trade. >> Okay, and this is where I was going to go, but I'm glad you brought it up. So from Oxbow's standpoint, is it let's find those unloved, undervalued parts of the market and let's get in them now before the crash, so that as capital starts getting burned by the correction of the main trend, it starts seeking
(11:25) safer places in the market, things that aren't overvalued, and we'll ride that. Or is it more we'll do a little bit of that, but really we're going to just build dry capital, because, I mean let's face it, I don't know if the market's ever been this concentrated into sort of a single trade.
(11:52) 45% of the S&P market cap is made up of AI related stocks. I think it's 70% of the NASDAQ 100, but almost half of the general market is basically dependent on this AI trade continuing. So if that goes down, it's going to take the index down with it. It's going to take a ton of ETFs down with it because those AI stocks are widely owned across most ETFs.
(12:17) Even a lot of ETFs you wouldn't expect to be in tech stocks. So which is more your strategy right now? Get in now and position now, or maybe get some entry positions, but keep a lot of dry capital in case everything goes down at once. >> Our allocation both in the high-income strategy and the long-term growth stock portfolio between risky assets and then the short-term treasury allocation that we have really hasn't changed much throughout the year.
(12:47) What we've really been doing is just trying to be smart about when we're invested in an area that becomes a really hot area. And I'll give a few examples in a second. We're usually trimming, taking some money out of those areas just because we think it's gotten too exciting in the market. We can't really justify those valuations.
(13:06) And then you wait for the inevitable pullback where the underlying asset falls by 30 or 40 or 50% and then we start moving back in. So three examples I can give. First, gold and silver, which I know you talked about a lot at the time in January and caught a lot of criticism for it when you told everybody it was time to sell silver when it hit over an ounce, and we were doing the same thing, trimming our precious metals positions when gold was at $5,000 or higher, silver was over 100, I think it peaked near 120.
(13:38) Really cut back on that exposure, and then in the last month, now that gold is back around 4,000, silver is back around 60, those were always kind of our targets, not that it has to play out exactly how we would project, but this was the level we were waiting for, and now we're incrementally building those precious metals positions back into the portfolio. So that was one example.
(13:58) Another one in the energy market. We had a good exposure to energy, and then when oil prices spiked unexpectedly with the war in Iran during March, we ended up taking some of those positions off. Then oil falls by about 40%, the energy stocks pulled back, we've been incrementally adding back in.
(14:16) And then finally, in terms of just general stocks, you saw in January and February, and it's funny, I think people forget this, the whole first 2 months of this year was that halo trade, the heavy asset, low obsolescence stock trade to get away from disrupted AI stocks, and that really bid up the prices, but in March, when the war started, a lot of those stocks sold off, industrials, consumer staples, health care, utilities.
(14:43) We were adding to those positions in March, and then you've had a rally for several months in those positions since then, and it's continued as people are starting to rotate out of this AI trade in the last 3 weeks. So our philosophy really has not changed throughout. It's the same standard we're setting for what merits entry into our portfolios.
(15:03) It just seems like the movement in the financial markets has really accelerated up and down, which makes us have to be a bit more nimble in terms of taking some positions off when things get too high, and then be ready to add them back in when inevitably there's a 30 or 40 or 50% pullback. >> Okay. And your comment there about the market just moving with more volatility than many of us are used to.
(15:31) The day we're recording here, IBM stock opened today and was down basically 25%. I mean, that's a massive company. That's a company that was a quarter of a trillion in market cap before that happened. You know, it's a stereotypical blue chip stock. I mean, these stocks aren't supposed to do that, right? They're not supposed to lose a lot of value like that in such a quick period.
(15:54) Obviously the semiconductor companies have just gone bananas. They've gone up many, many multiples just since the start of this year. So is this the nature of a speculative mania where things just get manically priced almost like a manic-depressive, one day it's the best thing ever, the next day it's the worst thing ever.
(16:22) And is that a sign maybe of late stage or late stage even bubble market behavior here. And one of the reasons why I'm asking this question is, again, we're sort of starting to see that in a lot of the elements of the AI trade. If this is indeed late stage, then the question is, okay, nobody can pick the actual date of the rollover, but we can start talking about what we think the magnitude of the rollover would be.
(16:53) So I'll give you a chance to comment on that, but I just released a video this morning with Fred Hickey, who has been following the tech sector extremely closely. He's a tech analyst since the late '80s, and he's incredibly pessimistic on it right now. In fact, he thinks kind of the business model, the economic model for the AI industry is, in his words, deteriorating in front of our eyes.
(17:18) And so, you said earlier that when you have some of the historically large market corrections that we've seen, like a 40% or 50% market correction, you kind of give up almost all the gains that you've got since the party started. >> Yeah. I'll touch on it a little further, but yeah, I mean, if you have a 40% or 50% market decline, that means the winners of the last cycle are probably going down by 2/3 or more.
(17:45) And I've got a good example for that in a second. To your point about speculation and all this volatility in market trading, in the month of June, essentially half the trading days in the month of June, the semiconductor index went up or down by more than 5%. And I just ask anybody, do you actually think the value of these big businesses is changing by more than 5% on an every other day basis? And I think anybody would rationally say no, so it kind of shows the level of speculation that's going on. And circling back to what
(18:16) we saw just a recent example with precious metals in January, where you saw the volatility really spike in gold and silver prices, this does seem a little bit like that. And to your point that this does seem late stage, and it doesn't mean that maybe this is the top here in the last few weeks and we're starting to roll over.
(18:36) There could be another move higher here. We're not trying to predict that. It just doesn't fit our timeline when we're trying to look out up to five years in the future on our investments. Trying to win the next six months is not really our goal. The best example I can give on this, though, is Micron, which is not a company that really fits our criteria because we think the business is too cyclical.
(19:00) A good example of that is in 2022, they lost money. And now they're on the verge of having higher net income than Apple, which just shows how wide the swings are for a business like that. So we don't want to own something that's that cyclical. It's not a fit for us. And we don't necessarily think that they have enough competitive advantages.
(19:18) But to give an example, there's a tech research analyst that we respect and is bullish on the AI trend for another couple of years. And they have the Micron earnings per share going to $250 in 2 years, in 2028. And the gross margin in a couple of years for Micron going to 90% gross profit margin, which is double what they normally do.
(19:43) Normally, it's about 45% gross profit margin. So you see this gigantic jump in earnings per share for Micron. But, by 2030, that same bullish analyst, just knowing the cycles of memory chips, has the earnings per share dropping from $250 in 2028 to 50. An 80% decline in earnings in 2 years. >> Wow. >> And so you can make a case, Micron normally trades at about eight times its normal earnings estimate.
(20:11) So if you want to say that $250 in earnings per share is possible, maybe the stock doubles again and goes to $2,000 a share in the next year or two. But if the final outcome is that you're heading back to a normal profit level about $50 per share at eight times, that means you've got to fall all the way back to 400 for the Micron share price. And it peaked at 1,200 recently.
(20:32) So it's a 2/3 drop just as a base case. So that's just an example of the type of swing that you can anticipate. And for us, this is just not a game we're trying to play where we're trying to chase this higher for a few months longer. >> Okay. That's a great example, and with Micron, it is, I mean, their profits are growing right now.
(20:57) Those are true profits. The question is how long can that be sustained, obviously. What was really interesting in talking to Fred Hickey is he, a lot of people will say, look, the profits of the AI companies, at least the hyperscalers at least, what's different from the dot-com era is that this time they have real earnings.
(21:21) And as long as the earnings keep growing then the share prices can keep growing. And if you look at a lot of these hyperscalers, their PEs aren't that crazy right now. And so people are pointing to that and saying, hey, look, you hate it all you want, but this is all supported by fundamentals and what these companies are earning.
(21:45) Fred disagrees with that because he thinks that the earnings are artificially high right now. And he basically says there are a couple factors. One is these earnings are getting boosted by a lot of one-time gains in investments that these companies have made like in a lot of the frontier models like OpenAI or Anthropic.
(22:09) So that's boosting their earnings artificially, right? Those aren't necessarily operating earnings. But then also you've got all this CapEx spending that's going on right now. And the depreciation cost of all this CapEx is coming in the future. It's not right now, right? So when you really factor in what the ongoing depreciation costs are going to be, yeah, profit margins are actually going to be coming down a fair amount because of that.
(22:42) And then forget about some of the challenges he thinks to the economic model going forward just from issues that demand might be lower, there's a lot of issues going on with cost of tokens and things like that right now. So he says that if you look at the adjusted CAPE ratio for this sector, the cyclically adjusted PE ratio, he says it's more like 67 times.
(23:14) So it's, again, you can kind of look at the headline number like a lot of people are doing and saying, oh, they actually seem pretty fairly valued. But you dig under the hood a little bit and you do the adjusted calculations, guys like Fred come to the conclusion that things are just wildly overvalued right now.
(23:34) >> Yeah, it's almost like an accounting arbitrage and I think it's driving the overall index higher where the huge capex spending by those five or six hyperscalers, who they're buying those products from, that's recognized as revenue immediately on day one by the semiconductor companies or capital equipment companies.
(23:53) And it's like, yeah, exactly. So it's 100% of the revenue being recognized today, but then on the expense line, since you can depreciate it, let's just say over five years, only 20% of that is being expensed right now. But if you get out a few more years and that depreciation continues to compound, you're going to start to really see it come through, and I think the hyperscalers are trying to make the bet that the revenue's going to inflect and really accelerate here and going to more than offset the
(24:20) looming depreciation costs. I'm not sure if it's going to play out that way, the way that they hope. The thing that I find interesting, there's a chart that was getting circulated a lot in the last couple of days that shows the semiconductor businesses have basically stolen all of the free cash flow from the hyperscalers in the last couple of years.
(24:42) And maybe that's the new paradigm within that whole supply chain, but those hyperscaler companies are some of the smartest management teams in the world. I don't think they're dumb enough to let the semiconductor companies take all their free cash flow forever. So I'm watching it just to see how this plays out and I wonder if some of them are hoping that they're able to get more efficient or something shifts in the marketplace that they don't have to spend so much and that could be a source of a reversion in this whole trade as
(25:10) well. >> I'm curious. I haven't really heard much about it yet, but some of these companies have started making their own chips. Could you see them maybe acquiring the microns of the world? >> I haven't heard that yet. I almost wonder, at Micron's valuation, I don't think those companies would want to pay a trillion dollars for Micron.
(25:30) So that might be a hindrance. Maybe you usually see acquisitions like that after there's a fallout in the industry and then someone swoops in and tries to buy at a discount. That would be more the scenario I would envision if someone wanted to integrate more of the chip making into their own operation.
(25:48) >> Okay. So um I won't go fully through the whole litany of potential risks to the AI complex, because I've done it in a lot of videos and then we go way deep into it with this video with Fred Hickey. So folks, if you want a real deep dive into the outlook for the AI complex, go watch that video.
(26:07) But as I mentioned, Fred says these things, we're kind of seeing the vaporization of the economic model of that industry in real time, and he's not even sure they really had an incredibly well-planned out economic model that was just get as big as quickly as possible. But what we've seen is tokens, obviously token usage has exploded, but the cost of tokens to the companies that are using compute continues to go up and we're starting to see reports.
(26:39) Fred mentioned one from Chamath Palihapitiya, the guy who's on the All-In podcast and billionaire former Facebook exec. He's got a couple of companies and he's really leaning into AI. I mean, he's a total AI fan. But he asked his CTO how things were going with the compute and the cost of compute and the CTO said, well, the cost of our tokens is doubling like every 45 days.
(27:08) And Chamath said, oh jeez, that's not good. Well, what are we getting for it? And the guy said, well, my increase in productivity is increasing by like 5%. So Chamath was like, okay, wait a minute. Like, my costs are going bonkers and I'm pretty much flat in terms of performance. That's not, those aren't good economics.
(27:30) And so they're ratcheting down their token usage, as are a lot of other companies now for similar reasons. And Chamath is saying, hey, look, if we're doing it, everybody else is going to have to start doing this soon if they haven't already. And that again, that's just one big potential adverse change that's going on right now.
(27:50) As you guys look at this, I know your job isn't to try to time exactly when this party may end. That's kind of a fool's errand. But explain to me how you're watching this in terms of how much of it, I guess to use Chuck Prince's analogy, how much you're still trying to dance on the dance floor versus say, look, this just makes us too nervous.
(28:18) We're going home. >> Yeah, for us, I don't know even for really playing at this point. Like, you look at the positions that we have that would be considered AI beneficiaries, it's maybe 5% of our portfolio in the long-term growth stock strategy. So it's not something that we're playing all that specifically at this stage and at these valuations.
(28:43) And there's actually just as a good example, in January, we bought a position in Fortinet, which is a cybersecurity company. In January, just 6 months ago, cybersecurity stocks were being lumped in with the rest of software stocks as being at risk of AI disruption. And some of these businesses that normally trade at pretty high valuations had fallen to more reasonable entry points.
(29:08) And so we had bought Fortinet at a little over 20 times free cash flow. And it's now doubled in 6 months because now it's viewed as an AI beneficiary because AI becoming more prominent increases the need for cybersecurity, and being able to try and stay at the forefront of what's happening. So those stocks have all taken off.
(29:26) That wasn't even our thesis necessarily that we expected it to double that quickly. But now it's trading at over 40 times free cash flow, which is about as high as it's traded in the last 6 or 7 years. And so yesterday we cut the position in half and just try to be prudent about, we still like the business long-term, but we'll just take the double that we got in such a short period and remove the cost basis and just keep a small position.
(29:51) So that's the sort of moves that we're making when we do end up benefiting, rather than thinking that we need to hang on to any outsize gains and just hopefully it keeps going for us in our favor. >> Got it. Yeah, and to your point there, not only are you harvesting your gains just because the company has moved so far so fast, but also harvesting gains as a way to kind of put some aside for the winter, in case there is a general market correction,
(30:18) you've got some dry capital there. Just one quick thought, could be totally off base, but one of the things that Fred Hickey and I talked about was that a lot of companies, even the big hyperscalers like Microsoft are now starting to turn towards more Chinese models because the cost of compute is much lower and you can still get about 90% of the tasks you want done but just at a fraction of what Anthropic or OpenAI might charge you.
(30:52) And of course turning to those models, you have security issues, right? Both national security and corporate security issues. So it just might make that space even more important going forward, that cybersecurity space. All right. I want to ask you a couple questions about bonds in a second, but let's see here.
(31:14) There are two stock-related charts I want to bring up here. One just to underscore again sort of the level of, sorry, the level of speculation that's going on in the market right now. So here's a chart that you guys have on how extreme these new IPO valuations are. So we're seeing, this is just crazy to me.
(31:41) This is, I thought initially this was a price-to-earnings chart, but it's not. It's a price-to-sales chart. So you've got SpaceX here. Was that the price that IPO'd at or is that its price at the time that you actually published this? But anyways, it's at the 79 times sales valuation.
(32:01) >> Yeah, and even if you give credit for future growth, it's 50, well, at least at the time that it went public, the price has come down already some, but that opening price you saw on the first day it was trading at 58 times next year's revenue. Which is pretty mind-boggling. And to put in comparison, and we were just trying to show, this is to show that the excitement around these three IPOs, and SpaceX more than even the other two, I think it was about as high as Ted has experienced, from people calling him
(32:31) about it in his entire career about an IPO, which usually says something. But it does seem relevant. >> Because they were excited to get in on it or >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> wanted to buy. And for us tech IPOs always generate excitement and maybe if there's something with real potential and great growth, you could justify paying up to 10 times revenue on something if you really think you got a good read on it.
(32:55) And the best example of that is when Google went public, I think it was in 2004. It was at eight and a half times revenue. But eight and a half is very different from 20 to 70 times revenue. You really are trying to bake in the most optimistic outcome and need everything to go right for that to pay off.
(33:16) And the one thing we tried to point out, I think it was the previous slide before this one, was just looking at the history of IPOs in the last, say 10 years, that got people excited. In every case ended up trading down from whatever its first day closing price was. And I think SpaceX is already down 12% from its first day closing price.
(33:37) And the average usually is it cuts in half at some point during the first year. So if you do really want to own these sorts of newly public stocks, you have time to watch it and just see what happens during that first year. And we had a good example ourselves where Airbnb is a high quality company that went public in 2020 at around $145 a share.
(34:02) And we watched it for four or five years before we ended up taking a position at a little above $120 a share when the valuation got more reasonable and hopefully we're able to own it for quite a number of years going forward. >> Okay. So what I just want to underscore here is we have a market that has an awful lot of speculation in it right now.
(34:23) We have a market that is extremely concentrated into one trade. As I said, it's almost half the general market cap. And that trade has a lot of potential failure points in it that are increasingly getting identified. I'm not saying this juggernaut can't go on for another couple of years.
(34:49) I will say most of the people that I talk to think we're in the later innings than the earlier innings, just as an FYI, but nobody knows exactly when it's going to break. But basically, it's the kind of thing that you look at the system and you say, okay, there's a lot of reasons to expect a pretty big downward repricing at some point in the not-too-distant future.
(35:13) By not-too-distant future, I mean any time between tomorrow and 2 years from now, ish. And you're nodding generally as I'm saying this. So I want to map or match that observation with this chart right here. And just give me 1 second, folks, to pull it up. This chart which basically shows that households are just, you guys say overexposed to equities.
(35:44) I would say almost ridiculously exposed to them. So this is the share of financial assets in the US among households. And they are, at least households that own financial assets. And they're 73% in stocks and 7% in bonds. So I'd love for you to comment on this, Chance, but the one other data point I want to add to this is I've seen data that shows the percent of stock concentration by household.
(36:20) And it increases with age. And that makes some sense because wealth is correlated with age. But once you hit retirement age, you're supposed to start de-risking. You're supposed to start shrinking your equity exposure. But this time round, we see the highest percent exposure to stocks in the households that are approaching retirement or even in retirement.
(36:48) And so the worry here is that if there is a big market correction, it's going to hit households hard because they're so exposed to equities, overexposed to equities, but it's going to also hit the people who can least afford to take the losses hardest, because they have the least amount of time to make it up.
(37:08) It's going to hit them the hardest. >> Yeah, I agree. I look at something like that and I think especially for retired households, I have some personal examples, family, friends, things like that, where I've heard a similar story where the market, stocks have done so well for the past 17 years since the end of the great financial crisis in 2009, and it's just been such a phenomenal run and you just want to see, can it just keep going a little bit longer and I can just get a little bit more of that higher return
(37:38) that I would get from fixed income or from a T-bill or something like that. And then it'll really set me up and I'll have even more to spend in my retirement years. And I think the later we go into this cycle, because if you look at these sorts of secular bull runs in history over the last century, you're usually talking somewhere where 17 years in now.
(37:59) It's usually somewhere, give or take 20 years. Like, there's probably not a whole lot longer that this thing just continues to go up and up and up. So do you really want to risk your savings with that when you could just count your blessings that you've been able to participate in this 17-year stage rather than think of the people who spent their retirement years from 1968 to 1982 where your financial assets went nowhere.
(38:24) It's just been a real blessing for everybody, but maybe a good time to reallocate to other areas, whether that's short-term fixed income or a little bit of gold, precious metals, some in energy. Just round it out, because since 2020, we are in a significantly more volatile geopolitical environment, financial market environment, inflationary environment than we were in the 2010s.
(38:49) And to just assume that everything will be okay and you can ride it out and nothing unexpected could go wrong, I think comes off a little bit too naive at this point and you'd want to make sure that you're more balanced. >> Okay. And we'll talk about this in a little more depth in a moment, but this is the advice that you're giving to your high net worth households, right? That this is the advice that {quote} {unquote} the rich and wealthy are receiving from their financial counselors.
(39:16) >> Yeah, I think you can create a portfolio that protects your purchasing power and you can even grow it by rounding it out between short-term treasuries, you've got some shorter-term investment-grade corporate bonds, some allocation to some high-quality energy companies, precious metals, some other commodity businesses, and then some good stocks, some high-quality businesses outside of those commodity areas, but that are trading at reasonable valuations, where you're not trying to ride the next hot new trend
(39:46) and then have to try and time when to get out before it inevitably rolls over. >> Okay. And I mean, share if it's all right with you, Chance, some of the recent additions that you guys have made to the Oxbow portfolio so folks can actually know specifically some of the companies that you think meet that criteria right now.
(40:04) Real quick, I'm going to put up one last sort of warning sign about where we are in the markets right now, which is margin debt. Margin debt is at record levels, I understand. This is not a chart of margin debt by itself, but margin debt to money supply. But in this series here, this is the highest ratio we've ever seen.
(40:28) So this generally tends to be another late stage sign when margin debt gets to record highs, it's definitely a sign of speculation as we've been talking about. And it's a sign of market risk. As Lance Roberts likes to say a lot, as margin debt is rising, oh, it's a lot of fun, right? It's rocket fuel that propels a speculative rally even higher.
(40:55) But once margin debt starts declining, and it's usually a forced decline, it's basically rocket fuel in the other direction. And so this is a real sign of, I'm trying to give a good analogy, but it's like climbing a rickety ladder. The higher you get, the more you can see, but the higher you get, the risk of the ladder toppling and you falling off gets higher and higher.
(41:24) So anything you want to say quickly about margin debt before we move on to bonds and interest rates? >> Yeah, I'm glad you brought it up because I just in the last day or two, David Rosenberg had a couple of good charts that he released that was new information I hadn't seen anywhere else, that margin debt in the last 6 years, 2/3 of all margin debt has come on in the last 6 years, which is pretty staggering that it's essentially tripled in a 6-year period.
(41:53) And then margin debt itself has increased by more than 50% year-over-year. So this time a year ago, we've increased the amount of margin debt in the system by more than 50%. That's only happened three other times in the last 30 years. One was the end of the dot-com bubble in early 2000. The second time was in the middle of 2007 before the Great financial crisis, and the third time was in early 2021, which the index was able to move a bit higher, but that was the peak of all the speculative stocks and SPACs, things like that, and they all started going
(42:22) down, and you had a bear market in 2022. So the fact that this is the fourth time that's happened, another example of the speculative fervor in the market right now, and just be mindful out there of where you're positioned. >> Okay. So now let's get to, just real quick, let's talk about bonds.
(42:44) So Oxbow, last couple of times I've talked to you guys, you have said that you kind of think the allocation for the future is less 60/40 than more of a 30/30/30/10 allocation. Is that still the case? >> Yeah, and we don't try to stick specifically to those exact targets, but the idea is there should be a significant chunk that's still shorter-term, high-quality fixed income.
(43:12) So shorter-term Treasuries or investment-grade corporate bonds, and usually that means maturities of 3 years or less. So that if interest rates or inflation shoot higher, you're able to then roll over into better yields as those Treasuries mature. Then the next area is commodities, whether it's energy, precious metals, agriculture, and then the third is high-quality stocks.
(43:37) And then that remaining 10% is more opportunistic special situations, things of that nature. >> Okay. In opportunistic, are those actually all holdings in that 10% or does that 10% kind of also include just sort of a cash buffer? >> It could be cash. I think it's more just if Ted or myself see something that's kind of unique, that's definitely something that I think he does a good job of identifying in his research and tries to take advantage of if he sees something.
(44:07) One example, something that we bought must have been a couple of years ago, Boeing issued a convertible preferred stock that had a good yield and the common share price had really gone down a lot and seemed like a good buy low, hopefully sell high, but get a good yield in the meantime. And that's something he really looks out for in the high income strategies when you get one of those convertible preferred stocks in a good business that's just going through a tough time.
(44:32) Then you're able to generate a good yield for a few years and then hopefully shift into the common stock at an appreciated price. >> Mhm. Okay, great. So you mentioned you generally keep duration 3 years or lower. I'm just pulling up the chart here of the 2-year yield. And they're heading back up again.
(44:55) Now yields have largely been in a new trading range since around 2022. This has been the return of T-bill and chill, if you will. So I guess where do you guys see yields going from here? Is your default expectation that they're going to sort of just stay in this trading range? Do you think they're going to move higher because you do think we're in sort of a secular inflation regime, as you gave a little bit of inference to earlier? Does Kevin Warsh change the picture at all? >> Warsh is a factor. We'll see how much
(45:32) he's able to enact on what he's saying. I think he's taking what's the right approach, which is come out very strongly trying to fight inflation and saying they're going to do everything they can to get inflation down to the 2% target and then that will give them more flexibility to potentially cut rates. That's the right thing to say, but there's a lot of stuff outside of his control.
(45:55) Like if the war in Iran heats up again and gas prices go back up, then you're going to see the inflation rate go back up. So he's going to have to be nimble on that front. For us, I think you're trying to see what is the US government and the Fed need to have happen, and I think what they need is lower interest rates.
(46:14) And so I think they were going to do whatever they can to try and get inflation down so they can start cutting shorter-term rates, and that's why we've been trying to add more into the two- and three-year Treasury in our income strategies. It's now about 15% of those portfolios is locked in at rates of 4% or a little above a 4% yield.
(46:37) And that's attractive for us because we might look up a year from now if the inflation rate has come back down to 2% or a little below, mainly because the base effects will have cycled through where the oil price spiked in March this year. So by next March, we'll still have inflation, but it's going to look lower just because you're comparing it to the March levels.
(46:57) And that might be enough for them to start cutting rates. You see the two-year yield start coming down, and then we'd be happy that we locked in more at 4.15% currently. So that's the sort of thing we're looking at. And then on the long-term Treasuries, we're still just staying away because we think, since 2020, we're in this regime where inflation is higher, more volatile, and then just the difficulty the US government has with higher fiscal deficit, increasing debt levels, increasing interest expense, high
(47:28) mandatory spending, it's going to be difficult for them to keep long-term yields down, and that's not really an area that we're trying to play in. >> Okay. I will say as a client of Oxbow, and I've got a chunk in both your conservative income and high income sleeves. You guys seem to do a really active job of not just buying new issuances, new T-bill issuances, but also looking for bonds that are attractively priced and buying them in the open market, where
(48:06) you're getting a nice yield to maturity. Kind of almost, you're not looking at what the initial coupon rate on it was, but you're looking at the yield to maturity of how the bond's trading. And so you guys, to me at least as a client, appear to do a really active and I think pretty good job of trying to find ways to maximize yield and getting in and out of the securities as the math determines.
(48:36) Do you want to speak to your approach there at all? >> Sure, I think that's always been a point of pride for Ted and it was an early focus in his career that's continued for the decades that he's been in the business, but really trying to be smart about allocating capital in the fixed income market, whether that's Treasuries, municipal bonds.
(48:55) If individual clients need them, he's always monitoring the muni bond market to try and find the right pieces of paper to buy for each client that he thinks generates a good return. And then in the last handful of years adding a little bit into investment-grade corporate bonds with maturities that are less than 5 years.
(49:13) And I think the goal is always trying to get, at least currently in the current environment, if we're able to lock in as much as we can at a yield that's 4% or higher that we really think is next to no risk of default, that's a nice base to have of just knowing that we have that income coming through.
(49:32) And then in the high income strategy we're able to try and find some incremental opportunities that are more volatile just because they might be more common stocks or things of that nature, but have higher dividend yield, higher income to be able to augment the portfolio further. >> All right, great.
(49:50) And as I promised, I just want to show folks specifically some of the things that Oxbow is adding to its portfolios right now. So is there anything you want to mention about any of these recent additions? >> Yeah, I can just touch on it broadly. So in long-term growth, which is our stock strategy, the thing to take away from those three names, IDEXX is an industrial business that tries to just buy niche companies that are critically important products for their customers, but are a low portion of the
(50:19) costs of what the customers need. So there's an emphasis on reliability and gives them some pricing power. So high-quality, kind of steady industrial business. McKesson is one of the three big drug distributors. The emphasis on GLP-1 weight loss drugs, they've been a beneficiary of that because they're one of the companies distributing it around the country.
(50:41) So in addition to healthcare, and then US Bancorp is probably the biggest, highest quality of the super regional banks. So when you look at that broadly, industrials, healthcare, financials, those are three sectors we've been allocating to over the course of the first half of this year without trying to get caught up in trying to chase the AI trade.
(50:59) We're just trying to smartly allocate to other areas when we see prices we like. And then in high income, this is the perfect example of showing where we've been starting to reallocate in the last month. So Northern Oil and Gas, Kimbell Royalty, those are in the oil and gas space. We've been adding a bit back to energy as the oil price got back below $70 or $80.
(51:22) And then adding to our precious metals position again, or making sure everyone has the full allocation we want them to have in gold, silver, and a few of the gold and silver mining or royalty companies. Making sure that that's kind of back to the base level allocation we want in high income so that if gold and silver turn and start moving higher from here, we're back to where we want to be and can participate how we would like.
(51:48) >> Okay, great. And I so appreciate you being willing to be this transparent. It's really useful for the audience who's always looking for new potential investments to go consider. And folks, none of this is personal investment advice. Don't go out and buy these just because they're here on Oxbow's list.
(52:08) But definitely go explore them if you think they could be good fits for your portfolio. All right, so I want to kind of get to some practical questions here for you, Chance, as we start to wind this up. So as I mentioned in the intro, your firm is a high net worth firm. And so just to be real clear, before we end I'll ask how folks can engage with Oxbow going forward.
(52:38) But if you do not meet Oxbow's minimum threshold, folks, you can still follow their work. And maybe I'll just start there. Chance, if somebody is going to have to self-manage because they don't meet your criteria, but they want to watch what you guys do, see your regular reports that you put out and any guidance that you give.
(53:04) Where should they go? What should they do? >> Yeah, you can go to our website at oxbowadvisors.com. And then we also have a great YouTube channel we manage. If you look for us at Oxbow Advisors, that's where we try to post content about weekly, usually one video that's just keeping everyone updated on what we're thinking is most relevant in the financial markets.
(53:25) >> Great. But you guys have a mailing list, too, right? And if folks go to Oxbow, they can sign up for that mailing list. >> Definitely, yeah. >> Okay. So I always think it's really instructive though that everybody can look to see what the wealthy are doing and then learn from that. Because there's a reason why they got wealthy and there's a reason why they're going to stay wealthy, hopefully.
(53:46) So tell me how Oxbow would engage with the following two people. We'll start with the first one. This is somebody who's had a liquidity event. I know this has kind of been the bread and butter of Oxbow from day one. But this is somebody who either just sold a company, right? The guy that had an HVAC company for 25 years, and he's just now sold it.
(54:08) He's sitting on a big pile of cash. He doesn't really know what to do with himself when he gets up in the morning. His strength is in running an HVAC company, not in managing stocks and bonds. How would you help that person onboard? And again, it's not just the exiting entrepreneurs.
(54:26) This is maybe somebody that has, maybe somebody who worked at Micron, and all of a sudden their stock's up multiple times, right? Or sadly, maybe it's a spouse, and you're recently widowed. Your spouse was the one that managed all your family wealth, and now that responsibility fits on your shoulders, and you don't know necessarily the first thing about investing.
(54:53) But these are just people that have suddenly come into a bunch of money, and they haven't deployed it yet. How would you engage with that type of person? >> I think the biggest thing we always say in that type of scenario is that there's no rush to take action with this liquidity event, this cash flow that you just received.
(55:12) I think that's something that is a common mistake that Ted's seen in his career, that you feel like you might need to do something with it right away. There's always the possibility that players in the marketplace have found out that you've got all this money, and now they're going to start soliciting you to try and get some of that, they've got a great idea in private equity for you, or private real estate, or give us this much to manage in the stock market for you.
(55:37) And there's really no rush, and I think Ted's idea was always like you could take a year and >> Take a year off. Yeah, I think I've heard him say that. >> Yeah, because as you pointed out it's a huge life change in any of those scenarios where you just got to adjust to what the new normal is for you. And you don't need to do anything rash or overly significant with what you have.
(55:57) If you had that type of liquidity event, you're probably in pretty good shape and you can just kind of sit tight and usually what ends up happening after that kind of period of time where you adjust to what you're doing is just a series of conversations explaining what we do and setting expectations of how we manage across our three strategies and determining what's the best fit for them and a lot of times it ends up being kind of taking it slow on getting into the more risky assets where maybe more of the money goes into conservative
(56:30) income investing, treasuries and things of that nature. And then you get a little bit more into energy, precious metals, common stocks, but it doesn't have to be any sort of a ratio that causes someone to lose sleep at night. And I think we've also had examples where someone might say that they think this allocation works for them, but then they actually see the day-to-day movement that's natural to the stock market and someone might say they're okay with a certain percent move in their portfolio, but then they
(57:01) see the actual dollar amount that changes from day-to-day and they get uncomfortable. That's totally okay. Like it's helpful to experience it and know, all right, we need to adjust this a little bit if it's a little bit too much and just try to make sure that we get it set in the right way for them that they don't have to think about it too much and just know that it's protected and hopefully can grow at a reasonable rate over time.
(57:24) >> Okay, and when you say, hey take the first year off. I understand. I think that's wise counsel. Would the counsel literally be just let it sit there in the bank account and we'll talk in a year or would it be, let's just put it in really safe instruments like T-bills, but at least you're getting a safe risk-free 4% yield over that year and then we'll talk in 12 months.
(57:49) >> I think that's the ideal and some people are ready to take some action sooner than that, but the idea is just that there isn't this pressure that you've got to do something with it right away. So >> Yeah. >> I think if it's sitting in a bank or someplace that is hardly giving you any sort of a return, that's where you might want to put it somewhere that you can get the market rate, whatever the T-bill is yielding on an annualized basis is a good starting point, but yeah, there's no rush once you
(58:17) get that kind of cash flow to try to make something happen in a really big way. >> Okay. And I think people who have a bunch of cash sitting there from a big liquidity event, one of their fears about working with a financial advisor is, we're going to go from zero to 100 miles an hour immediately.
(58:42) And I certainly hear a ton of horror stories of people who start with an advisor and their assumption is, yeah, over time we'll start allocating this and start deploying it on whatever pace makes me feel good and I'm involved in it and it's going to take some time. But they'll come to me and say, oh my gosh, I transferred my funds over and they just fully allocated it the next day. I just wasn't ready for that.
(59:05) Sounds like at Oxbow, yours is much more of a process of first really getting to know the client and looking for what they want to do and what fits them, but I guess let me ask you this. Is there any argument for going from zero to 100 or is it always smart to kind of take it a step at a time? >> Yeah, if you're just trying to treat it mathematically and not trying to speak to the emotions of the person and the relationship with their money, technically speaking, you'd want to invest it within the first few months.
(59:34) But each person is different and their relationship with their life savings is unique. And you want to make sure that you're meeting them where they are. So what we tend to do, and we've got plenty of data to back this up, we used to buy in, for example, in the stock strategy, really slowly. And we actually have enough data to suggest that that actually was not helping our clients as much as it could have.
(59:59) So what we've done now is we almost try our best to set a reasonable amount of risk for the portfolio as a starting point. >> Mhm. >> So, for instance, right now, in the long-term growth strategy, we're about 60% in our stock allocation, about 40% in Treasuries, but the 60% that's in stocks, by and large, those are very reasonably priced stocks.
(1:00:22) They're not super cheap in a market like today, but I would not describe them as overvalued. So we're not in a bunch of semiconductors that I would be really worried about us buying it for a new client and it could go down 30% in the first 3 weeks. >> Mhm. >> And so that's our way of trying to, as much as you could say, de-risk a risky portfolio, that's the way that we've tried to do that.
(1:00:45) So, we can confidently buy half of that stock allocation when they join and then anywhere from half to full pretty quickly in the first few months. But the real way that we try to make sure that the allocation is correct is it doesn't have to all be in the riskier of our three strategies.
(1:01:07) It's often a split in some way that fits for the client between the conservative income strategy that's primarily Treasuries or municipal bonds, and then the high income strategy that is still probably 55 or 60% Treasuries and corporate bonds, and then long-term growth, which is about 40% Treasuries. So you can shift the allocation between those three strategies, split it in a way that you can see how volatile the overall portfolio will be, and make sure that it matches what the client's looking for, and then that gives us the confidence
(1:01:40) that we can buy those stocks pretty quickly knowing that we've not expecting too much downside for their risk appetite. >> Okay. And I can just say, folks, I'm an example of one of those clients that's got exposure to each of the different sleeves or portfolios that Oxbow offers, and we've come up with, for me, what's the right split of them based upon my objectives and risk tolerance.
(1:02:06) All right. So the other type of person I wanted to get your quick thoughts on is somebody who's above your minimum threshold, who's got a fair amount of assets, but they come to you, and those assets are being very conventionally managed right now. So let's assume traditional 60/40, maybe probably even 70/30 because a lot of average financial advisors are leaning into the FOMO that's going on, and let's assume in that 70, there's a lot of AI-heavy
(1:02:40) stocks. How would you help that person determine maybe the way to right-size it? >> Yeah, so if it's like an IRA, something where there isn't any taxable gains that you have to worry about, to the extent that the client is okay with it that's coming on board, we would want to get it to our strategy as quickly as possible because that's, hopefully why you want to work with us, and that's the best way that we know how to manage money.
(1:03:10) If the client has any positions that are really personal to them that they want to keep, that's okay. We just put that in a non-managed sleeve for them to hang on to in the account. But we would like to be able to get as much of it to our strategy as possible. The part that requires more active management that you're alluding to is if they come in with a lot of unrealized taxable gains, that's where we need to manage that usually over a longer time period, maybe over 2 or 3 years. So if the
(1:03:41) client doesn't want to recognize all of those taxable gains in this calendar year, we can go through, and we've got our own assessment of most of the large cap stock universe, which is what a lot of these types of clients might own in this scenario, and can try to pick out the ones that we think we would be most concerned about from a downside perspective between now and year end or that just screen the worst on our work.
(1:04:06) Those are the ones we would want to get out of first and then we try to manage the overall taxable gain that would be realized so that it's something that we would consider to be reasonable and then hopefully get through to the next calendar year and we'll do the same thing until they're out of all of those positions and can get fully into our strategy, but then we're not recognizing all those taxes in year one.
(1:04:29) >> Got it. And if the client has a CPA or tax advisor, you guys presumably can kind of work hand in hand with them to make sure that everybody's really eyes wide open about, A, what the potential taxable gains are going to be, and then again, coming up with a schedule to try to minimize them.
(1:04:49) >> Yeah, it's usually pretty simple. I mean, the way that I always looked at it was, best case scenario, if you had a portfolio that was doubling every 5 years, and you decided you needed to sell 1/5 of the portfolio per year, you would essentially be recognizing 10% of the portfolio in gains and paying about 2% of the portfolio in taxes.
(1:05:12) So that's our limit that we set and we're usually pretty transparent about that. Let's say someone's got a million-dollar account, we would be willing to recognize up to $100,000 in gains per calendar year if they're okay with that and it would be about $20,000 in taxes if they're long-term gains. And they can take that to any other advisors they have to see how that matches up, but usually it doesn't have to be much more complicated than that.
(1:05:38) >> Okay. Super useful. Thanks for going through those examples. And all right, just in closing here, we talked earlier about how Ted has said in his career he's always had his best years kind of coming out of a market bottom. Right? When there's sort of quote-unquote blood in the streets.
(1:06:05) If you've got the dry capital to deploy then, that's when you're really setting yourself up for outsized future returns. And as you said earlier at the beginning of this conversation, you guys are looking at the current environment and saying, you know what? Even though this FOMO might last for another 6 months or year or whatever, we think we're close enough to the end that given probabilities and risks, we think it's a time to play defense, not offense.
(1:06:34) I'm just curious, how many of your clients, which again are the wealthy, are on board with that strategy and saying, look, I'm really just here to make sure I don't lose a lot of what I have and then be really well positioned for the blood in the streets moment versus, you mentioned people were calling Ted up about SpaceX, versus saying, hey, this market's raging, this is my time to make money. Let's go long.
(1:06:59) What are you hearing from your clients right now? >> I think the vast majority are supportive of what we're doing, but I think that's part of what we really like about the relationship we have with our customers is we try to be very transparent from the start, speaking to them even before they come on board with us about how we try to manage money, what our priorities are, and what their expectations should be for us that we would think is reasonable, that we're trying to deliver for them. And that tends to
(1:07:29) either make a lot of sense to someone or it doesn't fit for them at all for whatever reason, and that's completely okay. There's a lot of different types of money managers out there, and those people can find something that's a better fit for them, and I think that's what anyone who wants a relationship with a money manager is really looking for, so if we've done our job of explaining ourselves clearly and setting expectations, and then we do these videos about once a week, whether it's an interview with someone like you or
(1:07:57) something that Ted or I shoot in-house, we're trying to just continue to communicate what we're seeing and what we're doing so that there's nothing that's a surprise for any of our customers, and then we're able to hopefully deliver on that over the long run. >> All right. Again, thanks so much for being so transparent about, A, what you're investing in and, B, how you actually handle it all with actual real clients.
(1:08:19) Folks, please join me in thanking Chance for delivering all that to us by hitting the like button and then clicking on the subscribe button below, as well as that little bell icon right next to it. If you would like to talk to the team at Oxbow, Chance, Ted, and everyone else there, just fill out the very short form at thoughtfulmoney.
(1:08:41) com/oxbow, and the team will be in touch with you right away. And it only takes a couple seconds to fill out the form. These consultations with Oxbow are totally free. The team will just do whatever they can to be as helpful to you as possible, whether you decide you might want to work with them or just pick their brains.
(1:08:57) Chance, just to make sure that we're setting expectations correctly, what general minimum threshold should we let folks know about here in terms of how many assets they need to have to be considered as a potential client for Oxbow? >> Yeah, we're always happy to talk with anyone about their financial situation.
(1:09:18) If they feel like we might be helpful for them. But in terms of potentially becoming a client with us, the minimum we would set would be 2 million. >> 2 million. Okay, great. Again, I just don't want to set folks up for disappointment. But if folks fit your personal situation, again, just go to thoughtfulmoney.com/oxbow.
(1:09:37) Chance, thanks so much. It's always great catching up with you. Look forward to doing it again with you hopefully a quarter from now. I hope you have a great summer and I hope you get a chance to really enjoy it with your young man who's now somewhere between 2 and 3. >> Yeah.
(1:09:53) Yeah, no, it should be a good rest of the summer. Thanks again, Adam. >> Yeah, it's such a pleasure. All right. Take care, Chance. Everybody else, thanks so much for watching.
</content>
</invoke>