time constraints. So the second thought and the second thought, actually, is that we conduct the university, normally by the integration, which is, of course, an area of research where I don't know about it. Yeah, it's okay. Okay. So thanks. I will, so I will, what I will do is for this lecture, I will rather quickly run through some slides to describe some, this type of problems and I will describe some problem which I, which people have been trying to prove. And then I will start with some estimates in this direction. So at the beginning, maybe it runs pretty fast. Okay. So my, so here it is a classical problem where, so we have a compact remaining manifold. So the question is whether or not this remaining metric you can find a positive function so that the new metric, the scalar curvature is constant. So this u, then the problem is in terms of u, it's just this semi-linear partial differential equation because the left-hand side divided by this power is the new scalar curvature. It's just a computation from definition. So this is the equation to be solved. So this problem actually is a variational problem. So fix up manifold if you look at the remaining metric. So there is a functional. You integrate the scalar curvature divided by volume of certain power. So then it is a functional. So there is a critical point. Euler Lagrange equation. So if you look at a critical point of a functional, so that's actually an equation. So this is actually the Einstein equation. So, and if one, because we are looking for new metric of this form, it's a variational problem. It's a conformal metric. So we only look at functional of positive function multiplied by this g.  So one can think, so this is one can think of, if the total metric space is r3, you can say this is a line in the r3. So then you can, one can look at this functional and restrict it to this conformal class. Then the critical point will be given by new scalar curvature equal to constant. So, namely this equation actually has a variational formulation. So actually there are three mutually exclusive cases to, depending on the first eigenvalue of this operator. This is the Laplacian operator. This is called conformal Laplacian. So one should solve this equation with this constant should be the first eigenvalue of this operator. So this problem was solved through many years work. So after that, after this problem was solved, people look at solution space, try to understand the space of solutions. So there are three cases. One is first eigenvalue is zero. Well, then that's a linear problem. So this is a second order elliptic operator equal to zero now. So then it is known that the eigenspace for the first eigenvalue should be one dimensional. So zero, so existence is also clear. So this is very clear. So another case is the first eigenvalue of this linear operator is negative. So one needs to solve an equation with a negative sign. So in that case, the uniqueness is actually clear. And it follows from standard maximum principle. And existence in this case actually is also known, can be proved easily. So because if you take a small positive epsilon as a constant, so it's going to be a sub solution. And the other one will be a super solution. So once there's a sub solution less than a super solution for such an elliptic equation, then there will be a solution in between. So that's clear. But in this case, if the first eigenvalue is positive, it's much more complex. So if this manifold is our standard sphere, then all solutions are known. So it's one known. And it's unique modular conformative morphism of the standard sphere. So if it's not SN, solution space is more complicated. So one question would be is say whether all solutions are bounded. So if all solutions are bounded, you know the solution space is compact with very high norm. So there's a lot of work on this problem. So starting from Shane and then for many works. And eventually the result is the answer is no if dimension n is greater or equal to 25. And dimension below 25, then the answer is yes. And actually in this case the yes was depending on positive mass theorem. So this part is the part what I will describe analysis about is try to solve a fully nonlinear version. Yeah, might be problem. So for this problem, there is a remaining manifold. There's a tensor called shout and tensor. So this is the Ricci curvature, scalar curvature and the metric. And the shout and tensor is one can think of it as ambiance matrix, symmetric matrix, let's say. So let lambda to be the eigenvalue of this tensor with respect to the metric g. Then when we take a trace, we actually get scalar curvature, modular, a harmless constant. So therefore the amabi problem in this case can be rephrased as follows. On a remaining manifold, if we assume the sum of the eigenvalues is positive, whether or not one can find a conformal metric to make it equal to one. And a more general question would be, let's say for some other function, you start from it's positive, whether or not you can make it equal to one. So this is for function equal to the sum of lambda, the lambdas. So one can look at other function. So this equation will be a second order fully nonlinear elliptic equation because this H e tilde in terms of, yeah. So it's written in terms of u is like this. This is the formula. You define, we have the definition of the shout and tensor one compute. So after this conformal change, it's going to be like this, involving second derivative. So then this is a nonlinear expression. So if we look at eigenvalues, so it's nonlinear. So we want that equal to one. So it's a nonlinear second order equation and we will only look at the case. This equation is elliptic. So more precisely because here we have a function f, a general function f. So more precisely we look at gamma. So we have a, in R n, this is where the eigenvalues live. So there's a gamma. This is the domain of definition of this f. So this gamma is a comb. So this gamma is an open convex symmetric comb. Symmetric meaning if lambda one, lambda n in it, we make a permutation, it's still in it. So it's a vertex at origin. It contains the positive comb. It's like the first quadrant. All coordinates are positive. And gamma one is half space. Gamma one is on this side. It's a half space. So, and f is a function, c one, and f lambda i, partial derivative in each lambda i is positive. This means the equation is elliptic. f is positive inside. f equal to zero on the boundary. So these are important examples. We take this case elementary symmetric function. Gamma k is the component where sigma k is positive containing the positive comb. So then, this is a, these are important examples. So then, so the fully nonlinear yamabe problem is to assume the initially eigenvalues of this Schouten tensor is in this gamma. So find a u so that to make this equal to one. So when you look at this equal to one, one, yeah, it's, yeah, okay. So we solve this. So the yamabe problem is actually a special case for f equal to sigma one. So we take the sum of all eigenvalues. Well, one, this is, this looks rather general. So can one really solve something like that? So well, the answer is yes. If this f, if the domain is locally conformally flat. So then it's very general. So general f gamma like this. You can always solve it. So let's, let's look at the important case for elementary symmetric functions. Then if this k is greater or equal to n over two, then one can solve it. For k equal to two, one can also solve it because this case, it's a variational problem. One has a variational, one have a functional. One can look for gradient point of that functional. So there's a lot of work on it. So still there are open problem. So the main open problem here is look at a special case for sigma k and k between three and less than n over two. So that's, so the answer would be yes if one can prove a priori estimates. So, namely if one have a solution, then one show solution is upper bounded by a constant. So, so this is the main remaining open problem now. So in this, so well, why, why it is sufficient if one prove this a priori bound, then the problem is solved. Well, so this is a fully nonlinear equation. But for this equation, if we have upper bound with C, then so through more than 10 years work of people, one already know that there will be a lower bound also. And one also know that the gradient of U will be upper bounded. So this is C1 estimates. And then one also know C2 estimates. Once you have C0, C1, you will have C2. And once it's C2, then if this is a f is concave, like in this case, then one classical theorem like Krilov's Evans will give C2 alpha, then shoulder estimates will give all derivative estimates. So, namely, so using already known results, one have all derivative estimates. So if one have all derivative estimates, then one can deal this problem by, by, by, by a homotopy to a subcritical problem. And then one can solve it. So one can make a homotopy to a subcritical equation. So, so anyway, so the, so this is the remaining is to prove C0 estimate. So what I will describe here will be concerning the estimates to go say from C0 to up. So already if there's time I will talk about some cases C0 estimates. So, so in particular, we will not worry about remaining manifold for the time being. We, we want to establish estimates for Euclidean space. And then how, and then to, to go from Euclidean to remaining one have another step because that equation will have low order terms because of the remaining metric. So here I will only describe the Euclidean case. And this Euclidean equation will also occur when one tries to prove this C0 estimate. So, so usually when one treats C0 estimates, one can say suppose it's not true, then C0 estimates fail, then one rescale that sequence of solutions, one will end up with a solution in the whole space. And then, then this will be the equation if one rescale appropriately. So, so this will be an AU is a second order operator like this. So this operator looks, looks complex, but this operator is the only conformally invariant second order operator. So it's a nitro object. And also many of the proofs can be made using this conformal invariance property. And it doesn't, yeah, one can use it that way. So, well, so this type of equations, there's a classic work of Louise and Nuremberg and Sprach. So they studied a second order fully nonlinear elliptic equations, they are kind of problem. So this, the equation we look at is kind of resembles that, that equation. It has some low order terms. And, and it has some additional feature is there's a conformal invariance of the equation. So in, in the talks, I will describe some estimates. So for this Euclidean space and I will mention some open problems. So the first problem I will describe a Liouville type theorem. So, so this theorem says that if we have a positive continuous function in Rn minus zero, so and satisfied in viscosity sense, the eigenvalues of this Au, we have n eigenvalues, they lie on the boundary here. So the equation is the eigenvalue lies there. So we, let's just look at U is C2, then it has clear meaning what that means. Otherwise there's a weak meaning. So, and we can think of a C2. So if the equation is satisfied in Rn minus zero in the space minus a point, then the solution must be radially symmetric about a point. And corollary is if the equation is satisfied in the whole space, then it's a constant. So, so I will describe if gamma is equal to gamma one. So where gamma one is here is the half space. So then this statement is actually the classical Liouville theorem. The reason is this lambda Au belongs to here. It's the same as lambda U equal to zero. So if we take all, if we take the trace, these two terms will disappear. So it just means that. So then the classical Liouville theorem says that the corollary one is the classical Liouville theorem. So it says that a positive harmonic function has to be a constant. So I will describe a proof of this. So let's say U is C2. So I will only, I think I will describe a proof of U is C2. And I will indicate some, at some key point, some proof depends only on the C0 property of U. And that's a key reason why the whole thing can go to C0. So, and let's prove for theorem one. So of course, if one needs to prove, well, this Liouville theorem is needed when studying the problem I described before. So when there's a need to establish something like that. And naturally, one can think of those ways to prove the classical Liouville theorem. So which one can be made going through to this nonlinear set. Anyway, so actually the way we describe here. Okay, yeah. So this, if we look at the harmonic function, we know when we make a Kelvin transformation it's still a harmonic function. So here we have this invariance also. So it's invariant under Kelvin transform, Kelvin transformation. So what is a Kelvin transformation? So if we take a ball of radius lambda, sorry that I use lambda for the radius to denote radius and here to denote eigenvalues. So I will just keep this. So there are two lambda here going on. And here is a ball of radius lambda and centered at x. And if we have a function U, whenever we have a function U, we can cook up a function. It's called a Kelvin transformation. So it's lambda minus x. So it's a Kelvin transformation. And the U 0 1 is the one which may look more, certainly look more familiar. It's a Kelvin transformation. This is with respect, unit ball centered at 0. Here we just change the ball naturally. So that's the Kelvin transformation. And with this expression, one can calculate that actually the eigenvalue of this is actually the same as that. So the eigenvalue of this conformal fashion A U, when we make a Kelvin transformation, it's actually the same. Essentially this is the only operator which can give you this properly. That's a defining property for the operator. So because of that, then the equation, so this is an equation. So lambda, this is our equation. So this equation is invariant. So that when you have a solution of this equation, the equation we look at, then when we make a Kelvin transformation, it's always a solution. So our equation is invariant under Kelvin transformation. We know this property for harmonic functions. Harmonic functions has this property. So we are going to prove this theorem. We are going to prove theorem one by proving the following. So we'll prove for every x in our n, but not equal to 0. So this is the origin. So we'll prove for every x which is not equal to 0. And when we draw a ball of radius lambda for lambda, bigger than zero, less than x. So for every point not equal to 0, so then we'll prove that U x lambda y, the Kelvin transformation is greater or equal to U of y. For every y belongs to this ball minus this point x and also p. I'm going to call this point p. So p is the Kelvin transformation maps p through. So y goes to x plus lambda squared y minus x over y minus x squared. So if I take p here, I'm going to be mapped to zero and vice versa. So this is a symmetry point of zero with respect to the boundary of this sphere. So I denote that as p. So after the Kelvin transformation when y is inside, if y takes p, then this expression, U x lambda expression, you can see a singularity because you may have a singularity as zero. And also here, if I take y equal to the center, then if you look at the expression here when y is at x, this will be infinity. So one may have another singularity. So there are two possible singularities here. So that's why we write this in equality for ball minus these two points. So we are going to prove this. So once proving this, we will see symmetry. The reason is, so if one can establish this, then we are going to see symmetry because first from here, you will see that if you have zero and you have any x, if you draw a ball like this, so we have U x and we take the radius as absolute value, then we are going to have this order. Then this is true for every x not equal to zero. This is just by limit. You can go to there. So then we will see that we want to prove symmetry. So now I take x1 axis here. I take x prime as the remaining. And if we take every y, for every y, which y1 is positive, if I take any point y on this half plane, then we see that for x large, for r large, if I take this point as x equal to r zero, zero, if I take r very large, this ball will contain y. So for large y, we know that y will belong to b, r, x for large r. Now we know this inequality. We know from there, this has an order U of y for large r because this y is inside now. So then I send r to infinity. Send r to infinity. So this will converge to U of y hat. So y hat is a symmetry point here with respect to the plane. So this is minus 1, minus y1, y prime. So minus y1 and y prime. Ah, cannot read now. Right, sorry. So this one actually goes to U of minus y1, y prime. And this is y1 and y prime. So we have an order then. So this point, the value of U is greater or equal than that point. We can prove the other way. We put the ball on this side. So we showed that they are equal. So then, and this is true for any, this x1 axis can be chosen arbitrarily. So this function U will be symmetric with any, with respect to any plane going through the origin and we have the symmetry. So the main thing is to prove this. So once we have a way to establish this, we'll get the symmetry. So we will prove this result by proving the following theorem. So we know that, so here we know that this U, we know U in this setting will be equal to U on the boundary of this region, of this ball. Okay, we know that. Because this Kelvin transformation is a reflection with respect to that. We can look at the formula. So they are the same. They are the same. And we also know that lambda of AU satisfy the equation inside. And we know that the reflected one satisfy the equation may miss two points. We want our conclusion is we have this order. So this is a maximum principle statement. So we need a maximum principle statement like this. We have a bounded domain. This omega will be this ball. And we have two, we have some singular points. So here are two singular points, x and p. One solution which is, this is more general which is on one half space. This should be minus gamma. So I shouldn't have a bar there. Okay. I shouldn't have a bar there. No bar there. So our minus gamma. And the V is belongs to this belongs to gamma bar. So then we have V greater than U on the boundary. And we want to have this order inside. So this is the maximum principle statement. And this, yeah. So if this is harmonic function, and we have that. So we first describe a proof of this without singularity. Namely, this statement. So suppose these two functions, again there's no bar here. So two functions, they satisfy, and for the time being we just think of this boundary gamma. We can think of that. So if we have an order on the boundary, then we have an order inside. But on the ball. Yeah. Yeah. They are equal because of this. Yeah. So this will be lambda. So this cancels, so y minus x. So this becomes y. Infinity. U x lambda at x. Yeah. Wait, wait. This will be bigger than that. Yes. Oh, we are going to prove that. We prove that. Yeah. That has to be proved. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. Yeah. That needs to be proved. Yes. Yes. Yes. That needs to be proved. And so I would say that's the main harder part to prove. Yeah. That's the only part in a way the tougher one to deal with. Well, I may not. But anyway, that state may not be proved. But when proving this, both require some thoughts. Yeah. But that's not obvious, this order. Not obvious. Yeah. So this is one step. One step. One step is to see the idea is assuming everything is smooth. Yeah. Then there's a separate step to address this singularity. So lambda of Au belongs to Rn minus gamma bar. So the original, I should not have that. So or lambda of Av belongs to gamma. So this means this is a strict subsolution. So for the gamma one case, this is just say Laplacian U is strictly positive. So this is a strict super solution. So in the Laplacian case, this is Laplacian V should be less than zero. So if one of them satisfies the equation super strict. So then this statement is very simple. So this is simple. So the proof is straightforward. So let's describe the proof. This proof. So then, so then what we prove by contradiction. So if not, one can, maybe one can draw something like this. This is going to be a V and maybe U would be something like this. This would be U. And here I will, this is omega. So V on the boundary is greater equal than U.  So there will be a picture like this. So then I use blue, blue can run, blue is okay. So then we multiply this V by, we multiply this V by a number. We can find a V bigger than one to put it in the following position. So, so namely, so this V hat is greater than or equal to U in omega. And V hat is bigger than U on boundary omega. And V hat actually equal to U at one interior point. So it's quite clear from the picture. So, and this equation, if we look at the expression of this AU, so lambda of AV hat is simply equal to a positive multiple of lambda of AV because of the expression. This is not readable anymore. So, so therefore this is still satisfying the same, same equation. So satisfying the same equation. So this is belongs to gamma bond. It's still satisfying the same equation because gamma is a cone, or definition gamma is a cone. So then at the touching point, so this is the expert. So at touching point, we see the gradient should be the same because there's a minimum point of the difference. So, and the Hessian should be greater than that. So of course, we already know that this is the same. Then if we look at the expression of AU, we see immediately that AV hat at X bar should be less than AU X bar. And certainly, eigenvalues will also have that order. So property, one property of one property of this gamma is if lambda is in gamma, mu greater or equal to zero, namely mu is every coordinates of mu is greater or equal to zero. Then the sum will still be in gamma. This follows from the convexity of gamma and the fact this gamma contains the positive cone. So now, for instance, we said if either, for instance, if we assume this, the other one is the same. If we assume this, then this will imply lambda of AU would also belong to gamma and would violate the assumption violating lambda of AU should be in Rn minus gamma. As I said, this should be taken out of that gamma bar. So it's a contradiction. So, so namely, if we have one of these conditions is strict, then the proof just follows from this very quickly. So then the question is, in this case, what, how to prove? Well, actually this proof may remind us of the, a proof which one may, maybe the first proof of many people have seen to prove the maximum principle for Laplacian. It's a similar proof. So then what do we need to do? So we only need to prove the following. We only need to say there exists a sequence of solution of, in C2 and Vi goes to V in C0 and lambda of AVI is in, in gamma. So we only need to approximate our V so that we have C0 convergence, but we are able to make this eigenvalue go to gamma. For example, you know previously this, this eigenvalue of V may very well be lying here. So you want to perturb your V in C0 norm controlling this eigenvalues inside. So, so this depends on the equation. So if, if you can do that, then it works. Our proof just works. So the main thing is to make this work. The main thing is to achieve that. You want to be able to perturb, to make up approximation of V, but to move this eigenvalues inside. So from, from super solution to strict super solution. So to do that, it's easier to work with this expression. It's harder to, well, well, for this it doesn't matter that much if we don't keep track of the dependence that carefully for this we don't need to. So anyway, so let's make a change anyway. So then we write it as in that. So we just rewrite this in terms of W. So that's the expression. When we compute, it looks like that. So let's, so we are, instead of perturbing V, we are going to perturb W. W expression looks neater. So, so let's take, define a function. Let's take this function. So we take some small data and this is just a exponential function. So then a calculation, a calculation will give the following. So for epsilon and delta small, we are going to prove this, we are able to prove this inequality. Here, we need the structure of this operator. So namely, this is equation dependent. We are working with this equation. It has this nice property. And moreover, the dependence of this, as in the proof one can see that the dependence of this only depends on C zero information. We'll see that. Just look at the proof. We'll see that the smallness depends only on a lower bound, a positive lower bound of W. So that's the reason all these theorems will work going to C zero sense. And to C, we'll of course, if one can have this inequality, that means from a W, where AW is say in the closure, when we make a small perturbation in C zero norm, we are pushing that inside by a strict positive amount of lambda. We are pushing it that way. So then after that, we can just take, say, we can take epsilon i equal to delta i goes to zero, and we define our V i through this W. And this V i will have the property because clearly this will go to that C zero, and this will... So how to make this calculation? So we can... So how to prove this step? Here it just says that if we can do this, so this approximation, this property will just follow immediately. So to prove this step, one calculate W plus epsilon because this AW is quadratic. So we have AW plus linear term in epsilon and plus quadratic in epsilon. So if we replace in this expression, hash and W by that, because this is the definition of AW. So then if you insert that, the second derivative will be replaced by AW itself plus first derivative information. Then we have that. So this is harmless because this is a cone structure says if you change, this is still in gamma bar. And that term, the gradient term actually is a good term. So this will help later also. So this is a good term actually. And then the explicit expression, if we compute, we will see that it's bigger than that because this term raised to a square can be absorbed by that and left with a delta square term. So for terms as small, one will have this. So the linear term is actually gaining that. So then we squeeze epsilon, we will have that. So this proves this inequality. So we have proved this maximum principle statement for smooth in the domain. So maybe I'll stop here.


Now tens of thousands of Spaniards have protested in Madrid against government plans to pardon 12 Catalan politicians who were convicted over the region's failed independence bid in 2017. Around 63% of Spaniards opposed grunting the pardons while some 25% backed it and about 6% were indifferent according to a poll published on Sunday. Madrid's municipal police force estimated 126,000 people took part while the national police put the figure at 25,000. In a non-binded report last month, Spain's Supreme Court said that it opposes potential gup-in-pardons for the Catalan separatist leaders.


So I'm recording this at the time of all the stay-at-home orders because of COVID-19 and you know a lot of stores are doing different things You know grocery stores and stuff still have to be open today I drove a little bit further past my grocery store because I wanted to go to Sam's Club the big box store because I really wanted to You know get larger amounts of stuff. So I don't have to go to the store as often I get there and there's a line out the door because they're only letting so many people in and it's a 20 to 30 minute Wait, so I'm not waiting in line So then I decided to go to Publix just the regular grocery store that I go to well I get there and they've been doing good things They put you know recently they put little plexiglass things up in front of the cashiers Even though the baggers don't have that at least it's something they've taped little lines on the floor when you're standing in line So you know it reminds you to keep your distance six feet and most these things I think are good I was surprised that recently They aren't requiring all their employees to wear masks.  I Didn't think much of it until a minute later There was announcement over the speakers of the store to remind the customers that if you look down when you're going down aisles There's arrows taped on the floor telling you which way you can go and this is to keep us Separated, you know our social distance social social distancing What a stupid idea Once I heard that I'm like, okay, so I don't get why all going the same direction is going to separate us more I'm still having to go around people who are to stand there looking at stuff at the shelves But this is what happens.  I don't need anything on aisle one or aisle two I get to aisle three and I can see what I need a little less than halfway down the aisle from where I'm at But I can't go that way So I had to go to the next aisle walk all the way down that aisle come back to this aisle and walk up This way at which point I got stuck behind someone going really slow that I couldn't get around Then finally got up to why I need it and then continued down that same aisle and that happened to me two or three times Because I'm not I don't know. Maybe most people go up and down the aisles. I go and I have a list of stuff I need I go I grab everything I need from this area I go down to oh, I need this I get to an aisle and I grab everything I need from that aisle and And I try to make it quick. I don't need everything on every aisle. So I'm not going up and down every aisle and literally Most of what I need was on the ends of the store, but I had to go down to the aisles in the middle and both of them I get to and I had to go down to the next aisle walk all the way down come around So literally almost doubled the time that I was in Publix and doubled the amount of area.  Let me know down in the comments below. Do you think this is a good idea? Do you think this is a bad idea? I don't see how it helps at all going the same direction doesn't keep me Set distance away from you if you're stopping looking stuff at the shelf I'm gonna walk around you whether I'm going the same direction you or not So it's not like we're all we're all going the same seat if everyone's going to go up and down every single aisle at the same Speed it makes sense, but people don't shop like that. I don't shop like that. I'm not gonna go down the aisles I don't need to go down so Good idea bad idea. Let me know what you think down in the comments I think it was a horrible idea and it actually just aggravated me that I had to go up and down more aisles than I needed to because of this so Let me know what you think have a great day You


Hello and welcome to episode 71 of the market maker podcast great to be back. You might have realized if you're a follower of the podcast series that there was a missing episode last week because I had my hands full unfortunately. Yeah, what's your excuse mean surely you don't have a good enough excuse. Just, just, just, you know, doing my part just helping humanity, adding another human being to the to the world. Yes. So yeah, can I just say amazing congratulations. Thank you. Yeah, I know. Because technically I'm still off at the moment you messaged me this morning.  So just go in the other room sleep all night. I'll take care of this. I'll take care of both of the little ones. Yeah, big mistake. The brutal night shift. Yeah, if I'm sounding a little groggy. That will be why but but yeah good to be back in the first off as I normally do a couple of shout outs in order I think because as I've been away, kept my eye on the few things and LinkedIn I saw some really great news and first off for our own team for for a change. And that is for for Milan. First class degree computer science, the unveiled to the world this week so massive congratulations to him I know he's had quite a few things to hand on his plate both professionally and personally so absolutely awesome job to to get that done. And now onwards and upwards, you know the real difference that he can make our know will start now for us and for himself I'm sure so congratulations to Milan, Sophie as well. Not to neglect the other members of our awesome tech team. She also got a first. I know she announced that a couple weeks ago, and she went to the best university in the world, not him Trent. So that's where I went, of course, and then, yeah, just to mention the other, the other members of that team as well who are joining now full time, having now graduated so it's great to have you on board as well with us every day and their leader of course my main man just the glue that holds everything together so can't can't not give a mirror shout out as well. So yeah, just to get that out of the way and say well done to that team. But yeah let's talk about what's been going on because I did catch the episode that you did I think the day after or the morning of when the baby arrived. Obviously the Fed pulled the trigger, and they went big, and then volatility is being quite high, which is quite typical go back and do your back testing of when I typically tend to take holidays and so. The pattern is there. So yeah US stocks have recorded their worst first half in more than 50 years, and we're recording this so it's first of July now so it's good really good time I like to do this often. I know you're the same pierces I take a bit of a stock check where we are various periods throughout the year and typically quarterly semi annually and it's good good conversation I know we can talk a little bit about potential portfolio rebalancing and these things are very important at this time and we can also talk a little bit about debt and capital or equity capital markets as well. So it won't all be global markets we can throw in a little bit of kind of IBD chat as well so yeah the main crux of this as we know has been very well commented on in press run away inflation fears of slowing growth aggressive central bank tightening now well on its way. The SMP finished yesterday session down around a percent but it means that the index is in bear market down 20.6% the first six months of the year. The one stat I did see, obviously sensationalizing it was the FT they were talking about stocks are basically lost $9 trillion. Can that be right, but they were quoting the. The SMP 1500, which not something I'd look at a great deal, but to give you a bit of context. If you are relatively new to markets with the stock indices there's a variety of them and typically they look at different types of stocks different size index weighting things like that. The SMP 1500 because it's typically the 500 largest companies that most people would look at as a benchmark the 1500 tracks small medium and large cap groups. So I guess it's a pretty good barometer of just the general encapsulating what's been going on but obviously starts to blow up that figure. If you're a journalist to the nine trillion marker. But then yeah tech stocks of course have been arguably one of the main casualties for 2022 to date they've lost almost 30%. So you can stick on another 10 on top of the SMP loss, but they haven't all been losers. Although we can talk through and I'd like to get your input as to the rationale behind some of the equity sector performances. Energy stocks up 29%. Now just to put this in context I said the SMP, which was down 21% energy was up 29%. So phenomenal period for energy stocks that then perhaps you could talk us through that and talk us through consumer discretionary stocks which I know was the complete opposite. Yeah, why these sectors have performed like they have and is there any expectations that you have going forward for the next six months. Yeah, so definitely some sensationalist headlines as you were saying in the, like the FT in the light this morning. Yeah that kind of front page your US stocks suffer sharpest first half drop in more than 50 years, which is actually correct. So the first half of 2017 was the last time we had a bigger sell off in the first six months but I mean, I guess it's just a bit of timing this sell off we've had, as you said 22%, sorry 20.6%. So it's the official Nasdaq 30%, but it's just the timing of the seller just happens that we peaked at the end of November. We kind of started to move to the downside and then. So just so happens the first six months of this year has been all downside. It's not to say that we haven't had bigger sell offs at any point in the last 50 years, because of course we have. We've had more quarter four 2008 quarter one 2009 the S&P sold off 66% or 68% think it was right so we've had way bigger moves lower. It's just that just in the first six months of a calendar year we haven't had as big a move as this so. We've been talking about this all year of course so everyone knows the reasons the inflation crisis the hawkish pivot from central banks the commodity price pressures as a result of geopolitics the supplies chain factors that are ongoing, you know, China and all the rest of it so we know why it's happening but yeah, we often mostly talk about the indices on this pod but it's time to just lift the bonnet. As you said, because you delve into then so rather than just taking a whole index you then go down to the sub sectors right so that we split stocks into different sectors different categories depending on what type of business it is. And these businesses depending on what type of service or product they're selling often behave in different ways, you know, in certain parts of the cycle so basically every single sector has declined in the first half of 2022 apart from one. And that's energy and it's for obvious reasons, the price of oils shot higher because of supply risks associated with Russia invading Ukraine and so clearly energy companies revenues are derived from selling oil and when the price of the product you're selling just ramps through the roof and that's great news for you and that's why like here in the UK, for example, the government's announced to kind of one off windfall tax on energy profit energy company profits because you know that they're benefiting from this crisis right so look energy, a lot higher 30 plus percent, everything else has dropped. Okay, but then when you look at everything else we often talk about defensive sectors, and then the opposite to that is what we call like cyclicals. The defensive sectors utilities consumer staples healthcare, they're the ones that they've sold off but they've sold off the least. I think it's utilities is the best utilities is down 2% when the whole index is down 20 right. Now why is that well a couple of reasons. What are you talking about electricity and gas right selling to consumers. And the thing about their revenue streams of those companies they're very stable.  You know you're going to your consumption of electricity and gas is going to be fairly steady right so from a revenue point of view these companies revenues are very stable. And so that becomes really attractive when you're heading for a downturn that stability can be very attractive that's one thing. The second point is about if you're in an inflationary environment. Obviously we are then actually it's that type of business that can far more easily pass on the higher prices to their consumer. So electricity prices go up right and actually we're used to our electricity prices going up and down on our electricity bill. And that's always the way it is right, but most companies it's a lot harder, you know if you've been, whatever if you've been selling Mars bars at one pound for the last five years and now you want to increase the price of one pound 20.  Not paying that right and so it's a lot harder for we talk about price being sticky. So a lot of people that manufacture and sell physical products that stickiness is really tough to pass these inflationary price pressures through to the customer right and so they have that hurts their margin and their profitability. So utilities are great a good inflation actually. So they've done well consumer staples, you know that stuff you buy, I don't know whatever Procter and Gamble or the often one I talk about its toothpaste or deodorant or shampoo. You're going to buy this stuff it doesn't matter what the economic situation is so again very stable revenues, health care similarly, if you're buying drugs will obviously you need to buy drugs and again that's not an economic decision. So again, stable revenues right so they're your three kind of defensives, then you have other kind of sectors that aren't defensive then more cyclical where the sales of these companies goes up and down with the economic cycle. So you know industrials and technology and consumer services, sorry communication services and then the big, the biggest loser of the whole lot in 2022 is something called the consumer discretionary sector. And that's like your, if you like your luxury goods. You know, are you going to buy your $2,000 burberry jacket, when you're worried that recessions about to hit, and you might lose your job. Well my, you know these discretionary products it's like nice, nice to have so you don't need them. I don't like the menu maybe aspires and I don't know but it's an economic decision where in a downturn you're not going to buy that stuff right so therefore those companies, they get their revenues are way way more cyclical. And so when we got a downturn ahead, no share prices get hammered the most. So yeah, I mean that's the situation. Yeah generally speaking, a six well it's actually a seven month downtrend, because it really started in December, and still going. A couple of stats for you then to kind of book book in that that segment is that looking at the S&P 500 worse performance over the first half from 1928 to 2022. So given a nice pool of data. So the first half of this year ranks talking calendar. So, understand the context you were saying earlier but looking at the calendar year 2022 ranks fourth worst. So more more downside than that was 1940 20.9% lower 1962 26.5% lower 1932, which any market historians will recognize was by far the worst that was down 44.5% for the first six months. So all three of the years I've just mentioned 1940 62 1932. Their second half of the year looked like this gone. So in third place, after being down around basically 21% it rallied 7.4% for the second half. So the second worst start to the year in 62 down 26 and a half percent then rallied 20% in the second half. And in 1932, the big downside that I mentioned actually rallied then for the second half of the year 53.4% So that's just just to put out there, because one of the things I did see was a note out of Morgan Stanley's wealth management team, and they were saying that watch earnings estimate cuts, and the bottom or bottoming in economic surprise indices to signal a buyable bottom. Now I know you don't like going around picking bottoms peers but earning season. And on your radar buyable bottom comes up all types of images. I think that. Yeah. So I guess you've rolled off those stats. I guess in there you're basically asking a question that you didn't actually verbalize which is what's going to happen in the second half of 2022 then. I would definitely not be bullish second half of the year. Yet, but definitely not. I think there's a big difference here well I'm not. I don't know what monetary policy was doing going that far back maybe but the thing about the second half of this year is the central banks are not coming to your rescue. Investors are very you know we've been used to without the luxury for a few decades that whenever stocks go down. Don't worry. Central banks are in with their stimulative programs and pumping them back up right that's gone in 2022. That is not going to happen. So that's a key factor to understand when you're trying to judge what's going to happen in the second half of this year what is the rebound potential. Well we might not even rebound at all we might actually continue to sell off by the way, but the central banks not going to drive the rebound. That's an important thing. So, for me, July is the critical month that will shape the next six months I think, and to keep elements to this month, the earnings season. So as you've just mentioned with quarter to now ended and so as normal, we now get big companies corporations reporting their performance in quarter to number one so that's looking backwards you know revenues and profits and all the rest of it. Much more importantly, yes guidance forecasting for the rest of the year, and are they going to revise down their earnings and almost certainly but how much are they going to revise it down. You know how badly did quarter to get impacted because of this inflation crisis this is what we want to find out. That's really key. That's happening throughout the month right takes like four weeks for all of these companies to report that's going to be ongoing. Another critical thing is on the 13th of July. 130pm London time. Market in your calendar US CPI for the month of June. Okay, this is massive, massive, massive, massive. We had some inflation data earlier this week. Earlier this week yesterday, actually. There was something called the court inflation is a tricky one that there's lots of different measures and different types and yesterday's measure was something called the PCE. And this is actually important because it's the feds preferred measure of inflation. And so we have some data that and it actually came in lower than expected. And at the time yesterday afternoon I was like, wow, okay, that's quite notable. And the thing is, I should, I should make clear, this is for the month of May. So this is PCE inflation data for May. So it's, it always gets reported two or three weeks after the CPI data is reported so this is, it's slightly old news we're ended. This is May now right and this is May data so it's a little bit further back was looking but it was lower than expected. And I thought, well, you might well see stocks rally off the back of this but and they did for all of about one minute.  And I thought that was incredibly interesting as a gauge of sentiments. There was a, there was a reason to buy yesterday afternoon. And while some I'm sure did in the end the sellers still were in control and the market closed lower for the day. I thought it was a really interesting sign that this is still a bearish market. There was in amongst all that inflation data there was something called the personal spending data for the US for the month of May. And we were expecting a strong increase 0.6% month on month so we're expecting consumers personal spending numbers to be 0.6% higher in May than they were in April. The actual reading was only plus 0.2%. So it's quite a big miss. What's happened is up until this point, was this inflation thing has been, you know, with us for a while, because the savings rate was so huge through COVID. People were saving a lot of money because they weren't going out.  What's been happening is even though prices have been ramping up quite rapid, very rapidly, consumers are still being out there spending, because they got so much cash right. It could be that people are looking at that personal spending number and going new. Maybe that's the first signal that inflation is now beginning to bite in terms of damaging consumption. Maybe that's possibly why but that's kind of just getting into the sort of the nitty gritty of the data that we get on a month by month basis. But that's for May, right? On the 13th of July, we'll get the CPI, the consumer price index for the month of June. That'll be the latest update. And that is key because of what happened last month. So the May inflation data that was announced on the, I think it was the 10th of June, showed that inflation had pinged back higher. Prior to that, we had thought inflation peaked in March, but May saw it jump back above and so proved that actually hadn't peaked, it's still going up. So what we want to know is, is that inflation trend definitely still back on the up? Is the June inflation number going to be larger than the May inflation number indicating this inflation problem still getting worse? And so, right, the Fed are going to have to carry on with their massive hikes each meeting. Is the May reading where you got that clip high, was that the anomaly? And actually, does the June reading drop back down and kind of the idea that the inflation peak is behind us, does that narrative come back to the table? So when we start feeling a little bit more relieved and maybe the Fed aren't going to have to hike as much and et cetera, et cetera, right? So that July 13 inflation number and the US earnings for quarter two is key. So ask me at the end of July. I'll have a more confident opinion on what's going to happen in the second half of this year. So that sounds like an incredibly sensible way to economically monitor the situation, but mechanically, what about this idea of rebalancing to just make sense of some recent market movements away from just kind of interpretation of forecasting on data. Is there other activities that would seasonally happen around now that can have influence on prices? Yeah, so the day your wife gave birth was the low of the year. I'm already long, Peter.  That was Fed Day, FOMC Day, and that currently is the low of the year. I mean, so far, this is only a couple of weeks ago, right? I'm not saying that is the low of the year. We're not going to break it. That's not what I'm saying at all. Right now, that's the low of the year. From that point, we actually had a bit of a rally over the last couple of weeks. We've had a bit of a rally. I'm talking about US stocks here until like the last couple of days and that's come back. All right, but we had a period there, really between let's say the, let's say the week beginning the 20th of June. That week, we had a solid, actually a pretty sizable bounce.  What's going on there? How do you explain that economically? And people were scratching their heads and we were trying to spin an argument. Oh, maybe people think that the recession is going to happen sooner because inflation is worse and the Fed are going to have to hike faster. The recession is going to come sooner. Well, then maybe the Fed won't have to hike as much. Oh, and maybe in 2023, they might start cutting interest rates and you were reading articles about this and people are trying to spin a story. But actually, I don't think it's got anything to do with economics at all. That rebound week beginning the 20th is most likely due to quarter end rebalancing. So this is a sort of phenomenon like in the asset management industry where you're running equity portfolios. Then you'll be, you know, your kind of language is what's my asset allocation weightings, you know, what's my strategy, and therefore right as a result of that what the weightings have what proportion of my portfolio will I be investing in equities for example. And let's say you've got 50% weighting in equities. Okay, let's say at the start of quarter to so on the first of April, you've got 50% 50% of your portfolios in equities and that's your strategy. But then as quarter to unfolds equities sell off sharply. Okay, for the whole a quarter to literally from the first of April to the 30th of June, it's a big downtrend. So what that means is if you do nothing with your portfolio. Naturally, you're going to see the proportion of your portfolio made up of equities dropping because the price of those shares are going down faster than other stuff in your portfolio. And it might be that by the coming to the end of quarter to your equity waiting is 45% now, not because you've been selling anything is just that's natural creep because of price change. Okay. So here you are at the end of quarter to nearly and your 45% equities but that's not your strategy. Your strategy is linked to a lot of stuff you've agreed with your client through like an investor policy statement and so it's really your job to make sure your weightings are in line with strategy and with constraints and risk parameters and so on. And so if you're now underway equities, you've got a what we call rebalance, which means you've got to bring your weightings back in line. You've got 45% equities but you should be 50. We're going to need to buy equities and a lot of them. And actually the net rebalancing figure was thought to be in the US this is just US equities only. The net rebalancing was plus $29 billion dollars in that week. Okay, so you add a net plus 29 billion on the rebalancing flows, which is almost certainly why the S&P and kind of US stock complex went up. It wasn't really anything to do with any kind of clever rationale around 2023 Fed rate cuts or anything, it was just straight up what we call window dressing rebalancing at the end of the quarter. So this has got me thinking, talking about Milan at the beginning of the episode. I'd love Milan to run some numbers for me about the severity of kind of stock losses over certain periods to then going into the seasonal pockets of quarter in the annual to see the impact. Can we quantify window dressing in duration of the dressing, if you want to call it that, and then the scope of size compared to the size of the loss that pre pre came that move so that could be interesting. Yeah, but okay. Well, let's, let's, let's pivot and let's talk about the fact that you know something I always say when I talk to the various different students I meet is that irrespective if you're going to work in global markets, or in the more classical kind of banking side of the bank, you definitely should have an idea about what's going on in the economy, because even if you're looking at mergers and acquisitions equity debt capital markets. A lot of this is influenced by economic conditions and the outlook for the economy, which ultimately is derived from things like monetary policy fiscal policy so on. And with that in mind then so let's pivot and let's talk a little bit about how fundraising has gone in the first six months of the year was gone, incredibly badly. If you're in the business like an investment bank of providing services to help companies raise capital. So there's kind of this very broadly kind of split the capital raising activities into three categories, equity. And then when I was going to say debt, you could say two categories equity and debt but within debt, there's two parts as bonds. So your corporate bonds your corporations are issuing bonds but then if the amounts of money being raised is a lot smaller than it's just loans right you'll go to your bank and you'll have a whatever revolving credit facility or you'll have an overdraft facility just borrowing money from your commercial bank right So equities, bonds and loans. Okay. And yeah fund raising stand 25% in 2022 compared to 2021 looking at the first six months of each of those years. On the one hand, I mean 25% that's a huge number you are the comp is really bad though because 2021 was off the scale the biggest year ever. That's the biggest year in history for capital raising. Okay, so that's a bit unfair. So when you say 25%, okay, coming off 2021 it was always going to be hard to try and compete with that but the numbers are that $4.9 trillion has been raised. So that's down 25%. So in 2021 it was 6.6 trillion. According to Refinitiv, by the way. But when you delve into it a bit closer so if we just park the debt side and look at equities. So equity raising this is like everyone will have heard of IPOs right so initial public offerings but also then follow on offerings. So IPO in the past, when you issued shares and you sold them and these shares now trade on the stock exchange, you can still raise more capital through issuing and selling equity. But it's not called initial public offering anymore you've done that so it's called a follow on offering right. So if you take IPOs and initial, sorry and follow on offerings then we're down 70%. Compared to 2021 70. So by the end of June we only had 252 billion raised and not only is it down 70% and you still might say well it's unfair to really just compare it to last year. But 252 billion capital raised in the first six months of a year. That's the lowest since 2005. That's globally. Okay, if you look at the US, it's even worse. If you look at US only. They raised just above, like only had 18 IPOs in the first half of this year, which is crazy and raised only just 40 billion. That puts it at the worst first six months since 1999. The worst equity capital markets in the first half of the year, this century in 2022, which is kind of insane and I guess it kind of makes sense right it's all part of this bigger macro story that we've described at length and, and I guess what happened is that there was one IPO in the start of May. Baishan mom, which is, I don't know if you've actually even kind of ever ever heard of them but they're an eye care company. So health health care basically they used to be called valiant pharmaceuticals maybe people might have heard of them more but they kind of rebranded. But on May, they were trying to raise capital, initial public offering, and they were looking to raise $840 million. It would have been the second would have been the second largest listing of the year. But it was appetite is so bad. In terms of risk. And, you know, in public markets you've seen that with the S&P and then as that blah blah blah in private markets as well. So they were trying to raise 840 million it went so badly the book building process and trying to get investors, you know, demand up and in the end they had to they had an IPO price at $18 per share which was kind of below range but in the end the only managed to raise 630 million. When they were trying to raise 840 to put that into context normally when you're running an IPO like this, your demand is normally going to be at least double. Right your book is going to be at least will have demand for at least double the amount we're trying to raise. And then investment banks can have the luxury of going right we're going to pick and choose from the bidders. So the type of investors we want to have owning part of our company, and you'll be looking for a mix between, you know, longer term asset manager investors that's investors who are in it for the longer term. So you might want 80% of your book to be long term kind of long only asset managers, and then you might want 20% that's more short term money like hedge funds, who are most likely going to be in and out quite quickly. So you want some of that because you want some liquidity on the secondary market on the stock exchange you want some volume, so that the you know on the order books, so that the price can behave well so to be that far below six the only raised 630 million aiming for 840. As soon as that happened, basically that's it has been no IPOs. That's because that it was so bad. It was like wow, everyone just kind of pulled back. And so it's really, really bad climate at the moment for, you know, trying to raise any type of capital, which makes it, and then you come back to the kind of tech sector on the more kind of high growth, sexy tech stocks and FinTechs. The big problem they have is that they're not profitable. So they're cash burning. And the problem is that they need to raise capital it's not a question of, we should we should we not let's try and time it for when market conditions are favorable for us to raise capital. Some of these companies that they have to otherwise they'll literally run out of money and get bankrupt. And so what what we're finding is that a lot of these tech, big FinTech names are having to raise that they're having to have what we call down rounds.  So these are rounds of funding to fuel this growth. And what we're finding is running a lot of down rounds which means that companies are having to raise capital at a valuation that's lower than the valuation of the previous round. And so they're basically having to accept a big discount from a previous valuation because they need the money. Otherwise they won't survive. And obviously this is incredibly negative amongst the investor community. Because basically you're having to take a big haircut. If you were involved in a previous round you're having to take a big haircut on the kind of valuation of your of your asset. So this is what's happening in private markets. And yeah, it's just really bad. So if you are working in that space in the kind of advisory arm, surely then it's not that these deals go away they just get parked. Would that be an assumption and actually we're going to go through the next flush when we see whenever that might be so yeah 1824 months or whenever but surely there's going to just result in pent up demand and everyone will be rushing. And there'll be astronomical demand at some point because there'll be just people wanting to get back in again is that is that a normal. Was that a true assumption to have. Yes, it's cyclical like everything right. So, well, if you have the luxury as a business, right, but you don't need external capital. So there's, even if you do need it, you can try and delay it, but how do you delay it we've got to cut costs. You've got to try and spend less money on a month by month, you've got to reduce your cash burden. But then this is all like vicious kind of negative feedback because how do you do that we lay people off. Maybe I might, I might lay off some autonomous car driving engineers and 10% of my workforce. Exactly. So I know it's a bit of a spiral because if everyone's laying people off well and obviously this just makes the recession, even worse. And then the fundraising conditions stay bad for longer. So obviously only so much cost cutting you can do right in the end, you've got to even if you get down to the real skeleton. You've obviously still got to be operating and trying to grow the business to try and actually achieve the end goal where you actually turn profitable. So, if you do have the luxury though where you don't need capital, and you can cut costs if you want then yeah fine people are just parking the bus and we'll wait, we'll wait 12 months. You're always going to get a rebound. We're just not quite exactly sure yet whether or when that rebound would be, but yeah at the moment we're really right at the trough probably office, you know, incredibly negative kind of fundraising conditions out there in the private markets. Sure. Well, look, great explanation is always peers and a good way to kind of fit in for the different chat to the supplement the global macro kind of view on things so we'll call it an entity episode there. Don't forget to check out the show notes of the episode for links to either our finance accelerator simulations they are still going on so if you're a student and you have finished now and you're free for the summer. If you're looking for something to do. Well, the summer is a great time to skill up, get some practical experience and yeah we do this for absolutely free. It's sponsored by Morgan Stanley, none other than the major US investment bank themselves so we'd love to get you with that so it's a two hour free sales trading market making asset management simulation. Again, check out the show notes to register we do it every week. And also for our daily newsletter that we put out and yeah I'll be keen to get back in the hot seat as of Sunday night. In fact, look out for the amplify me YouTube channel my look ahead for the week will go out as per normal and then yeah. If you've been missed. It's good to have you back just the world. You know, what's going to happen in the second half of 2022. Well, all right, the Fed aren't going to help you out, but at least Anthony chunks back at his desk. That's it, you know, Jay power was texting me is what's happening me last week. I was like, look Jay, just hold off that I'm not going to have any more children so don't worry. All right, cheers. Thanks everyone and see you next week. Have a good weekend. Take care.


Hey everybody for us here ripping 20 22 select baseball hobby All box case number 17 random divisions. I'll show the results right here You can always find these at late in sports cars calm. Thanks for joining everybody and good luck. See what we got Just a sound real quick Trying to make it sound a little better. All right. Here we go And that's not a lot Squeaking ones. They're starting rating stuff too. Yeah, definitely come say hey, Sal It will be here breaking by and selling in half to 149 cubs Diamond level silver Yachty Malina Cardinals Give me a little of all the 250 rookie Jersey Giants and Fuego and Neal Cruz as Whites candle our Charlie Blackman out of 50 for the Rockies Raleigh the 75 on the auto for the Mariners Silver Joe Adele angels Henry Davis to 199 youth explosion auto nice hit pirates Fractal rookie Redulfo Castro pirates. Sorry refractor silver rookie Red rookie Colton Welker to 199 Rockies Palamoleta 250 rookie Jersey Braves Silver Altuve numbers Tri-color rookie White Sox Gavin sheets Machado Tri-color and Mundo Sosa Cardinals Tri-color brand of Woodruff Brewers Drill Alice 75 Jersey Auto D-backs Silver Concourse Larry Walker Rockies Brad George Springer to 199 Blue Jays Brian Sandberg cubs light blue. Yeah, light blue to 149 Got a gold Salvador Perez to 10 Royals Premier level Aaron Ashby to 250 rookie Jersey Brewers Nolan Aronato Silver Tyler McGill the 299 rookie Jersey Auto Mets at Brash rookie Jersey Mariners Got zebra stride Colton Wong Brewers premier level zebra stride or no, sorry concourse zebra stride nice Like we've seen a silver Orioles So Stephen Yeah, I agree. I know Brad. I was listening to it earlier too. And I was like, yeah I just don't know what to do. You know David Fletcher angels. I Was like audio is working. So I guess we're just gonna have to carry on for the moment Silver Diamond level Jay Ram Cleveland got to stay on schedule today.  I could see it OBS Silver Shohei Otani concourse for the angels Yeah, it's so all it's always so hard to like replicate the Nash and the sound in like a big room like this Rookie Jersey Reds CJ Friddle Silver Mike trout angels we just need to bring a literal booth a literal sound booth Recording mini recording studio to do breaks in Right color akil but do tigers? Yeah, people are not gonna know where to go now Shane Bieber premier level the 99 lime green Cleveland Kind of joking kind of not though the 99 Connor Wong Ricky Jersey out of Red Sox All these visually it looks good. Everything else is set up. Well, who looks good Mercedes at 25 patch auto It sucks cracked ice It is a good idea Hard to implement diamond level silver. That's how they're a Neal Cardinals Red Renfro to 199 Brewers You pes the 250 Rookie Jersey Cardinals Try color Brandon Lau rays. So Brad, we're gonna road trip to the national next year. You in We're gonna drive to Chicago Silver diamond level Trevor story Rockies and Aaron judge to 149 light blue Yankees killing my shoulders So low forward red key K to one 99 Red Sox We're not going next year, Brad Try color Rookie Caster for the Pirates Mount Castle the 250 Jersey Card Orioles Silver Nikki Lopez Royals Silver Diamond level Royals Brady Singer Drew Ellis rookie Jersey the backs O'Neill Cruz silver and Fuego Silver Rookie Concourse Camila de Val Giants Try color Rookie O'Neill Cruz Pirates tie-dye Miguel Rojas Marlins 20 Gold the tan Luke Williams RPA Philly's nice Louis and Diaz to 99 Jersey Auto Marlins Concourse Rookie Auto Lopez light blue to 149 Blue Jays To 99 one you pes Rookie Jersey Auto Cardinals To 199 Glenn auto Rookie Jersey Auto Rangers Wanda Franco and Fuego Silver Concourse Ken Griffey Jr. Mariners Yeah, we'd have to stop in Atlanta. We road trip to Chicago Silver Patrick wisdom on course for the Cubs Red Ozzy Albie is the 199 Braves Yeah, pretty I'm like 99% sure it's in Chicago next year. Try color Andy Abania's Rangers Matt Brash Rookie Jersey Mariners And tie-dye Reed Detmer's Angels Rookie Concourse at 20 nice tie-dye Lars new bar Rookie out of 149 Cardinals Gold Louise heal Rookie Patch Yankees the 10 Knights Silver Moon shots Jared Walsh Angels Try color Nate low Rangers Silver Raffi Devers Red Sox Silver Concourse raise Mike Zanino guys to skip the stadium club collection of Derrick Jeter filled up random hit style Silver Concourse Giancarlo Stanton Yankees plan auto Rookie Jersey Rangers Got silver sparks Tim Anderson White Sox Try color Freddy Peralta Brewers White Premier level Chris Taylor Dodgers out of 50 a Bari at a 260 Jersey Auto Angels Jaime Bariah Silver Premier level Adames for the Brewers Concourse light blue Tyler melee to 149 Reds Red Joey Votto out of 199 Reds Try color Colton Wong Brewers Sharon Durand at 250 Rookie Jersey Red Sox And Colton Welker to 199 Rookie Jersey Auto Rockies manual focuses on Rally to 199 Rookie Jersey Auto Mariners To 99 Hoy Park Jersey Auto Pirates Silver Premier level Luis Castillo Reds Yeah, so I pretty much just like focus on the boxes like the cards. I would think that's better Sorry, my eyes are pretty blurry when I did it this morning one of Broncos silver concourse albies for the Braves Be better right there Hater lime green to 99 Brewers When auto red out of 199 Rangers It's much better now.  So it's good. You guys can't hear that at least tie-dye Jake Kronoworth Padres the 20 nice tie-dye Edward Cabrera to 25 practice Rookie patch four color Marlins Silver concourse Brian Reynolds Jake McCarthy to 250 Rookie Jersey D-backs Silver Brian Reynolds phenomenon Pirates Silver concourse at Mundo Sosa Cardinals Silver concourse Rookie Gavin sheets White Sox Yeah, it comes in here in there. I can see it coming in I got TJ Fridle Rookie Jersey Reds Silver Babe Ruth the numbers like I know when I talk it'll kind of just take over and it won't like you won't hear too much of it It's pretty damn well. We're gonna adjust it here after this break as I'm gonna give radical Try color Chris Taylor's Hodgers So we'll see if we're gonna get it better tie-dye Jared Walsh angels at a 20 It was just not this loud earlier. It's hard to predict like Hard to get the settings right for something like this Rickie Jersey auto angels three dentmers to 299 Willie Calhoun of 49 Jersey auto Rangers light blue Eddie Matthews Brewers To 149 Red you on Moncada White Sox to 199 Try color Rookie teacher Fridle Reds One you pay is Rookie Jersey Cardinals Armin kill a brew I could kill a brew right now Silver for me levels at Gallant D-backs for me a level Red Glaber Torres to 199 Yankees Silver Diamond level Rookie Hans Kraus Phillies Josiah Gray Rookie Jersey Nats non-numbered silver and Fuego Cattel Marte D-backs Try color premier level Jordan Montgomery Yankees Vidal Ruhon raise Rookie Jersey Silver premier level Dylan C. Swight Sox light blue Freddie Peralta to 149 Brewers I hope everyone's having a good time watching the break. Hope you're enjoying your Wednesday Jose Barrero. It's a 99 Jersey auto Reds are working hard here for you Also working hard back at the shop Try color Ibanez Rangers Silver Rookie D-backs at beer Try color Austin Hayes Orioles out of 99 Not try color. That was a lime green And Jackson co-art of 99 Royals auto there Actually everywhere in here It's break scheduling for you and here is a stadium club members only Stadium club members only Derek Jeter guys let's get it filled up 15 to go every spot hits Michael Brantley try color Astros You'll get a box to put one in 25 Kyle Muller cracked ice patch Ice one Braves 25 silver Cal Ripken jr. It's like stars Orioles Got a tie-dye Hey, oh, it's honey Dude that is gorgeous Five it's oney Hey, we can make this one Heck yeah on the tie-dye show. Hey, I'm trying to get the light off of it There we go That's sick. We'll get that back for you angels Edward Cabrera 250 with a rookie jersey marlins silver diamond level Austin Riley Braves Sparks to 75 Matt Manning auto tigers Silver premiere level you Darvish Padres Miguel Cabrera to 149 tigers light blue Eli Morgan at 25 practice rookie patch auto Cleveland silver concourse Liam Hendricks white socks Reds at gallon premiere level of 199 d-backs Try color rookie set beer d-backs That's why I want to think about selects. They should get different boxes The cards can stay in one spot silver diamond level rookie reds alejo Lopez silver concourse from oreas cleveland Josiah gray rookie jersey gnats non-numbered and fuego silver manning machado Padres tri-color scherzer for the Mets light blue Logan Webb out of 140 big ding on that one It's 149 Logan Webb Giants an empty box and wrapper for you on that one Red concourse Alcantra marlins to 199 Tony santi on the 75 auto for the Reds I'm a Berea at a 25 practice patch auto angels lime green rookie jake mires houston out of 99 tri-color charlie morten atlanta Spencer strider braves rookie jersey and silver premier level johnny bench reds asshole Probably pretty decent here Looks better than I was in chicago the food Jackson maryl auto for the Padres Tri-color to 99 Opadres nice prospects hit there Yeah, guys, I did drop a link in chat for the stadium club collection derrick jeter Breaking at 5 p.m. Today a tri-color patrick wisdom cubs random hit style 16 high-end hits per case redemption wonder franco spark signatures tri-color big congrats to the rays I don't want to yell to that. I'll make the mic cut out That's huge though. Congrats rays pretty good case silver bay ruth Hey guys, like I said, I'm gonna give brad a call right after this break and we're gonna adjust the audio a bit to see if we Make it better calcronchial diamond level silver cleveland Got a gold coming up now. It's paedal onzo Hey go nine and ten. What a box to finish the case here Holder Pete sweet Pete Eli Morgan cleveland rookie jersey Silver on fuego Javi Baez has a tiger Tri-color Ken grippy jr. Mariners mere Garrett to 99 jersey card reds Alarm green uh adam frazier to 99 Seattle Hey guys, sorry if there's like glare here and there It's just a lot different from this from the breaking it at home Rookie explosion redetmer short printed insert great box to fit the best box to finish the case here. I'd say silver louis castillo red joa del angels out of 199 And that's gonna do it. Thanks again, everybody Let's do a quick recap here So you had a short print colton wong on the zebra Autos now jackson meryl. Tony sancy on matt manning Sorry guys jackson co are henry davis cow rally. I'm a baria. Eli morgan pile moller, jose barrero willy calhoun redetmers everde cabrera Louis june park Calaralee colton welker. I'm a baria louis gill when auto one yippez louis indias luke williams gold practice seven russetes Conor wong tylin mcgill drew ellis. We had a tie-dye concourse shohei otani. That's one T And a redemption for the race is wander franco sparse takes tri-color. Thanks everybody Let's keep going


Hey guys, it's Jen from iCrateCrafts. Today I'm going to show you how to turn an ordinary dollar store mug into a really awesome Christmas present for under $3. All I have in here is a pair of socks and then also a bag. So I'm gonna show you really quick. I saw this at the dollar store and I'm like, I can turn this into something. So I'm gonna show you one without a bag. This one just says cozy socks here and it's pair of socks with the mug. So normally I do stuff with the Cricut. I'm gonna show people without a Cricut how to create these and then I'm also gonna do another tutorial on how to do this. But this just came from the dollar store and I thought it would be perfect.  And it depends if you want the tissue paper or not or if you wanna put it in a bag, however you want it to look but I'm just shoving it way down there so you can see the socks stick out. So I have a whole assortment of socks here. I got all these from the dollar store. You can pick them up from Walmart but I wear these all the time in the winter and they're so soft and comfortable and for a dollar, can't go wrong. So I'm just gonna choose the pink pair.  All you gotta do is find the center in here and push it in and just like that you have a homemade gift for under $3. So I'm creating these because one of the stores that I sell in has a holiday trail where tons of people come in and they buy holiday stuff for Christmas time. So I'm gonna put these in here so I put about $2.30 into it. I'm gonna try to sell these for $10 and kinda see how it goes. You have to think that I took $2 out of it so that's $8 and then she takes 20% off of that. So we're gonna see how much I make on these but aren't they cute though? I mean it's so simple to create and you can put candy in here if you want or different color tissue paper or like I said, you can wrap it like this with a bag but I actually kinda like without the bag. But again, quick, easy tutorial. I hope this helps you guys. I hope you like this. If you do try this, show me what you guys make. I would love to see. So stay tuned for more tutorials. I'm actually gonna do next. I'm gonna show you guys really quick what I'm gonna show you guys how to do next. So I made these little ornaments and it just says, let it snow with ornaments that I purchased from, I think it was Hobby Lobby. I got it 50% off. So I got 24 of the ornaments for $10. So it comes out to about four cents apiece and then the little fake snow in here and the little snowballs came from the dollar store. So it was a dollar and I filled six of these up with it. So it's under $1 to make these. I actually have my little tag on it so I'll show you. So I have to put tags on them when I sell things. I'm going to be trying to sell these for $8. My ornaments go really well at the stores that I sell at. So that's how I do it. So stay tuned for this. I'm gonna show you guys next how to create this in the next video. So hit that subscribe button if you're not already and give me a thumbs up if you like this video tutorial. Let me know guys too. Do you like these short little five minute videos?  Happy crafting everyone.


The football league's bottom side going into this weekend. Testing times for Matt Gray and Sutton, as it feels like their home form is going to be huge if they are to turn themselves away from troubled waters. Bradford here still with Kevin Macdonald at the helm, as the trial of the player head coach continues. It's still ongoing. No doubt a win today may just make a decision. Become just that more imminent in the coming days before kickoff. Sutton and Bradford, and everyone else inside the stadium will remember how much of those who made the ultimate sacrifice. Defeats in a row for Sutton, and they've got to turn this around. Oh, Brian, now it's Josh Coley. He's away from his man. He's got a chance to finish off, and it's done just that. Josh Coley, drawn into the side for this game, and is on the score sheet within the opening five minutes as Sutton have the lead. Well, there's a Sutton player sent to the deck. It was Harry Smith through to where Brian, he then played it along towards Josh Coley. Slots it past Harry Lewis, and Sutton are in front. Composed and can't finish it was. Short from the front. Bradford just a little bit switched off there. Cross goes in, and that for a corner. We're able to be switched on there, and that ball did come into the penalty area. The way to the back post. And the head of that back across. Goes for another corner. Adding up on them as Sam Stubbs gets his head to it. Went to the back post. We know Sutton are a very big side in terms of height. But they're just about dealt with it. To the right corner goes in this time. Sawanmi meets it. Headed wide to the goal. Here's a real towering figure in there, isn't he? Omar Sawanmi, the Sutton centre-back. Corner in, and he's nowhere near the goal with that header. Right-hawk. It's a good play by the Bradford number eight. High ball. Not found into Halliday. It's away from Beauty Moon. What's the debate? It's promising this for Bradford. Cross going in. And we'll now go towards Walker. This one's gone now, and it will be a Sutton free kick. Fringement spotted there by the referee, Oliver Langford. There's better signs from Bradford that they are in this contest. Lovely little ball, which right-hawk clipped in. It was a foul by Cook. He's led to the free kick being given. Warming around him, they've won it back very well. Here is now Brad Halliday. Coming forward, getting the cross in. For a corner by Sawanmi. Halliday with a lot of room ahead of him to run in to make space, did get the cross in, but Sawanmi was alert to head out. Delivered in, goes right away in there. Hit again. It will go for another corner. Smallwood was the man who met the initial ball in. He's headed towards the back post. Did it go there as Sawanmi was in the way now, headed out for a corner? Sutton have only won twice in the league this season. Both of them here. There's Notts County on the opening day. It was the first of the two. They did beat Walsall to get the second of their two wins. As they head away by Sawanmi. That's a beautiful little bit of skill by Walker to feed it into Andy Cook. Goes on the deck, hit by Gilead. And it's hit. Sawanmi's smack bang in the face. As he's left in a heap on the floor, it's out for a Bradford corner. He certainly took a bit of a powerful strike in the face. That is for sure. Gilead got right underneath that strike. Sawanmi in the way. Doing his defensive duties. Penalty area from this throw. And there's the chance for Ossidabi. It's another corner. It took a nick off a Sutton player. As it would go on to the roof of the net. The throw came in with pace. Ossidabi would attack it. Will take a nick. Ossidabi's defensive kit seat. Gives it in again. Goes right the way. And it's a Cook. And Bradford have equalised. It's the big man. It's their number nine. It's Andy Cook with the equaliser. A critical time they've needed. The mean machine in front of goal to stand up and be counted. And he's done just that. Dean Buzanis in no man's land. Couldn't move quick enough. Cook. And Bradford punishing. And as it's 1-1 here. Much better show in this second half by Bradford. All-curt. Ossidabi. They'll get it in there. There's the header. It's off for Cook on the volley. And it's off the woodwork. Andy Cook so unlucky. And mightily close to putting Bradford in front for the first time in this game. Only for the crossbar to save Sutton. Ossidabi got the ball in. They won the header into the box. It dropped for Cook. Could not have hit that any better. Bounces off the bar, which is probably still shaking. Ossidabi battling away with Joseph Kitzi. That's good play by Ossidabi. Cross in towards Cook. He was flinging himself at it. But as well off target with that header. A real difficult one to execute right to be fair. Wonderful play by Ossidabi. Didn't give up. Felt he had a good chance to get across in, which he did. Cook met it. Couldn't get it on target. Some of the long throw. Won't go back out. To the throw by Jackson here. Will come in. And Butemann rises. And Sutton are back in the lead. His first goal since the opening day win against Knox County. That's Sutton on course. But just their third win in this League 2 campaign. Well, Jackson. And then play the pass across. Would come in. Butemann would get up. Lewis sprawling and diving. May have helped it in, you know. And Harry Butemann gets the acclaim. As it's his header that's put Sutton back in the lead. Edging closer. Victory here. Sutton as the whistle goes. It's a big, it's an important win for Sutton United. Just the third time they've tasted success with the third of their three wins coming at home like the previous two. They were in front early on with a goal from Josh Cowley. Bradford equalised with Andy Cook but the winner would come. Late on from Harry Butemann. They still do remain at the bottom of the League 2 table. But encouragement to take forward. It's finished here. Sutton United 2. Bradford won.