Jason Calacanis

Chenier, yeah.

That's a great business.

If I had to bet, I'm going to bet that brands go to zero.

Really?

Yeah, because I think that when you can make things that are as good or better, and you can make them in a cheaper, faster, better way, people want that abundance more than they want an affiliation to a brand.

Example?

So the perfect example is actually what Tesla did to BMW.

you know, what Tesla did to Mercedes, what Tesla did to Porsche, what BYD and Geely have done to the car manufacturing cycle in China.

This is a fundamentally cheaper, faster, better product.

Yes, it's got a great brand, but nobody's going to pay a premium for these products.

The reason why Y has outsold everything else is because the Model Y is priced better and it's superior on every operational dimension of comparison.

That's also true for the cars in China.

So I think it's the opposite.

I think that brands and the pricing power brands, other than maybe premium luxury goods, but even that's eroding.

Like look at the stock, like, I don't know, Nick, show the stock chart of...

LVMH, or Ferrari, this is not a commentary on the quality of the actual product.

But what this shows an erosion of pricing power, all of these things are being eroded away.

And to your point, maybe the right word is abundance, like the brands that bring abundance, that bring more to the table than their competitors, and they are able to bring more at the same unit cost or less.

captures share.

That's probably true.