Episodes

Announcer:                 Broadcasting from the Investor Hour studios and all around the world, you're listening to the Stansberry Investor Hour. [Interlude plays] Tune in each Thursday on iTunes, Google Play, and everywhere you find podcasts for the latest episodes of the Stansberry Investor Hour. Sign up for the free show archive at investorhour.com. Here's your host, Dan Ferris.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Hello, and welcome to the Stansberry Investor Hour. I'm your host, Dan Ferris. I'm also the editor of Extreme Value published by Stansberry Research. Today, we'll talk with Matt McCall, my friend and colleague. He is one of the best stock pickers I know. He's had more triple- and quadruple-digit winners that he's recommended than anybody I know, so I like to check in with him frequently. We'll do that today.

In the mailbag today, questions about MMT, the Federal Reserve, and lessons learned over the past year. And remember, you can call our listener feedback line – 800-381-2357. Tell us what's on your mind and hear your voice on the show. For my opening rant this week, I'll talk about some major inflection points in financial markets today. That and more, right now, on the Stansberry Investor Hour.

So what do I mean by "major inflection points"? Well, I wrote about this recently in the Stansberry Digest and I think it bears repeating. I don't mind repeating myself. I used to be paranoid about it earlier in my career, and I was actively discouraged [laughs]. Somebody told me I was plagiarizing myself for whatever – it was a long, long time ago. And I thought, "Well, that's silly. You know, if something's important and it's still true, you got to repeat it."

So if you've read the Stansberry Digest, keep listening to this. I might hit on some points that I didn't make then. But here's the thing. I believe that there are – I just call them five long-term cyclical-type trends that are at or near or maybe just beyond – right around a major inflection point. And you've probably heard me mention four of them before. And I'm going to add a fifth one today.

So what are these big trends that are major inflection points? Well, one of them is a pretty familiar topic. That's the fact that I think the long bull market that started in March of 2009 may be at an end. It may have already ended. We may have already seen the top, and we may be looking at a 50, 60, 70% decline in the big indexes. You'll never hear me say, "You know, that's absolutely the case." You know what I say. "Prepare – don't predict."

So that's one of them. I've talked a lot about that, right? And the way to prepare for that is two things. You make sure you're holding plenty of cash and make sure you're not holding any garbage. Look. We all accumulate some speculative [laughs] garbage in a big run-up, especially near the top when everything goes absolutely bananas. You know, like it did basically after March of 2020. Then the speculative juices were flowing after that, right? And now, that's pretty much over. I think a lot of the bubble started popping about a year ago. Cannabis popped and SPACs and other things.

And so, your speculative garbage – if you haven't already sold it – you should get rid of it. And otherwise – in your equity portfolio, holding plenty of cash and no speculative garbage, that'll get you a long way toward being very, very well prepared if I'm right and a new bear market is going to start soon. OK. So what's the second one? That's the first big one. What's the second one of these five? Well, the second one I've talked about once or twice: the value-growth stock cycle. Value stocks are the cheapest stocks in the market by the traditional measures, like price-to-earnings, price-to-book, price-to-cash-flow.

And the growth stocks are the stocks in the market that have the fastest-growing revenues, generally speaking. And they're represented by these big indexes, right? The Russell 3000 Growth Index, the Russell 3000 Value Index. And you can see – if you compare those two – the cycles, one of them outperforming the other for several years at a time. It's very obvious. OK? So, obviously growth stocks outperformed right up into the dot-com peak. And then, value stocks outperformed up to the financial – right before the financial crisis. That peak.

And then, ever since then, it's pretty much been a growth market. So now, I think we're in another inflection point, and value has begun to outperform. It's been fits and starts over the last year and a half or so, but I think it's outperforming. And if you did... I saw on Twitter a listener and a follower of mine on Twitter said, "Hey. You know, Dan Ferris said to do this trade where you short the growth index and buy the value index, and it was up when the market was down 10%." It was up like 4%.

So, fingers crossed, this is the beginning of a multiyear outperformance for value stocks. All right? Another one that I've mentioned before is commodities versus stocks. Same thing. Like, if you do a chart of comparing commodities versus the S&P 500 Index – use the S&P GSCI Commodity Index, used to be called the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index – and go back to the late '80s or something... if you go back to the '70s – God, the '70s were so crazy that the chart is screwy.

But if you just go back to like the late '80s, you can see the cycles since then. You know, basically commodities down into the peak of the dot-com era, then up really into that 2011 peak, you know, when gold and all the mining stocks started getting killed. That was the peak. You know? And then ever since then, commodities have pretty much sucked wind. But over the past year, of course, they screamed in 2021. And really, that started a little bit late 2020.

So this could be it. These things usually last many – you know, several years. So we could be looking at a decade or so for really good performance from commodities versus stocks. Another one that I didn't even think of until our guest, Marko Papic, mentioned last week was emerging markets. I just say versus the S&P 500. Versus domestic equities for U.S. investors.

Again. You can take an Emerging Markets Index, compare it to the S&P 500, and it looks almost [laughs] the same as all these other things. And I realize, as one Digest reader once wrote in and said, "You know, you're just showing me the cycles in the U.S. dollar." And I was like, "OK. But that doesn't mean you can't make a lot of money off the stuff, and it doesn't mean we're not in another inflection point."

And he was saying, "Well, the U.S. dollar's doing really great," and he showed me a chart that showed it going up and up and up and up and up since the '70s. The trade-weighted dollar. Well, yeah. But I whipped out the DXY – the U.S. Dollar Index chart, which is a really widely watched chart. Much more so than the trade-weighted. And that one is a downtrend – a really volatile, highly cyclical downtrend. Which more corresponds to the cycles that I'm talking about.

So, I don't really care about the dollar. I know it influences these trends quite a bit. But look. [Laughs] If printing trillions and trillions and trillions of them and having a lot of bureaucrats finally convinced that you can do that with impunity and it's OK... I don't know [laughs]. If that isn't a sign of an inflection, then maybe I'll be wrong about all these. But I think it's time to buy value, buy commodities, buy emerging markets.

And the fifth thing that I think is changing – has already changed middle of last year, since the middle of last year – is inflation, of course. We're up to 7% in December. So you put all these things together and you can exploit all of these. Even if all you do is like buy an emerging market ETF – Marko Papic suggested actually focusing on commodity-producing nations like Brazil and Chile. He likes those. You know?

So a Brazil ETF and a Chile ETF might do you pretty well for the next five, 10 years. And the same thing. Like, you can probably target commodities with an ETF in general or you could target specific commodities at specific times if you wanted to try to do that. You could put all this together, in other words, pretty easy-peasy with a bunch of ETFs.

What I did was, I think I've got inflation, I've got value and I've got commodities really well covered in a portfolio that I created for Extreme Value readers which I'll put out for the first time in the February issue that comes out next week. And I've got 10 stocks in there that, I think, you can buy those 10 and just basically put them away for five, at least – maybe 10 – years or maybe more.

And even if these things don't come on super strong, they're great assets and great businesses that should perform well anyway. You know, with great management teams. Some of them have the best management team in the industry. There's big-cap names that you recognize, but there's mostly small-cap names that you wouldn't recognize. And I think – small to mid. Not like $50 million market caps. I’m talking like a few billion or a couple billion.

So yeah. That's just for Extreme Value readers. I’m just going to put it out there and let you know that it's going to exist starting next week. But I think there's a way to exploit all this stuff – all these trends – where you could, A, make a ton more than just buying an ETF and, B, do really, really well. Even if I don't nail the trends. If you pick the right businesses, I think you can minimize your downside from possibly being wrong about the trends and maximize your upside.

So I just wanted to tell you about that. I think we're [laughs] at a huge, important time. You can almost always say that because there's always something big that nobody's thinking about. But there's not always a new bear market, maybe, possibly about to start. And there's not always a shift out of growth stocks from the last more than a decade into value again. You know? There's not always a big shift into commodities and a big shift in emerging markets.

I mean, we haven't seen, you know – commodities and emerging markets and value. I mean, they peaked between 2007, 2012, 2011 – something like that – and they've sucked wind ever since. So nobody's really thinking about them. Obviously, commodities are back on the radar screen, inflation is sort of back on the radar screen, but I still don't think people are necessarily taking it all that seriously, and I think they'll be surprised.

Because inflation doesn't have to – it doesn’t have to go double digits. It just has to be 6, 7, 8% constantly for several years. You know? Nobody is thinking about or talking about potentially a few or maybe even several years of kind of painful performance in equity markets and in other assets too. It's something to think about. It's not something to bet on, necessarily, but it's something to think about. And you know me. "Don't predict. Prepare." All right?

So those are five things that I think you should try to prepare your portfolio for. And I think you can do it in a way that, even if you're wrong about all of them, you'll still have a bunch of good companies. All right? That's all I'm going to say about that. Let's talk with my friend Matt McCall. Let's do it right now. [Music plays and stops] Matt McCall has been on this show more than once. And now, he's stepping forward with a prediction for 2022.

If you have any money in the U.S. stock market, you will want to hear what he says could happen next. Because it could impact the way you live in a big way. For the first time ever, he's going public with his prediction about a new technology that could lead to a rust belt revival in Middle America. He says several cities are already quietly being transformed – Flint, Detroit, and Grand Rapids, Michigan... Buffalo and Rochester, New York... his hometown of Bethlehem as well as Erie, Pittsburgh, and McKeesport, Pennsylvania, and the list goes on and on.

More importantly, he believes it could make early investors massive gains if they act on it today. He's excited because he's uncovered a 100% American-made technology that he believes will go through a massive nationwide rollout beginning right now. Matt is a legendary stock picker and he calls this new technology "one of the greatest places to put your money right now."

To learn more about Matt's 2022 prediction, simply go online to mattbroadcast.com. Once again, that's mattbroadcast.com. [Music plays and stops] Time for our interview today. Today's guest is Matt McCall. Matt is the lead analyst for The McCall Report. Matt began his career at Charles Schwab where he was a stockbroker before moving onto a startup, Wall Street Radio. At Wallstreet Radio, Matt was the Chief Technical Analyst as well as the co-host of Winning on Wallstreet, a daily national radio show.

In the last few years, Matt has sold his other investment-related businesses to focus on the research side of the industry. Through The McCall Report and his other newsletter, Matt McCall's MegaTrend Investor, Matt will focus on reaching millions of investors around the world. The goal is to educate and help others achieve financial freedom. That is a lofty and worthy goal. Welcome back to the show, Matt.

 

Matt McCall:              Thanks for having me, Dan. Pleasure being here, as always.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah. This is your fourth time, man. I don't know if we've interviewed anybody four times.

 

Matt McCall:              [Laughs] You poor guy.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah, that's right. "Poor Dan. He's got to put up with Matt McCall for another – for a fourth time." Well, it's my pleasure, I want you to know. So in case anybody does want to sort of get some background, we talked about those things with some background stuff with Matt last time, Episode 228, October 14, 2021. So maybe if you want to learn more about Matt's background you can go to that. But I'd rather just kind of dive right in if that's cool, Matt. And yeah. I'm going to take a wild guess here, Matt, that the mild unpleasantness of the month of January in the year of 2022 didn't faze you one bit.

 

Matt McCall:              Well, it fazed me quite a bit but not in a way that you probably would project [laughs]. You know? I spent all of last week watching some football and going through historical charts. And not that I was trying to push one strategy or the other, but I was just trying to find out what was really going on with this market and what it meant historically. Because I agree with this time's not the same as last time, you know?

Pullbacks 40 years ago, you had to call your broker. Now you hit a button on your phone to sell or buy. So it is a bit different. The one thing that's the same, though – and, Dan, you might agree with me on this – is, it's psychology. You know, we're human beings. So we still go back to caveman days where we get a bit worried about things and negativity runs wild in our head, and you panic and you hit the sell button. You know, back then it might've been running from a woolly mammoth. Who knows?

But we've seen this same time of action in all pullbacks, so I did a deep dive on all recent pullbacks we've had over the last several decades. And the first thing I found was that – as of last week, Dan – the average Nasdaq stock was down nearly 44%, even though at that time the index was only down 12%. And that's fascinating to me because, if you turn on the major media or look on Yahoo Finance where we might go, "OK. Nasdaq's down 12%. S&P's down less than 10. Things are all right."

But a lot of people are feeling a lot more pain because a lot of the smaller-cap stocks, a lot of the growth and innovation stocks have really taken a beating. And the reason the indices continue to stay near the highs – or not far from the highs, I should say – is because of the big names. Most of the bigger names have held up pretty well in keeping – and they make such a high percentage of that index that it keeps it up there.

So what I've found, though – the long and to the short here, Dan – is that after looking at history and seeing all the pullbacks that we've had going back to 1950 that typically a correction – which is a pullback of 10% or more – ends up being a great buying opportunity if you are able to hold for at least one year. Which you know me by now, being on here the fourth time, I'm a long-term investor. So holding for a year is nothing for me.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Right. Whereas, holding for most people through a long weekend is really difficult. So yeah. I mean, that's just about the answer I expected. It's no fun. Months like January are no fun. We don't wish for them to happen. But when they happen I just know... I mean, I actually had that thought a couple times in the past few weeks. I was like, "I know damn well Matt's buying. Matt is buying right now. I just want to know what the hell he's buying so I can buy it too."

 

Matt McCall:              I've actually done some buying on my own. I have been, Dan. I've been buying into some – we obviously can't buy the same stocks we recommend in our newsletters, so I don't usually share what I buy for that reason. But I've been buying – last week, bought on Friday's pullback. Bought into an ETF which I rarely do, just because I thought it was a great opportunity.

And again. I don't know if they go straight up. They most likely will not. There's going to be pullbacks along the way. But the thing is, going back to 1950, there's been on average exactly – believe it or not – one pullback per year on average. It doesn't always happen one a year. There wasn't one last year. But we already had one this year. In 2020, I believe we had three or four in the S&P 500. So this is normal.

And yeah. I got to tell you it stinks looking at my portfolio that is very heavy in growth and innovation and very heavy in cryptocurrencies get crushed in December and January. It wasn't fun watching that. But I've been doing this for 20-plus years – that I know if I were to panic-sell at this point, that's the last thing I want to do. The longer you're in the market – and that means you get to live a longer life, which is fantastic – the more pullbacks and the more recessions, the more bear markets you're going to have.

I believe the Roaring 2020's, but I still believe we'll have recessions along the way, we're going to have bear markets along the way. But I think at the end of the day, at the end of this decade, we're going to be much, much higher in the trend that we're looking at. Along the way, we're going to have massive pullbacks. It's just how it is. And if you can't handle that, the stock market's probably not for you. It's not that I'm not for you. The stock market's not for you.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Right. Too many people, I think, believe that the answer is to do a lot of short-term trading. But from what I've seen, the individuals who excel at that – they're a whole different breed. They have a kind of iron discipline that – frankly, Matt – it seems to go beyond what guys like you and I do when we buy a stock and hang onto it for a decade or more. Do you agree? No?

 

Matt McCall:              I agree 1,000%. I mean, I've known a lot of people throughout the years that have been swing traders, that have been day traders that have great years, great five years. But then, they have that one run where they get kind of blindsided and all those gains that they accumulate over those years are gone. It's very difficult to do it. And I try to talk most people out of it. I said, "If you want to do that, it's the same as going to Vegas.

If you go to Vegas and you said, "Listen. I'm willing to lose $1,000 or $500 or $10,000" – OK. That's your money. You sit down at the blackjack table or whatever you're doing. If you lose it, you get up and you walk away. I would say the same thing if you're day trading or swing trading. Because you very quickly have this plan in your head, Dan, where it's like, "All right. This is my risk management plan."

Well, that goes out the window the moment you start losing money. Next thing you know, you're praying to the gods every night just to get back to break even. It's just, I've seen that story too many times. And I'm not cut out for it. I'm a terrible gambler. I love playing blackjack, but I know if I break even I'm the happiest guy in the world. So I just think most people aren't wired for it, really.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah. They're not. So if you don't do that, then what do you do? Do you care more – I know you're a long-term, bottom-up guy. I know you believe deeply in the power of new technologies to create a lot of value and create a lot of wealth. What are you doing these days? Is there a particular – we just talked to you in October. Maybe I should ask you if anything has changed much since then.

 

Matt McCall:              Well, the only thing that's changed for me is the opportunities. Back in October, I obviously liked the trends I liked at that point – whether it be artificial intelligence or future battery technology or the metaverse, etc. Electric vehicles. Still love them. It's just that a lot of those stocks are much cheaper than they were in October. So to me, if you're new to the game, this is actually a great opportunity to start accumulating shares here.

If you're not new to the game, this is the tough time – when you have to hold on a downturn. I think we've either bottomed out or very close to the bottom in my innovation trends that I follow. So at this point, the last thing I would do is look to sell. You've made it through the beatdown. Now it should be up from here, or at least build a bit of a base.

So what I've been doing, Dan, is going through all of my trends that are still the same and just doing a deep dive into the stocks that have pulled back, looking to see if any of their stories have changed, looking if the fundamentals – there's a lot of stocks out there now. I like to look at price-to-sales for a lot of these because earnings are tough if they even have them.

Well, the price-to-sales are now trading at the same price-to-sales level that they were at the bottom in 2020 when the pandemic just hit, so to me that's a great opportunity. So I look at that and I look at continued growth. A lot of these companies still continue to hit record numbers, yet the stocks are down 30 to 50% from a high even though they just reported a record quarter. So it doesn’t always jive and go hand in hand. And to me, the stock market's extremely inefficient in the short term.

But over time, if a company's going to be making more money every year the stock price will follow eventually. And that's how I look at these trends. I thought back in the day when I was younger, Dan, "I could time this market. I could swing trade. I could get in and out." And I learned the hard way. It's much more difficult. And I tell you, the older I get... I like to sit on the beach and do my thing and look at the stocks. I don’t want to be stressing out every day. That's not a really good life.

 

Dan Ferris:                 No. That's not a good, quality life at all. Let me ask you a specific question. You still feel the same about Tesla? You still bullish?

 

Matt McCall:              [Laughs] I knew you were going to ask me that. I am still bullish on Tesla. And a lot of it has to do with the fact that I think autonomous vehicles will be here sooner rather than later. Again, this is a trend that's going to hit a lot of – no pun intended – bumps in the road along the way. But Tesla is still a leader in there. They're obviously a global leader in electric vehicles. So I still think there's huge upside.

But again. The valuation is still ridiculous, but I look out further that the valuation will eventually come back to a normal level – quasi-normal level, not market normal – once we start seeing some of the energy storage and their battery technology really start to add some revenue and something to the bottom line. So I think it's more than just an automobile play. It is an energy storage. It is a battery play. And it's a bet on Elon Musk to continue coming up with something new.

 

Dan Ferris:                 I mean, fair enough. He's obviously a brilliant guy, and he handles enormous projects better than most – better than I ever could [laughs]. I wouldn't even get started on any of them. But do you ever wonder like – the full self-driving has just not gone the way it was promised. You're obviously – I mean, you cited autonomous driving as a reason to be bullish. But, man, [laughs] there are so many stories about how this is not going well. Does that worry you at all?

 

Matt McCall:              In the short-term, if I was a short-term holder of Tesla and my entire thesis was based on that, maybe a little bit. But again. This is a technology that is so new that it's not going to go straight up. There's going to be a lot of instances where somebody – there's an accident or all of a sudden, they start going through stop signs or whatever it might be. What's different about today than, let's say, 40 years ago when there was an innovation taking place behind-the-scenes is, we're watching it live.

Back then, if this was going on 40 years ago, you didn't have the Internet. You didn't have all the stuff to keep an eye on every day, every little thing. You didn't have people with cellphones videoing every time something happens to a Tesla vehicle. But I think if you look at the percentage of instances versus how much testing is truly going on – between Waymo, which is owned by Google, Alphabet, between Tesla. Over in China, Baidu's a huge player in autonomous vehicles... there's so much testing going on around the world right now, and we hear about several instances.

And it's similar to anything in the world right now where you're going to pick out the most bombastic, the most fascinating headline. And again. People love to hate. I'm an optimistic guy, but there's certain people that bother me. But people love to hate Elon Musk – they love to hate Tesla for whatever reason. And to me, I think a lot of it's blown out of proportion. Is it not where I think it would've been right now, Dan?

Absolutely. But I don't think that's the end of it. I still think there's huge potential for autonomous vehicles. And if I close my eyes and I reopen them – let's say in 2028, which is six years from now – I would guarantee there's all kinds of autonomous vehicles out there right now. Maybe not what you see in the sci-fi drawings, but people that are jumping in their car and they could sit back and do some texts while it drives down A1A in front of me right here.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Right. OK. I think I'm sort of down the middle. I don’t have anything against Tesla. I don't love to hate Elon Musk or – do I even love to say Tesla's a piece of junk because I've driven the cars and they're awesome [laughs]. I have to say it was like one of the best driving experiences of my life.

To me, it's all about the prospect of this thing succeeding as a business in an industry where it's really hard to bring in a brand-new company, brand-new type of product. I guess what I'm saying is, the basic task of creating a whole brand-new technology in an industry like automobiles is really, really rough. And they're not exactly making money hand over fist at this. And the accounting doesn't appear to be the greatest in the world either. So to me, that's all it's about.

I actually love the idea of a new technology. And I love your perspective on technology. And I like your optimism because I actually do feel that way. Yeah, I own gold, I'm afraid of a bear market, and all this other stuff. But, Matt, who among us can deny the endless upward ascent of the general standard of living? I mean, yeah. Who could deny it?

 

Matt McCall:              No, you're right. And just one more point on Tesla. I don't want to get stuck on this topic too much, Dan. But everybody said the same thing about Tesla seven, eight years ago that, "There's no way they're going to come into this game where there's a big three. There's no way that they can become an electric-vehicle leader."

And they are the global leader by a country mile. So they've done it before. And again, I bet on jockeys a lot of times, not the horse. And this jockey has done it before, so – again, if I go back to the races – I'm going to bet on the jockey again. So I haven't given up on that yet because he's surprised people in the past and I think they could do it again. I may be way wrong, but I'm riding that jockey for now.

 

Dan Ferris:                 All right. Fair enough, man. I admire the conviction. And let's face it. Conviction in a long-term story that other people kind of start to hate that eventually turns out well over the long term is – that's worth a lot [laughs]. That's worth a lot of money if you can do it. All right. So, I'm good with believing that there are going to be a lot more electric vehicles on the road in five, 10 years, whatever. That's cool. What else? Did you and I ever talk about cannabis? I don’t know if we did.

 

Matt McCall:              I think we did a few times ago. My view – somebody just asked me about this. Honestly, I was sitting having a drink at dinner the other night with a group and they asked me about cannabis stocks. I said, "You know, I was on the first people to start investing in it." I remember hosting events where there was literally four people in the room and the CEO at the time of Canopy, Linton, was sitting next to me, being the CEO of the largest cannabis company in the world.

And we couldn’t get five people in the damn room. So I was there from the beginning. And I was a huge proponent of it. At this point, there is some opportunity in some of the U.S.-based multistate operators – they call them MSOs – because they're just so cheap right now. And I do think eventually it will be legalized. The problem is the pricing – there's been so much competition that the pricing has been knocked down so much that the margins have gotten crushed in a lot of these cannabis companies.

And that's what kind of keeps me away from it. So I don't see another big run-up like – we've had it basically twice in the last 10 years, 11 years or so run-up in the cannabis stocks. Are they value plays down here? Yeah, I could make a case for that. But I just don't see the huge upside from here because it becomes a commodity. I see – and this is riskier, and I don't own anything in this.

But ideally with mental health issues – and it's become more prominent in the last couple years during the pandemic, and you're seeing a lot of studies. There's a big one going on in Johns Hopkins right now using psychedelics for people with mental illness that are getting on – drugs, pharmaceuticals and stuff. And you're seeing great promise from that, people with PTSD coming back from war.

I think there's a big, big upside to the medical side of that because I think we need to figure out how to deal with the mental health issues that this country and this world has right now. And I think we need to look outside of pharmaceuticals. So when you look at like – the mushroom stocks and some of them are using types of acid and other things... I don't have the companies that I can mention. But I think there's bigger upside in the medical side of all this stuff right now.

 

Dan Ferris:                 That's an interesting viewpoint. A lot of people talk about the recreational use like, "Wow. That's the big enchilada." But I hear you. It seems to me to depend on research. Because word of mouth doesn't seem to quite cut it. You hear a lot of people saying, "Oh. You know, I have arthritis," or, "I was having pain when I had cancer," and all this stuff. But it seems to me like if you don't – people just respond better if they know the medical establishment says it's OK.

 

Matt McCall:              Yeah. I agree 1,000%. Because it's like taking a stock tip from your neighbor. I'm not taking a stock pick from my neighbor [laughs]. And it's – and if you go online, obviously you could find – whatever you're searching for. You can find whatever you want to find, whether it's good or bad. So you can find somebody saying that whatever product works. So yeah. I would like to – I question some of the stuff coming out of our quote-unquote, "Trusted medical officials," right, in the last couple years.

So I don't know if I'd take that any better either. But I will say that I think people in general would much rather have a doctor, an MD or – I would look towards something like a Johns Hopkins, which is one of the leaders in research, and see what they come up with in real trials and see how that goes. But I just think that we have to start looking for other ways to treat people. Mental illness is a huge, huge problem.

And think about the people that don't even talk about it. It is – you're seeing it in athletes now. You're seeing it everywhere. And we need to do something about it, and I think this is an option. And I don't know. It's early stages. I wouldn’t say I'd put my money into it, but I think that would be the next wave of this type of trend – if you're going to see big trends, it'd be in this type for really niche, high-risk sector.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah. So I bring it up because I read a little bit lately about how John D. Rockefeller started the American Cancer Society, and part of his push into the medical industry was to try to get petroleum-based products used [laughs] as medical products. And he went to great pains to sort of get the government to kind of discredit any kind of folk medicine or... including things like marijuana. Anything that people were using that basically wouldn't benefit him. And I don't know. It seems to me like – I don't know if it's all his doing, but somebody has succeeded with that.

And this idea, to me – the reason I brought up – to me, it just seems so crazy that you would want for this weed that humanity has been smoking for a long, long [laughs] time – a lot longer than the modern pharmaceutical industry has existed – that you would really need research to exist. You know what I'm saying? It's like this folk medicine. And you'd think that using it now in medicine means we're getting back to it, and we're starting to trust ourselves. But it really means that industry – the legitimate medical field – has discovered it or something. It's sort of perverse to me.

 

Matt McCall:              It really is. Yeah. And there's great stories about how basically marijuana got banned back in the day. Obviously it comes up –

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah.

 

Matt McCall:              I mean, I always said – and most people will agree with me... not using – I'm just using a hypothetical here. You take a couple puffs of something, or you take a little edible or you go out to the bar and drink too many vodkas, I'll tell you what – those too many vodkas are going to cause you much more trouble than taking a couple puffs of a joint.

So to me, I am 1,000% behind if people want to do it, they should be allowed to do it. And I think there are great medical benefits to it. I had a massage this morning and she rubbed this CBD stuff all over. I have arthritis in my shoulder. It's the best it's felt. I mean, this stuff is amazing. And maybe it was in my head. I don't know. But I'll tell you that there is studies that show that there are medical benefits to it.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yep. Yeah. We've had a couple of guests fairly recently discussing it who know a lot more about medicine than I ever will. So yeah. I'm glad you mentioned it. All right. What else are you looking at that you – is there anything like brand-new that you wouldn't have been talking about back in October when we talked to you?

 

Matt McCall:              Let me think if there's anything else out there. Probably – I just did a report on 3D printing. And I've been doing a deeper dive in it. I've always kind of had it on my radar, but I didn't really do a deep dive. But the last couple months, I've done more, and it really kind of popped up on my radar during that pandemic with the supply chain issues. And the more I look into it, the more fascinating that I think it's going to be.

And I think by the end of the decade it could be over a $1 trillion industry. And the reason for that is, 3D printing can be used in any sector we have. And it's being used in a ton already. Volkswagen's using it for some of its 3D – sorry, some of its EV parts... electric-vehicle parts. And you think about GM and Ford as they try to make this major transition from combustible engines to electric vehicles, they can't – it's brand-new machinery.

They can't just re-retrofit an entire facility or build a brand-new facility and retrofit it for EV's. They need to do this quick too, because there's a lot of companies. They can't sit around. So why wouldn't you just start 3D printing the pieces? And the biggest part that I just came across this past week that really kind of flipped a switch in my head is, end use products or spare parts.

And there's a story I remember in a book called The Future Is Faster Than You Think by Peter Diamandis that I read a couple years ago. He talked about it back then and the story stuck in my head. Say you're an Iowa farmer and it's harvest season. You have this part that breaks in your tractor but you have to get it flown in from here or there. You can't find it – it's a rare piece.

You go to the local place, they 3D print because you have the schematics. Boom, boom, boom, it's on that day and you're back to work. You don't miss a harvest season, which could crush your livelihood. There's stories over in Italy when COVID-19 was rampant. They ran out of swabs. They started 3D printing them. They ran out of one piece for the ventilator. They started 3D printing them. This really lets countries not depend on China for a piece.

Because there's some – we are a global market. I like being a global economy. But that being said, people are going to play games. And they do. You say, "You know what?" You give them the thumb and say, "Hey, we're going to do this right here. We have the 3D printing. We can do it right here." So I think it's absolutely fascinating for spare parts end use, medicine, technology or manufacturing, vehicles. It really – and it's not... you probably heard back in the day, Dan, when 3D printing was big.

Well, heck, was that 15 years ago maybe? Ten, 15 years ago? All those stocks went up big because everybody thought we had one in our house [laughs]. We don't need one in our house. I'm talking about 3D printers that are the size of a garage. These are for industrial 3D printers. Boeing makes a large portion of their parts for their engines from 3D printing. Two days ago, Dan, I saw the coolest thing I'd ever seen in my life. I’m walking down A1A here in Florida.

I look up and there's this rocket flying through the sky. SpaceX went off. And I thought to myself, "Well, a large part of that's 3D printed," which is pretty amazing. So it's out there already, but I just think it's going to be such a big industry. And what I like about it, too, is nobody's really talking about it and most people hate it that are in your and my position that have been in the market for a long time, because they remember the joke that it was 15 years ago.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Right. Yeah. I'm just looking at a chart of 3D Systems Corporation – DDD, one of the big ones – and it looks like it peaked in 2013. But yeah. If you look at all those charts, however long ago it was, it's like a rocket ship. It's like a picture of a Christmas tree and the rest of the chart is flat. It's really super dramatic. But I'm glad you mentioned it. I really am. Because now that's a technology that I could really, really kind of believe in. Because it's still here. It went through its bubble phase – some of the crappy companies disappeared, whatever – but it's still around and it's getting greater and greater adoption. I love that idea.

 

Matt McCall:              I guess I don't – like, 3D systems isn't a stock I follow. I know it obviously pretty well because it was one of the big ones back in the day. But just look at the numbers quickly. They were profitable last year and they're going to be profitable for the first time annually I think in a long time, if ever. You have got to like that too. These guys aren't just a pie in the sky here. They're actually turning a profit now. And that's nice to see. They trade at decent valuations considering they're a smaller $2.3 billion growth company.

And that's what you want to see. When these types of companies – I always say I want a path to profitability. They don't have to turn a profit today but I need a path. When these companies start hitting profits like this and their business model's completely different than it was, and now you're opening up brand new... they've been able to adapt. And you mentioned that just a second ago. They went through the bubble phase of these dreams which never came to fruition, but now it's actually a true business. It's a real industry.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah. You know it's real when people are making all kinds of stuff that the government wants to ban. [Laughs] That's how you know it has taken root amongst the population. There's a real market for stuff that gets banned, right?

 

Matt McCall:              Exactly.

 

Dan Ferris:                 And I wonder – I don't know. I just wonder if there is any regulator risk to it in that regard. Or do you think it's just the risk is in the products that people make, right? Guns might be regulated, but the devices making them might not be maybe.

 

Matt McCall:              Yeah. I don’t think that guns – I mean, I think guns would be regulated, obviously – and I hope they would be to some extent because you don't want just some kid printing one at home. Somehow there. But I feel like if you want to get a gun, you get one anyway. But I think the regulation could come from China stealing the CAD design of something and just printing it themselves and not having to pay any money to the company that came up with it. I think there's probably an issue there. But I think that's happening already. So I think there'll be ways around it. And I think this goes kind of to the Web 3.0 where you're kind of a more open-source world that we live in. So that would actually fit right into this.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah. Cool. I'm glad we talked about cannabis. I'm glad you mentioned 3D printing. Now you have me excited about looking at it because anything that lasts for any period of time – that's just the way I feel about technology a lot of the time. Like, I think about Microsoft. That is not an innovative company, but it is a massively successful one. You see what I'm getting at? So it's interesting to me that you could be a really successful technology investor but... it's not like you have to hurry up and get ahead of every trend at all. Or am I wrong about this?

Matt McCall:              No, you're right. And there's one thing that Microsoft did and still does. They created an amazing moat around their business. It's not easy to just jump in. So that's one of the keys. If you're looking to buy a new company, if they have a moat – man, oh, man – think about how many companies you thought were great and then Amazon went right through the moat and destroyed the castle. They didn't have the moat.

But when I look at Microsoft, man, you can't – you and I can't start a business and jump in there, Dan, and take them down. I mean, that's just crazy. But I will say one thing on Microsoft. Obviously it's different now being a $2.1-whatever-trillion company. But it went public back in – what – '86, I think? '86 through 2000. Man, that's like the early stages. I looked for the companies back then.

That's when you make the big money, getting in early. You look at how many pullbacks this stock had of at least 20% – and I'm going to go through... one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine – at least 10 that I can see in that time frame. So it gives you kind of that – when people now freak out that the stock pulled back 20%, "Hey. There's no way to get those 10X gains here, several-hundred-X gains, without having pullbacks. It's just part of the game."

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah. It's a part of the game human beings, as you discussed earlier, are really ill-suited for.

 

Matt McCall:              Listen. I'm human too. It hits my gut. I had an extra martini last week when I went – like, I feel it too. You know? I'll be honest.

 

Dan Ferris:                 What's the secret to hanging on, though? Is it just that you're so educated? Is it that you dig in so deep that you know the technology, you know the management? You feel like you know Elon Musk, his track record, so well you believe in him? Is there one thing that you can point to that says, "This is the reason why I'm able to hold on and the other guy isn't"?

 

Matt McCall:              Well, I'll say two things. One, I managed money for 18 years, so I had to actually deal with clients that called in on these types of times and say, "Matt, you're crazy. Let's sell everything." I was a shrink for about 18 years and didn't get paid for it. So that's one. Just kind of seeing how people react. And I'll tell you, Dan. There were certain clients that I had over the majority of that time frame that were the exact contrarian indicators.

Anytime they called in, they're freaking out – it's probably the best time to allocate some more cash and vice versa. When they said, "Matt. Why are we only 95% allocated? I want to be 100% allocated?" That's probably the best time to take some profits. So I got to see how people react, and I think studying the psychology of this really helped me to realize.

And the other thing is, because – again – over time you get big winners. I've seen a lot of positions that I sold way too early in my career. Way too early, Dan, going back to Intuitive Surgical buying at single digits – ISRG. And you know where that stock is today. I mean, it's just things like that where I thought I was a genius – this was the first year of me managing money. I thought I was a genius because I made like 40% in a couple months.

And if I would've held on, I could've had... the amount of money is just... I can't even think about it. So things like that where I've seen my conviction where I see a trend... and they all don't work out. But that's the things I've realized too. I can't expect them all to work out. But all you need is one or two Intuitive Surgicals in your 20-year career and, I don't care what the hell the other ones do, you're going to do pretty darn well. And so, to me I'm always looking for that next Intuitive Surgical.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah. So I've got a chart in front of me and I guess the farthest over on the left I can go is like $3.

 

Matt McCall:              Yeah. Now it's at like $290. I think – so when I started the business in like '03, '04. So yeah. If you go all the way back to then, it's like $2 a share, post-split. So it's about 120-bagger or so. Yeah. I don't want to do the numbers, Dan. You're going to drive to bring up the martini if I do.

 

Dan Ferris:                 [Laughs] That's right. All right, So listen. We can do my final question. And you've done this three times before, so maybe you'll remember it. But I'll just remind you in case you've forgotten. Every guest of the Stansberry Investor Hour podcast gets the identical final question. OK? No matter what the topic, no matter who they are. And the final question is simply, if you could leave our listeners with one thought, a single thought today, Matt, what would it be?

 

Matt McCall:              Oh, my goodness. This is the fourth time. I don't know if I have four thoughts in this little head of mine, Dan.

 

Dan Ferris:                 I know [laughs].

 

Matt McCall:              I like being on four times, but I didn't prepare for this question because it was...

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah. We need to get a new final question for Matt because he's been on too many times [laughs].

 

Matt McCall:              No. I'd say the thought is, for the average person out there, you're probably not going to start a business. Because it's just – not that you can't, but you probably won't. The stock market to me, the U.S. stock market investing in solid companies... doesn’t have to be aggressive. But investing in solid companies is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, way to accumulate wealth over time for the average American.

So for anybody who listens too much to the television or podcasts or media websites and thinks that things are rigged, just look at very long-term chart of the S&P 500, please. Lower-left, upper-right, the amount of money. And you can just buy into the index. But put money away in a system basis, whether it's your 401(k) or an IRA, and expand from there. But I will tell you. For the average person, by not doing that, I think you're doing yourself a disservice.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Well said, sir. And thank you. That's like a – that's a public service announcement that we should just do every week.

 

Matt McCall:              Thank you.

 

Dan Ferris:                 That's great. Yeah. All right, Matt. As always, a great pleasure to talk with you and get your thoughts on things.

 

Matt McCall:              Yeah, Dan. Thank you so much. And I’m going to ask one thing of you so, when I come back on for my fifth time – you got to give me another question because I can't get any better than that answer. I don't think – I think I've topped out. I'm all out on that one, Dan.

 

Dan Ferris:                 Yeah. It's so good, though. I think we might just forget the final question and replay that.

 

Matt McCall:              That's perfect [laughs]. Takes all the stress off me.

 

Dan Ferris:                 There you go. All right, Matt.

 

Matt McCall:              All right. Thanks a lot, Dan.

 

Dan Ferris:                 You bet, man. Thanks a lot. We'll talk to you soon. [Music plays and stops] Well, I hope you enjoyed talking with Matt McCall as much as I have these four times now on Stansberry Investor Hour. As you can see, he's a fantastic guy to check in with. Because I can just pepper him with questions about this trend and that technology and what he's doing now. And we always learn from him.

And man. That's what – as an investor, you want to surround yourself with people like Matt – a solid, bottom-up, long-term, optimistic guy who can teach you something about different opportunities and different industries every time you talk to him. He's like a perfect, perfect guest for this show. I hope you agree with me about that. All right. Let's do the mailbag. [Music plays and stops]

OK, everybody. Did you see that inflation came at 7% in December? Seven percent. It's the highest in over 40 years. Meanwhile, all the speculative bubbles are popping all across the markets. Marijuana stocks, SPACs, then practically the entire so-called "growth" sector. The market is giving you a huge warning. Are you paying attention? I sure hope so. Because what happens next is going to be an absolute disaster if you're not prepared.

That's why I just gave the most important interview of my life on camera with journalist and gold expert Daniela Cambone. We talked about a very specific plan for what to do right now today to protect your hard-earned savings – including a gold stock that I think could return you more than 10 times your money if you get in right away. It's simple to get started and I expect this hard asset plan to absolutely crush the overall market over the next five to 10 years.

Trust me. You do not want to miss this, and it's going live next week. Keep an eye on your inbox for an e-mail from me with the subject line, "Your Inflation Game Plan." Again, we'll Post the complete interview early next week. Just keep an eye out for an e-mail from me with the subject line, "Your Inflation Game Plan." Don't miss it. [Music plays and stops]

In the mailbag each week, you and I have an honest conversation about investing or whatever is on your mind. Send questions, comments, and politely worded criticisms to [email protected]. I read as many as time allows and I respond to as many as possible. Or call our listener feedback line, 800-381-2357. Tell us what's on your mind and hear your voice on the show.

First up this week is T.G. T.G. says, "Dan, longtime listener here. A lot of doom and gloom these days, and I think that it's a common opinion that there will be pain in the short term. But some also predict long-term pain with excessive money-printing, and Egon" – our recent guest Egon von Greyerz – "expressing concern about the status of the U.S. dollar as the reserve currency."

"Last year, I read The Rise of America by Marin Katusa. Now, I can't say I understood it all, but Mr. Katusa seems less worried about money printing and a transition to MMT. I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on a transition to MMT, the matter, and discussing the long game with Mr. Katusa. – T.G."

T.G., maybe we will talk with Marin. Or not. I don't – we currently don't have plans to have him on the show, but maybe we will. I've talked to him before in the past. So MMT is modern monetary theory. And the basic idea is that, if you're the reserve currency, you can print as much money as you want. And if inflation starts to be a problem, all you got to do is raise taxes. It sounds so easy.

It's a typical top-down pat solution to the top-down management of a multi, multitrillion-dollar economy. In my opinion, there's no way – no way – it doesn't generate all manner of destructive, unintended, unforeseen consequences. There's no way you can tell what is going to happen when you unleash that kind of massive money-printing into a multitrillion-dollar economy. It's so complex – it would be a massive mistake.

And of course, the people who would pay the most are those with the least resources. That's always the way, isn't it? All the top-down schemers and government bureaucrats all claim that they have the simple top-down solution to perfect society. But none of them ever do, and they never, ever, ever admit the mass destruction of their policies. They'll tell you that Social Security has been an unwavering success – nothing like that could possibly be the truth.

It has created disastrous results that no one will talk about. It's a powerful incentive not to take care of yourself to some degree. And there's something very wrong [laughs] with that. I believe it has contributed to the destruction of many urban families of modest means – poor urban families over the past several decades. Over the past century.

Anyway. Enough of that. I just want you to know I don't know what Marin says, I haven't read his book, but I think modern monetary theory is just a massive disaster if they do it. Good question, though. It's something that we should keep in mind and talk about. Because if government gets serious about it, we all need to get torches and pitchforks and march to the Capitol.

Not to break in [laughs]. OK? No more January 6 stuff. Just peaceful protesting. Oy. All right. Next is Taylor S. And Taylor S. says, "Hey, Mr. Ferris. Haven't had a chance to listen to your podcasts lately, but I still read your Friday Digest when I can. Question: If the Fed chickens out to raise rates and actually goes into negative interest rate territory, wouldn't that force people to move their money out of the banks and into more assets like stocks, thus keeping the bull market going?"

"If they step in, assets tank. If they don't, inflation will run very high, no? I think they're playing dumb and want to debase the currency as much as possible so they can swoop in with their Fed coin or USD stablecoin as part of their great reset. The Fed says, quote, 'Inflation is rampant. We can't stop it without completely destroying the economy by raising interest rates, so we created a new digital currency. Trade in your paper dollars today. We're saviors again.'"

And Taylor asks then, "Is this too much "tin hat" conspiracy? Possible, not possible. Thoughts? Hope all is well. Taylor S." Whether or not the Fed is scheming to do what you suggest, I have no idea and won't speculate. But your initial question is a very good one. And I'll just reiterate. You said, "If the Fed chickens out to raise rates and actually goes into negative interest rate territory" – that is lowers interest rates into negative rate territory – "wouldn't that force people to move their money out of banks and into more assets like stocks, thus keeping the bull market going?"

Well, it sure took a long time for it to have that effect in other places. But I suppose, yeah, you could say that. Negative interest rates have not really gone terribly well, I don't think, around the world. They were purported to be a way to stimulate economic activity and economic growth, and they've done nothing like that. And now, Europe is looking at 5%-plus inflation, record high inflation over some period of time.

You know, in a long time. I forget the exact number. It doesn’t matter. It just matters that all of a sudden, inflation is like this thing that it wasn't before. But yeah. It could keep the bull market going. Sure. Everyone says, "Well, I'm not going to pay the bank to store my money, so I will put it into the stock market or the bond market or" – anything.

Anything else, really, is the point. And it makes a lot of sense. But you got to understand. We talked about – I think we actually talked about this topic with Mark Dow. It was a couple years ago. And he pointed out. He said, "You know, it can be worth it to hold a negative interest rate currency" – the negative interest rate is like 0.05% or 0.25% or something.

And the alternative – and you have to hold cash, let's just say, for some reason and the alternative is any other currency that you don't want to hold – there are reasons. Like, you have to ask yourself, "Who's holding all this negative rate European and Japanese sovereign debt?" Well, somebody. Now, part of that is bank requirements. Just capital requirements and other requirements for banks.

But it's not all that. So there are reasons to hold onto this stuff that you wouldn’t guess. But your thesis is basically sound, I think. And you can keep the party going. But one of the reasons why I dealt with your question is because I saw this thing – and I'm not a doctor or anything. But I saw this mention of this disease, this chicken disease, called Marek's disease. M-A-R-E-K. Marek's disease.

And prior to 1960, Marek's disease – it was this relatively mild disease that chickens could get. OK? And it was not a huge threat like on some small, family-run chicken farms. But then these large-scale corporate mega-farms took over and it became a bigger problem. Because there were just more chickens in one place. So they developed a vaccine for it, introduced in the early 1970's.

And the mega-farms had really – they were dominating the chicken industry by 1970. So early '80s, they finally developed the vaccine for this thing. And there's 20 billion chickens in the world or so [laughs], something like that, and they're all being vaccinated for this. Now, vaccinated chickens rarely become ill with this Marek's disease. But it has become – like over the past, what is it, 50 years, it's become really deadly.

One hundred percent of chickens that get infected with this are dead within a couple of weeks. And the primary source of their infection, this paper that I read, – well, it's really a blog post. Primary source of the infection is shedding of the virulent strain of vaccinated chickens. So if unvaccinated chickens get it, 100% deadly, and the primary source of infection is shedding of the disease by vaccinated chickens.

So Marek virus has become one of the deadliest viruses for – of any organism, right, in history. And the massive chicken farms that feed us – those of us who eat chicken – they're totally dependent on vaccination. And this is what they call a leaky vaccine. It's suboptimal. Vaccine is supposed to – a real vaccine is supposed to prevent infection and transmission.

Now, you think I'm probably going to start talking about COVID-19. Well, no. No. I'm going to talk about the Federal Reserve [laughs]. That's what your question is about. That's what we're talking about. And I realized there's a parallel here, Taylor S, with your question. And the overall idea for me is not trying to figure out what happens if they raise rates or send them into negative interest rate territory.

It's just the fact that I view the Fed as a leaky vaccine. A highly accommodative Fed oversaw the dot-com bust and the financial crisis. They couldn't prevent – they couldn't foresee or prevent a financial crisis that folks like Warren Buffett and Jamie Diamond say, "Nearly destroyed the global financial system." And then, I read this little thing about how this [laughs] chicken disease has become absolutely 100% deadly.

Now, it's 100% deadly in unvaccinated chickens for sure. That's why I'm not talking about COVID-19, because it gets complicated. But in the stock market, man, we're all unvaccinated chickens [laughs]. The only people who aren't unvaccinated are people who can directly exploit their status as what they call significant – I forget what they call it. A SIFI. A Significant Financial Institution.

Too big to fail is really what it means. So – or, I'm sorry. Taylor S, you've got me thinking once again how the Fed thinks they can control markets and a lot of the market thinks the Fed controls the market, but they really don't. Fed policy is a leaky vaccine, and we're all unvaccinated. That's all I'll say about that. But man. Every time somebody brings up the Fed now, I think, "God, is this it? Is this going to be the big one? Is this the one where the Fed completely runs out of ammo, and we see that they never had anyone's back all along?"

I don't know. Finally this week, we hear once again from our faithful listener and frequent correspondent Lodewijk H. Lodewijk says, "What is the biggest lesson learned from the past year on investment, personal, and cultural life with lessons to be a better human in 2022?" Boy, that's a tall order. In personal and cultural life. Well, there's been a lot of controversy.

I won't go off because I just [laughs] went off about the Fed and Marek's disease. I won't go off about this. But there's been a lot of controversy about the implications for society going forward and right now, regarding vaccine mandates and mask mandates and things, and you see all these truckers protesting up in Canada. And people just – they want their freedom.

And they need their freedom. They absolutely need it. And I think probably, some years from now, we're going to look back on this and say, "Boy. The governments of the world really took us all for a ride. Didn't it? They forced this leaky vaccine on us and tried to scare the hell out of us and berate us and treat us like animals." I mean, I've heard otherwise reasonable people say that people who don't get vaccinated are members of a death cult.

It's shameful. It's ridiculous. It's absurd. And so, we live through this absurd moment that I think we're going to realize was an absurd moment. But overall, we haven't yet. There's still two sides to this, and they're still bickering like children. As far as investing goes, the market ripped, what was it, 26% or something? Twenty-six or 28. I forget. It's so huge it doesn’t even matter.

It just ripped like [laughs] crazy in 2022. And – or, I'm sorry, in 2021. But we did see – it's interesting, isn't it, Lodewijk? Because what we saw in 2022 – 2021 last year that you're asking about was a great lesson. The market ripped, lots of stocks went up, but a lot of the speculative garbage got killed starting in February. The ARKK Fund – A-R-K-K – lots of speculative garbage in there and just lots of hype.

The thing went up 150-some percent the prior year. And it crashed in 2021, and it's still crashing as we speak I think. And SPACs and clean energy stocks – pot stocks had been a bubble and crashed. Peaked early and they crashed so hard they've become a value play. It's one of my favorite ideas right now for a long play.

So I think that's the lesson, is that the stock market can do really well and all the overvalued garbage can crash like crazy at the same time. It doesn't have to send the big indexes into a bear market. That's one lesson. As far as being a better human in 2022, I leave that to you, sir. You probably [laughs] know more about it than I do.

So that's the mailbag and that's another episode of the Stansberry Investor Hour. I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did. We provide a transcript for every episode. Just go to www.investorhour.com, click on the episode you want, Scroll all the way down and click on the word "transcript" and enjoy. If you liked this episode and know anybody who might enjoy listening to the show, tell them to check it out on their podcast app or at investorhour.com. And do me a favor. Subscribe to the show on iTunes, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

And while you're there, help us grow with a rate and a review. Follow us on Facebook and Instagram. Our handle is @InvestorHour. On Twitter, our handle is @Investor_Hour. Have a guest you want me to interview? Drop us a note at [email protected] or call the listener feedback line, 800-381-2357. Tell us what's on your mind and hear your voice on the show. Till next week. I'm Dan Ferris. Thanks for listening.

 

Announcer:                 Thank you for listening to this episode of the Stansberry Investor Hour. To access today's notes and receive notice of upcoming episodes, go to investorhour.com and enter your e-mail. Have a question for Dan? Send him an e-mail: [email protected]. This broadcast is for entertainment purposes only and should not be considered personalized investment advice.

Trading stocks and all other financial instruments involves risk. You should not make any investment decision based solely on what you hear. Stansberry Investor Hour is produced by Stansberry Research and is copyrighted by the Stansberry Radio Network. The opinions expressed on this program are solely those of the contributor and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Stansberry Research, its parent company or affiliates.

You should not treat any opinion expressed on this program as a specific inducement to make a particular investment or follow a particular strategy but only as an expression of opinion. Neither Stansberry Research nor its parent company or affiliates warrant the completeness or accuracy of the information expressed on this program, and it should not be relied upon as such. Stansberry Research, its affiliates, and subsidiaries are not under any obligation to update or correct any information provided on the program.

The statements and opinions expressed on this program are subject to change without notice. No part of the contributor's compensation from Stansberry Research is related to the specific opinions they express. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Stansberry Research does not guarantee any specific outcome or profit. You should be aware of the real risk of loss in following any strategy or investment discussed on this program.

Strategies or investments discussed may fluctuate in price or value. Investors may get back less than invested. Investments or strategies mentioned on this program may not be suitable for you. This material does not take into account your particular investment objectives, financial situation or needs and is not intended as a recommendation that is appropriate for you.

You must make an independent decision regarding investments or strategies mentioned on this program. Before acting on information on the program, you should consider whether it is suitable for your particular circumstances and strongly consider seeking advice from your own financial or investment adviser.

 

[End of Audio]