Raw Transcript: 'Should Scare Everybody’: Nuclear Risk Spikes, Markets Should Brace For Chaos | Doomberg

Russia has tested a new nuclear capable missile. Long-range missile strikes into pre204 Russia are a red line for them. Um that red line was crossed. Russian claims about military technology capability should be taken seriously. I'll go with what NATO calls this missile the skyfall and that was only the second scariest thing that the Russians released in the span of a week. I'm very pleased to welcome back the show Duneberg. He's the head writer of the collective known as Duneberg. Check him out on Substack. A lot of very interesting news and commentary surrounding the energy markets and geopolitics, both of which we'll be discussing today. Welcome back to the show, Dubra. Good to see you, David. Always a pleasure. I want to start by talking about uh what's been happening in Russia. You've been talking about this and writing about this on Substack. Russia has tested a new nuclear capable missile, says uh Putin and top general. Uh Moscow tested a new nuclear capable powered cruise missile fit to confound existing defenses inching closer to deploying it deploying it to its military said uh President Vladimir Putin. The announcement which followed years of tests of the uh Burvestnik I'm not saying that correctly but perhaps you'll correct me. Burvethnic V missile comes as part of a nuclear messaging from the Kremlin which has resisted Western pressure for a ceasefire in Ukraine and strongly warned to the US and other NATO allies against sanctioning strikes deep inside Russia. Um, okay, a couple of things here. We're going to talk about whether or not its claims are true that can it can actually possibly evade Western air defenses and number two, uh, what the US response has been and will be. Yeah, great question. And so one of the great challenges of Western propaganda is they generally ignore what Russia is saying and doing and or mischaracterize it. Um Russia has been warning the US specifically and Britain also um and the rest of NATO that long-range missile strikes into pre204 Russia are a red line for them. um that red line was crossed by Biden in November, but the Russians um held back because of, you know, Trump having won the election and and proclaiming that he was going to engage in a new uh approach with Russia, which to his credit he tried to do, however haphazardly, and uh all this talk about Tomahawk missiles going to Ukraine. Um the entire reason that Russia claims it went to war in Ukraine is to prevent um such things from happening. And so the the the talk about Tomahawks triggered um Putin to release this information publicly. From here, of course, we can't know what's true, what's not true. Generally speaking, Russian claims about military technology capability should be taken seriously and um we think at face value, at least from a game theory perspective. Um this missile has been known to Western intelligence for a long time, and I won't correct your pronunciation because I'm particularly bad at it myself. I'll go with what NATO calls this missile the Skyfall. Um it's actually the SSCX9 Skyfall. And um and you know it's it's nuclear propulsion capable of both uh conventional and uh nuclear warheads. And that was only the second scariest thing that the Russians released in the span of a week which I'm sure we'll talk about here next. What is uh the US response at this point on Yeah. Uh Trump went to truth social and said that the US would start or restart nuclear testing. Um the Russians have interpreted this as actually you know exploding nuclear material uh in the old way that it used to be done. Um the US has not actively tested a nuclear weapon since 1992. We don't think actually Trump meant that. Um it's always dangerous to post significant foreign policy decisions on Truth Social. We think um especially those around nuclear war. Um what Trump was probably alluding to is um the the US will pick up its game in testing nuclear capable missiles and missiles and submarines and torpedoes itself in response to what uh Russia is doing. This all comes against the backdrop, David, of the new start treaty is going to expire in February and there's no plan or setup of negotiations to extend that treaty. That's basically go time for a revival of uh nuclear arms race. And we're going to see a nuclear arms race between the US, Russia, and China going forward. Undoubtedly, um Putin has offered Trump a one-year extension of the New START treaty, which would give both sides time to negotiate a new one. That offer has not yet been responded to, at least not publicly, that we can find. Uh and so the US response is tit fortat arms race which should scare um scare everybody. There are challenges to uh Russia's claims and uh I'll just show you one such uh one such article here um by uh this particular uh article uh we are the mighty I mean this is you know this is this is this is a uh a web page that obviously is uh pro-American but um uh it claims that this is the world's dumbest weapon. This is your regular reminder that Russia can't afford any of its super weapons. And second, the weapons are often pretty dumb anyway. Um, of course, if true, we are now facing a global crisis. A Russian nuclearpowered cruise missile threatens all human and even multisellular life on Earth. Well, yes, that is what a nuclear weapon does. It doesn't matter who hosts the keys, but um I'll let you evaluate whether or not uh uh this technology the claim that Russia Russia doesn't have the economy to even afford super weapons in the first place. um you know should we even be worried? That's abs that's just an absurd statement. Um Russia has already the world's largest and most sophisticated u nuclear uh arsenal. Um it is a extremely sophisticated country. Um we call this sort of western techno. You know Russia is nothing but a gasoline station masquerading as a country. Anybody who's interacted with Russia, Russian companies, Russian scientists knows that this is puff propaganda uh of the worst kind. Um I I don't know where it states in proper game theory that you should perpetually underestimate your foes. Um and that would seem to be of all the questions to to not underestimate your foes on this would seem to be one. If North Korea can develop nuclear weapons, um surely Russia can develop better ones. And um the the the scientific cultural um strengths of Russia are real um undeniable. I mean many people deny them but doesn't make them less real. And again we just think it does it does the west does the west no good to underestimate Russia to underestimate China. China has leaprogged the US in technology. Um it's just it's just plain as day. Anybody who visits China, goes to their manufacturing facilities, sees what's going on. Um, if if Russia couldn't afford to develop these weapons, NATO would doing a lot better on the battlefield than it currently is. This is uh President Trump responding to um the Russian missile testing, literally resuming underground nuclear detonation tests. You'll find out very soon, but we're going to do some testing yet. Other countries do it. If they're going to do it, we're going to do it. Okay. You can't clarify whether they'll resume. I'm not going to say yet. I mean, I know exactly what we're doing, where we're doing it, but other countries are doing it, and if other countries do it, other countries are doing it, and if other countries are do it, we're going to do it, too. Is this the beginning of a new arms race? And if so, what impact could that have on the energy markets? Yeah. I mean, well, you know, a new arms race that ends in nuclear armageddon. I mean, who cares what happens to the to the energy markets, right? But, um, it it it I think it is, David. I think this is a very serious issue. Um the uh nuclear arms treaties were negotiated very carefully over decades and I don't think it's wise to just toss them away. Um you know this is a worldwide issue. It's not just an issue for the US or for Russia or for China to decide in our view. Of course we're strongly anti-war. We we wish there were no nuclear weapons. One of the worst most dastardly inventions um ever made. And uh here we are. It's scary and I don't think um it gets enough coverage in the west. This is all over the news in Russia. I suspect few people listening to this podcast knew that New Start Treaty was going to expire in February and what that meant. Whereas it's wall- to-all coverage in Russia. Um, again, it it blows my mind that we're we're here. And, you know, I remember growing up, I'm sure, as you did, you're doing the drills getting under your desk in elementary school. And, you know, we took this stuff much more seriously back in the day than we seem to be taking it now. Before we continue with the video, let's talk about a growing issue, a very important issue, online privacy. Your personal data isn't just sitting in your email or phone. It's being scraped, sold, and passed around by data broker sites every single day. and you may not even know it. Today's sponsor, Delete Me, helps you fight back. They monitor hundreds of broker sites, scan for your exposed personal data, and remove it before it can be used against you. You also get regular privacy reports that show where your data was found and what's been taken down. In fact, in one recent check, they reviewed over 340 plus listings to see if any data broker had my personal information on my report. That's how much is out there. and they keep scanning every single week. Don't wait. Go to joindeelme.comdavid and use the code davidin for 20% off of all US plans or scan the QR code here on the screen right now. Take control of your privacy before somebody else does. Moving on now, we have to talk about um the the broader war in Ukraine overall. And it's been several it's been almost a year since Trump was in power. Uh it took office. Inauguration was in January. And we're not, it doesn't seem like we're any getting any closer to some sort of deal uh peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. And in fact, just uh just uh today I was reading that the FBI apparently is now investigating Zilinski and his allies regarding corruption using US money. So we're getting further away from a deal if not anything. So I c can you comment on this progress or maybe significant or maybe a lack of progress? Yeah, you you hit the nail on the head in one way that is is not really commented upon too much in the Western media. Look, let's start at the beginning. Full credit to Trump. Um I happen we happen to agree that if Trump were president, this war would not have started. Um and he says that routinely and he is right to say that. He came into office hopeful that he could stop the war. I think he underestimated the seriousness of the war from the Russian perspective and the willingness from the Ukrainian side to seed an inch to the Russians. Um and so it's not just that Russia is refusing to come to the table. It's that Ukraine won't accept any um concessions at all. then they can argue and they do and their supporters argue that you know Russia invaded Ukraine and um this is Ukrainian sovereignty and what part of the US would you give up and and all that stuff and that's all fine um wars are one and loss right and so um if if you think you can go and conquer your territory without western money and without western weapons because they're the the a appetite to give more money and and the inventory of weapons to give to Ukraine just just aren't there um that there's not much you can do. Trump himself said it on Air Force Air Force One that it looks like they just need to fight it out and and I I do believe we've been saying for a long time that this war will end militarily. um peace will be imposed by military force um unless there's a revolution in either of the two countries um which doesn't seem to be um on on the cards at least certainly not in Russia um that this war will end uh at the end of a barrel and that that's a terrible way for wars to end um you know not all wars end in stalemates that's for sure so we'll see um this the two sides are way too far apart um just listen to Zillinsky like Zolinsk's peace proposal is a freeze and then um you know put putin on trial for war crimes and make Russia pay uh restitution and you know eventually give all the land back and Russia's just never going to do that. Um and so and and Putin says you know these are our objectives. Um the root causes of the of the of the war in the first place need to be addressed and the main country that can address those root causes is actually the US not Ukraine. Well, it looks like the Democrats have introduced a bill that blocks uh Trump from unilaterally starting nuclear weapons tests. So, we'll see how this progresses. But meanwhile, it looks like China I mean this might be a bigger distraction from the bigger picture uh a distraction from the bigger picture which is potentially that the US is falling behind China in the matters of energy production. So some recent news here. Uh China author achieves thorium uranium nuclear confusion fuel conversion. Uh this a thorium molten salt reactor TMSR and obtained valid experimental data following thorium fuel loading. Uh meanwhile Trump has uh he's presented a few legislations that would make it easier for uranium mining to be done in the US. And I think you and I talked about this. The Trump administration does have a broader agenda to widen nuclear production and nuclear facilities in the US, but how far behind is the West when compared to China? Duneberg. So, I'm of two minds with this headline, and I can assure you that it has been sent to us um dozens and dozens of times. If you're listening, you don't need to send us that article. We've read it. Um yes, the the China is ahead of the US strictly speaking in both the sort of deployment of nuclear reactors as measured by speed and cost and um the nuclear science capability of its broader community I think is is pretty good. But um this particular headline and the hype cycle that came with it is not uh gamechanging in our view. um technology is not rate limiting uh for the deployment of nuclear power. Just take the AP- 10000 and do it a 100 times and we'll be done. And that's what um I think Trump is trying to do. We wrote a piece on this, of course. Um you know, the the thorium stuff is is um it's on the same sort of spectrum as fusion. A lot of people get excited about it, but the the technology solves fake problems. Um there's an infinite supply of uranium and there's no real reactor meltdown risk with the latest designs. All that needs to happen is the best designs get implemented over and over and over again and and the problem is solved. The technology is not rate limiting to the deployment of sustainable abundant nuclear energy. But it's not a gamecher in the sense that the technology already exists or it doesn't really it doesn't it doesn't take us in the right direction at the speed at which it promises to do. I mean I I I've read apparently that it's it's modular, it's portable, and um the US has not fully tested it yet. So we'll get your take. I mean again there's enough great designs out there. Yes. that what's not needed is a better design with better attributes. Again, it like yes, the can do reactors, the AP-1000, the Russian reactors, the Korean reactors, these are all perfectly fine, you know, buildable, runnable, safe, cheap when done correctly solutions to the energy dilemma. And so if you need, let's say, to put numbers on it, if you need a score of 50 and there's 10 reactor designs that give you a score of 100, do you get excited about a score of 105? Uh, no. Because all you need is a score of 50 and you're good to go. If you were head of the energy department in the US and you were tasked to expand the output of the energy supply by, I don't know, 2 3x magnitudes greater than whatever we have now in the next 10 years. and you had to do this in a way that isn't going to bankrupt the US and destroy the environment completely. What would your game plan be? Uh natural gas and nuclear um in that order. And that's kind of what's happening. I would also make it wildly easier to um build and permit off-grid power plants um to directly power data centers, which is the driving need to your question of course um directly power data centers with natural gas. Um there are some constraints. Those constraints will eventually get wiped away. There's a currently a shortage of gas turbines uh which we recently wrote about in a piece called Ted's law. Um but these things will get solved. Um the fuel that I would use is nuclear and natural gas because um natural gas is the cleanest burning cheapest hydrocarbon on the board and it's it's in huge overabundant supply in the US in particular. And then of course nuclear for the reasons we talked about. And on that front um existing secretary of energy Chris Wright is taking the correct approach. Um pick a reactor design and go with it. And uh the deal that was cut between the Japanese and the US um was a good one and and let's get those AP1000 reactors cranking. Well, what can we do to lower the cost of energy production or energy electricity overall in the US? Uh as you are aware, different jurisdictions have have different costs. I mean, some of some of this could be quite varied across the nation. Um, I I've just been informed that Texas, for example, is uh is not just a fuel powerhouse, but it also accounts for um a big chunk of the electricity production in the US using renewables. Um, in the first half of 2025, Texas led the nation in renewable energy production. uh California was actually second and um it's also got a very competitive retail electricity market. It seems and this is just a correlation here, maybe not a causation, but it seems that jurisdictions with low energy costs usually also operate a lot of renewable energy production on the grid. Can you explain this? Um lower or higher? I our correlation is the more renewables on a grid, the higher the the cost of electric. Okay. Well, that's interesting because um yeah, Texas has a huge amount of renewables and California has a huge look, when renewables swamp um uh dispatchable power, then things begin to break and we see that everywhere. Um this is why Germany has expensive electricity. Look, my my plan to um decrease costs of electricity is to stop loading intermittent renewables onto pre-existing grids, greatly expand natural gas, which is both base load and dispatchable, and build out um nuclear power in that order. Um you know, California has got the most renewables in the country, and it has actually the most expensive electricity in the country, last I checked. Um there are times where electricity prices plummet in California because there's too much solar, and during those times, they export to their neighbors at rock bottom prices. And then when solar doesn't show up, they have to buy from their neighbors um at elevated prices. And in fact, if California was not integrated into its neighbors grids, it would have collapsed uh their grid would have collapsed a long time ago. Um so yeah, the costs are driven by a combination of increased intermittency when that becomes a greater share of production than um dispatchability, which is basically nuclear and hydro. Um then you get real challenges keeping the lights on. And then making things worse of course is the demand for data centers and plugging those into the grid. Based on your research, what are the biggest misconceptions and um commonly misunderstood notions about renewable energy that you've encountered? Sure. First of all, uh hey, the fuel is free, so it has to be cheap. Um nuclear fuel is practically free, too. And and you wouldn't argue that a nuclear plant is free. There's there's a slight of hand between the perceived cost of the fuel and the cost to actually use it on a modern grid. That's that's a big one. Another big slight of hand is um capacity while ignoring capacity factors. Oh, 2 gawatts of solar, 2 gawatts of nuclear. Um, of course, nuclear has a 90% capacity factor, operates 90% of the time, and solar has a 25% capacity factor in the sunny parts of the country. And so, 2 gawatts of solar is not in fact 2 gawatt uh of nuclear. And then um other big one I think is that the um the co the cost to integrate into the grid and to make the grid stable with so much intermittent inverter-based resources. Um those extra costs that somebody has to pay are are regularly ignored when trying to measure the cost of solar in isolation with fraudulent measurements like levelized cost of electricity and so on. And so, um, fuel being free is probably the biggest one. Once you install enough wind and solar, the fuel is free and we'll have this low price, um, nirvana. That that's just frankly a lie. And how much electricity or energy do data centers actually need over the coming years. So, here we have an article from the FT and I'll just share with you a few stats uh, presented in um, in some findings. the 20 in 2024 the uh US Department of Energy forecast that the data centers will consume 6.7 to 12% of US electricity by 2028. I don't know if they've updated those forecasts. It was done last year up from 4.4% in the 2023 forecast. Um have you looked into this yourself and roughly how much electricity will data centers need? Yeah, when we looked at it, uh we we wrote a piece last year actually um sort of forecasting this called irreconcilable differences where we concluded that the projections in growth were just incompatible with um prices that residential and and traditional and industrial um customers um have been paying historically and that this would all have to go offline. That's why um you know we think um the gas going in, data coming out and no interactions with the grid or maybe one connection to the grid for backup power or or for extra power that feeds the grid. Um but by and large um these things we just can't make room for them on modern grids and and have a grid that is usable for the rest of us and so it's going to have to be moved off grid in our view. The renaissance of gas is being driven by a hunger for electricity from the data centers that are powering the boom in AI. You see the boom in AI reflected in the tech stocks which is driving up the entire stock market or has been in the last year and a half. You don't really see this so-called quote unquote hunger for electricity being reflected in the energy price now. Is it? Isn't that a little strange? Um well there's like different prices, right? There's just so much natural gas. Sure. that, you know, um the reason why everyone's excited is because the US is swimming in gas and would like to get rid of it, which is why it's building out a wave of LG export facilities. Um but then electricity bills are a whole different issue, right? That's that's the bill that you and I pay and big heavy industry customers pay. Those prices are in fact going up significantly in the areas where there's a you know either a lot of renewables or a lot of data centers or both. And so um this is a real problem. This is why we we titled the piece irreconcilable differences. You can't this can't go on for much longer um at this rate of growth, especially given all of the challenges with permitting and transmission lines and you know um transformer shortages and all the things that are real um and are out there as constraints uh for this and so we just don't think it can go on and that which can't go on usually doesn't. any risks of the um US obtaining Venezuelan oil in some form or other either through trade or uh the radi some radical claims. Um have been noting that maybe we the US could invade Venezuela. I I don't I don't know if that's even in the realm of possibility, but uh it's certainly popping up in energy headlines. What do you think? Yeah. Um first piece we wrote when Trump was president actually published Bless you. um actually published it. That's all right. Um the first piece we wrote on Trump's inauguration day was called Misrooting the Room and I believe the social media preview for that piece was if Greenland was the appetizer uh might Venezuela be the main course and this is one of the most predictable things of 2025. The Armada um now assembling uh off the coast of Venezuela. Um we don't know how this resolves. Usually when the US assembles that large of a um military fleet, the bombs start flying. It it sure seems like a tough country to invade and occupy. Um if the mission is regime change and access to oil, um that could probably be done um a little more quickly. None of this of course is legal. Um but laws seem to apply quite selectively in geopolitics these days. Uh and so you know Go ahead. Yes. No, no, please continue. Yeah, I mean the the the cover story is drug cartels um and narcotics trade, but the real issue of course as you and I know is Venezuela is sitting on the largest hydrocarbon resource base in the world and um it's particular grades of heavy crude um happen to be precisely the types of grades that Gulf Coast refiners like to refine and um they used to produce 4 million barrels a day and now they produce one and they should probably be producing five and 4 million barrels a day is an awful lot of cheese for the uh for the oil super majors and so it's it's a prize that's uh too tempting to ignore. Well, if oil drops much lower than if uh and if the um uh oil price actually goes below its uh the break even cost for a country like Venezuela then uh what geopolitical implications would that have? I I don't think um these types of decisions aren't made over the short term. Um oil prices go up and oil prices go down, but having the resources always a part of US geopolitical strategy. You know, the these are they're unfortunately quite cynical ways to look at the world, but it's it's just a mental model that works. Um, and so, you know, when when we write about the Western Hemisphere, we wrote a piece called Mosaic Theory a couple of months ago that predicted that Argentina would get bailed out and that there'd be some some uh some stresses with Colombia and that Venezuela was was was on the menu and and these things are all driven by, you know, oil and gas and they just are. Okay. Well, let's finish off on oil itself. This is the uh chart of the WTI and you've been cautious on the growth uh of the oil price for quite some time. In fact, before Trump's inauguration, you told me that a Trump win would be just outright bearish for oil. Uh more or less, you've been correct as the oil price this year has not performed well. Uh anything on the horizon that could point to you that we're on an we're at an inflection point right now, Duneberg, or is the trajectory still more pressure downwards? um more pressure downwards. Um there's nothing no bullish catalyst on the horizon that we see. There's just so much of it, David. And um the fact that there's so much natural gas is also an issue. And if natural gas becomes expensive in the US, that's going to put real pressure downward on oil price because natural gas and oil are co-produced in major parts of the US today. So if natural gas went to $7 a million BTU in the Peran basin, they'd be giving away oil to get the natural gas. There's no longer a break even price of oil in the Peran basin. You have to look at both oil and gas because they're produced together. And co-producer economics can be difficult for those who don't have experience with them to understand. But if the AI boom drives demand for gas, which puts a bid under gas and you're drilling for gas and you get oil too, you'll give away the oil if the price of gas is high enough. Um that's what we're seeing on the flip side today. Natural gas is negative in the spot market in the perian because oil is still relatively um uh uh expensive compared to fundamentals. So, um, yeah, I I there's nothing about owning commodities or commodity producers that gets us too exciting. Look, the the the long-term real price of all commodities is lower. Yeah, this is Henry Hub. Um, this is not the Perian. You want to you want to look at the WA Waja hub, W A Ha hub, but doesn't matter. Um, at $4 a million BTU, that's, you know, $25 a barrel gas uh oil, sorry. Um, that's the oil equivalent price of $25 a barrel. And in the perian, it's it's trading for a negative spot, maybe $2 on a 12-month strip. Um, and $2 is what 12 $12 a barrel of oil. And so if you saw an the break even price for gas only producers, say in Appalachia is like two bucks and change, a million BTU. You put gas at six or seven, I mean, there's just going to be a a stampede of of drilling for gas. And and what would we do with all the extra oil? They would dump it at any price. Um, and so, and look, in the Western Hemisphere, there's 10 million barrels a day of incremental oil that could be produced there. If you go bottom up, you know, Argentina with Becca, Marta, Mexico, Venezuela, Guyana, Colombia, Brazil, um, there's just so much oil in the world. People know how to get it. And, um, that ultimately we're still relatively bearish. And as you saw on that chart, like we were saying this at $75 and here we are, you know, at 59 and change. Uh, and I'll just finish off here. At least uh based on your projections, we're not going to have higher energy costs to weigh in on uh the CPI. Here's the CPI index. At least energy cost are going to bring out the CPI index overall. Energy is a big component of the CPI. It's been hovering around zero. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think the electricity is the only wild card here and I don't know what the waiting is on the CPI, but yeah, fundamentally the US has a huge advantage given its natural gas bounty. Um, you know, people who are worried about running out of natural gas just um, well, what can I say? Um, everybody we talk to in industry tells us how much we're drowning in it and they're not even trying to find it. Um, you know, it's it's a nuisance to get at the oil. Uh, if that were to flip, uh, it's a total game changer. Yeah, it is interesting to note that um, oil on a multi-year basis in real adjusted terms is not uh, has not actually gone up in price. the the inflation adjusted price of oil using Bloomberg's I think $1 1983 is $18 a barrel. I mean, you know, if you if you have to buy a commodity, own gold. Yeah, absolutely. Thank you very much, Duneberg. Tell us where we can find your work and stay up to date with your writings. Yeah, duneberg.com for our writings and then of course classics read aloud.substack.com for our new uh literature project which has been going amazingly well. Thanks in no small part to the boost we got last time I was on the show. Um okay, thank you for subscribing and I know you're a big fan of it. Um, so yeah, Duneberg and Classics Wrote Aloud are our two main projects from the team today. David, always a pleasure. Amazing to watch how much you've grown. Um, and it's always fun to be on your show. Well, it's uh it's always fun to host you and thank you for supporting the program and coming back. Uh, classics. Yeah. I mean, what uh what what what uh new literature are you examining? I'm curious to see I'm curious to always understand why people do the things that they do and has nothing to do with your your main your main job. So, it's it's interesting. Yeah. I'll give you a minute on it. Yeah. So the mission of classics read aloud is to resuscitate and breathe new life into the the real classics especially short stories that most people would never have read um or don't know exist. The um so these are in the public domain typically 100 years or older and um we want to you know um build a a repertoire of really well produced well read highquality um you know renditions of these short stories. The motto of uh of classics read aloud is you're never too young or too old to enjoy being read to. Uh it's been pretty popular. You know, starting a project from zero again is always challenging and daunting and scary and fun. And uh you know, we've got Duneberg down to a to a science, I'd say. You know, we research, write, publish, edit, and defend a piece every four days. And um the co-founder and editor-in chief of Duneberg has this particular passion. And it's one that we as a team decided to support and launch a new a new franchise. So classics are allowed. I think there's 14 hours of u literature already posted. We only started it at September 1st. It's it's produced in the Duneberg quality on brand and I think um you're you know if you're into literature, you'll really enjoy it. I can't wait for some large language model to write its own novel and have you critique it in a few years. Well, the difference is these are curated with a nice essay and some thoughtful, you know, etc. afterthoughts. AI will never be able to displace this product, which is one of the reasons we're doing it. Okay, good. Thank you for um enshrining the human touch in the fabric of literature. So we please keep doing that and yes do subscribe to Duneberg Substack. Great source of news for everybody. Thank you for coming back on the show and thank you for watching. Don't forget to like and subscribe.