Cameron  00:06

Welcome back to QAV. This is episode 621. We’ve just been talking about sex palaces off air. You missed out on a great conversation. It’s the 23rd of May 2023 to 2:22pm on the East Coast. Would have been my dad’s seventy-fourth birthday today, if he hadn’t died twenty-two years ago. How are you, TK?

Tony  00:28

Good. Well, we were talking about Tiberius, and if anyone wants to know the context of the sex palace conversation, look up Tiberius and the history of Rome.

Cameron  00:39

That’s where it started. Listen to my Life of Caesar series. It’s a lot of fun. Or just watch the opening of Caligula because you see a sex palace in the opening of Caligula. That’s where the great Tito whatever his name was, Malcolm McDowell, film from the mid 70s, starts in Tiberius’ sex palace with Peter O’Toole as Tiberius enjoying his debauchery.

Tony  01:07

Well named Peter O’Toole.

Cameron  01:12

Particularly for that film.

Tony  01:14

Oh dear.

Cameron  01:14

You see a lot of tools in that film. Rough week in the markets, TK. Rough, rough week.

Tony  01:22

Yeah. You’ve got to laugh, haven’t you?

Cameron  01:23

Or cry. Yes, rough week. Picked up a bit today, but there’s just been a lot of selling. I don’t know about you, but particularly for the light portfolios. It hasn’t really affected the dummy portfolio a great deal. I think I had to sell maybe one thing out of my Super. But, yeah, for the light portfolios I’ve had to sell a lot in the last week, and it’s been very tough to find much to buy. Very tough.

Tony  01:49

Same. I had to sell a couple of gold stocks I had, Perseus Mining and West African Resources today. Or the last two days. I haven’t been able to find anything to buy either, so I’m sitting on a bit of cash. I can’t even double buy something, that’s how light the pickings are at the moment.

Cameron  02:05

And it’s not because gold’s a sell, right, it’s just a Josephine. They rule oned or 3PTL’d or something.

Tony  02:12

Yeah, I think I was rule one down at both of them.

Cameron  02:14

Wheat did become a sell when Alex did the charts for us on Monday morning, which meant I had to sell GrainCorp out of the light portfolios. It’s been an interesting time.

Tony  02:27

I’m also running a paper portfolio for QAV stocks above a score of 0.2, and I only managed to buy two stocks for that portfolio in the last month or so since I started it, and I had to sell both of them. So, it’s sitting in cash. So, that’s how difficult the conditions are at the moment.

Cameron  02:45

Well, I want to talk to you a bit about that when I get to the light portfolios, because I seem to have been sitting on a lot of cash for a long time in the light portfolios. And it’s hurting us, comparatively, looking at the STW. When you’re sitting on a lot of cash that’s not doing anything, you’re going to underperform the index, right. But before I get to that, let me talk about the dummy portfolios. So, I did my weekly report today, and just again, for my own sanity, reminded myself that when I look at the two year All Ords chart, it’s barely gone anywhere in two years. That’s pretty much exactly where it was two years ago. Maybe up by, I don’t know, 3 or 4% or something, but it has been a two-year holding pattern, more or less, for investors. It’s gone up and it’s gone down, but if you compare today to where it was two years ago, it’s barely moved. So, it’s no wonder then that the dummy portfolio over the last few years is only up 6 or 7% per annum, CAGR per annum, over that period, versus the STW, which is pretty much the same. A little bit ahead of us today, but give or take, it’s pretty much neck on neck over the last year. So, it feels like a lot of hard work to do nothing. A lot of hard work to get nowhere in two years.

Tony  03:58

Yeah, that was the old rule when I was working corporate: you got paid bonuses every year until the year you worked the hardest, and then you got nothing. Which is usually the case, right.

Cameron  04:08

Yeah, I’ve done way more selling in the last couple of years, way more trading than we did in the early days of the podcast for no return, but I guess we’re doing the trading because the markets bumpy?

Tony  04:19

Well, yeah, I mean, interest rates have had a big effect, I think, on the market. The rising interest rates have had an effect on the market, big effect.

Cameron  04:25

Rising interest rates, trade wars, real wars. It’s been a bumpy couple of years.

Tony  04:32

Yeah. Having said all that, getting 6% or 7% a year during that kind of turmoil is pretty good.

Cameron  04:38

Yeah. And then I look at the ten year All Ords chart, which looks great. It’s gone up a lot in the last ten years. I wonder to myself, well, what will it look like ten years from now, or ten years from two years ago. Eight years from now.

Tony  04:53

If we knew that, we wouldn’t have to worry about investing ourselves.

Cameron  04:58

Well, we kind of do know, right? Unless this time it’s different, Tony. “This time it’s different, Tony. It’s always different, Tony.” Unless it’s different, the market always goes up over ten years, right? Historically.

Tony  05:10

Well, it should, yeah. On average it goes up 10% a year, historically. But you know, there have been long periods like the GFC. Ten years since the GFC, it’s basically back to where it started from.

Cameron  05:21

That’s right. Yeah. But that was, that was a big tank, the GFC. But anyway, the QAV report since inception. For new listeners, that’s September 2019. Dummy portfolio is up around about 16.24% per annum according to Navexa, versus the STW, the SPDR 200, which is up 7.18. So, we’re still doing about two and a half times better than the index since inception. This financial year, though, it’s up 16.5%, we’re up 8.5%. For the quarter, it’s up 1.6. We’re down a quarter of a percent now. We were ahead of it for the quarter a little while ago, early on in the quarter, but we’ve taken a bit of a dive recently. So, it’s been a difficult period. Haven’t been sitting on cash in the dummy portfolio, though, so I can’t blame that. We’ve just had a couple of stocks… Well, nothing’s done really well. It’s kind of been tough times.

Tony  06:29

And I think there was, according to Navexa, the report I got there was one big drop in the dummy portfolio’s holdings.

Cameron  06:35

In the last week?

Tony  06:37


Cameron  06:38

CLX, which we’re going to talk about. Bloody CLX. So, when I checked this morning, we hold it in the dummy portfolio and it’s still above it’s buy price in the dummy portfolio. Also held it in the light portfolio. When I checked my alerts at 8 am this morning, 9 am, it had just become a rule one yesterday afternoon. But it was, like, you know, 11% down. And the AFR said the market was gonna go up today and I had to go out for a couple of hours, go to kung fu, whatever. So, I thought, oh well, I’ll wait until the market opens. I’ll wait until 11. You know, you always say wait till 11 and see how things pan out. I was at kung fu, got back at lunchtime, and it had dropped another 9% this morning. So, it was down like 20% by the time I finally sold it. Checked the news, nothing about CGI logistics, or something?

Tony  07:35

CTI logistics, yep.

Cameron  07:37

CTI. I could see nothing in the Fin, nothing in HotCopper. Nothing in the news. Nothing on Stock Doctor, but they’re down 20% in a day. So, I don’t know what the hell’s going on there. But no bueno. Anywhere else I should look?

Tony  07:53

No, that’s what I would do. I just had a quick look then; I couldn’t see anything to explain the drop. Is it ex-dividend? Hang on, let’s check ex-dividend. You check that?

Cameron  08:01

No, the dividend was back in April.

Tony  08:04


Cameron  08:04

I did check that. So, yeah, it’s just one of those ones that came out of nowhere. It’s still above water, but it did drop… Well, actually, the report that I ran this morning on our last seven days for the dummy portfolio said it was down 9%. It’s probably down a lot more than that now. It was up, obviously. It’s still above water, as I said. It was up, like, 20 odd percent last week in our portfolio, and now it’s probably getting close to a rule one. No, but it’s probably back to what we paid for it. The other one that shocked me during the last week was Alloggio Group, ALO. As I was calling it on the day, How Low Can You Go? How low can you go. On the 24th of March, and it was a good performer in the dummy portfolio, but on the 24th of March, they announced they’d entered into a “scheme implementation deed with Next Capital, pursuant to which Next Capital would acquire 100% of the company’s shares. The proposal is to be implemented by way of a company scheme of arrangement for 30 cents per share in cash, which will be subject to shareholder and call approval.” Now at the time, it was trading around about 19 cents, 18/19 cents. Shot up close to 30 cents, up to about 28 cents on the announcement. It was great. Happy Days for everybody. QAV gets in there, finds a stock that’s undervalued, buys it. Somebody comes along, pitches a higher price. Happy days. I’m drinking champagne. On the 15th of May it goes into a trading hold. On the 17th of May it comes out of the trading halt and announced, “after a lower than expected April 2023 trading results with May and June 2023 results and anticipated to be lower than previously forecast, the company’s earnings have been negatively impacted.” The share price collapsed down to 16.5 cents, and it was a 3PTL sell. We still got out of it at a slight profit, amazingly. But something fishy going on there, I thought to myself. There’s an acquisition underway, all of a sudden, they go into a trading halt, and then come out and say, “nah, bad results are coming,” and the share price plummeted. I feel like they’re Waystar Royco. Next capital is Lukas Matson.

Tony  10:38


Cameron  10:39

GoJo. Yeah, he’s like, well, it’s not that Logan died, but the results are down and the share price… Like why am I paying 30 cents a share for this thing now when your share price is only 16 cents a share? I think it’s time to go back to the negotiating table.

Tony  10:55

Yeah. I should be clear. I know one of the directors of Next Capital as well. Not that we’ve ever spoken about this acquisition.

Cameron  11:02

Oh, well, time to get that person on the show.

Tony  11:09

If ASIC are listening, I haven’t ever spoken to him, to Patrick about this. I don’t know what’s going on. But yeah, I did read through the announcements after you raised it before the show, and it does look interesting. I mean, yeah, they’ve come out and said they’re not going to make the sort of projections they said they were going to make, but I think I had a look, and it was only like a million dollars less than what they were projecting. And it’s a small cap company, so a million dollars is probably, you know, material. 25% of their profit, maybe. So, my gut feel says that they’re going to still do a deal. It may not be at 30 cents, but again, the announcement says Next Capital haven’t walked away. They triggered a mediation clause to talk about the takeover. So, I don’t know, I’m just guessing here. I suspect that they’ll still do a deal at some stage. The share price actually recovered today. It’s back up to 19 cents from 16. It probably won’t get back to 30. If I was Next Capital, I wouldn’t pay as much as I was originally offering if the company has come out and said, “we’re earning less than we forecast.” But well, who knows? I’m not in the room, as they say, to these discussions. But if the company was attractive a month ago, and it’s come out and said we’re not going to make the same profit we’re going to make, but we’re still going to make a good profit, yes, I asked to revise my offer, but I wouldn’t walk away. So, we’ll see.

Cameron  12:34

Well, that was painful.

Tony  12:35

It’s painful, but it’s also a small cap stock. I mean, that’s the other thing, too; it’s such a low volume of shares. It’s $40,000 a day, I think. Volatility tends to go hand in hand with those small ADTs.

Cameron  12:48

And, of course, the instincts from QAV investors when something like this happens, well certainly mine was, well, this is an overreaction. We should just hold on to it and it’ll probably go back up. It’ll probably turn around. And as you say, it has come back a little bit. But rules is rules. So, I did sell it on the day, because it could have gone the other way, too, could have fallen further. So, just to remind people, Alloggio specialise in managing short term accommodation from one night to three months. “For holiday makers, international travellers, corporate guests, government and private sector contractors. It provides the services through hotels, motels, and short-term rent rolls.” So, I don’t know what’s happening in the short-term accommodation market.

Tony  13:43

Well, they came out…. I read the announcements — and again, I don’t know this company very well — but they came out and said that they would normally expect to get higher rentals after Easter, and that they hadn’t kept pace with last year. Mainly because people are a little bit tighter on cash because of rising interest rates, or maybe a little bit uncertain, and therefore aren’t taking as many holidays. That’s what they’re saying. I did also note, and again, I could be reading too much into it, but they had bought, they’d diversified into a company which I think did laundry. I’m not sure whether that was a chain of laundromats or whether it was like a commercial provider of laundry services, and that that was underperforming. But the good news was that they weren’t happy to pay the earnouts to the people they bought this company from because the profit was down. So, if I put my Machiavellian cap on and I say, “well, I’ve just bought this company and there’s earn outs, if it doesn’t work out as well, then I don’t pay them the earn out and actually save money, even though I lose a bit on the operating line.” I hope that’s not one of the reasons why they’ve had to report a reduction in their forecast profit which has caused Next Capital to walk away. They may have been too smart for themselves. But I’m reading a lot into that, so who knows what happened.

Cameron  15:01

Alloggio apparently is the Italian word for accommodation, Tony.

Tony  15:05

Makes sense.

Cameron  15:07

I did not know that.

Tony  15:08


Cameron  15:09

Well, there you go. So, those were a couple of shocks that I had this week, CLX and ALO. But you know, I’m glad that we have rules, because even though it’s upsetting and frustrating, you don’t have to tie yourself up in knots thinking about what to do and trying to out think the market or predict things.

Tony  15:32

And the other thing we’re not getting tied up in is trying to work out what’s happening based on the announcements, because, you know, they can be either scant on detail, they can be late on information, and they can, I guess, have a particular perspective to suit the party that’s making the announcement. So, without knowing what’s going on with Next Capital or with Alloggio, it’s difficult to know how to value the stock.

Cameron  15:56

They put out something on the 17th of March, have they put anything to explain? Well, they did, they said they had a lower-than-expected trading result. They got a new announcement that came out yesterday, I see. Something called… An update. “Consultation period extended.” Oh okay, so this is next capital saying, “Yeah, we’ll think about it.”

Tony  16:25

This is GoJo saying, “well, yeah, Logan’s dead, I don’t know if the company’s worth as much.”

Cameron  16:31

I like this, in this 22nd of May announcement, in bold at the end they’ve written: “ALO shareholders do not need to take any action at the present time.” Like yeah, well, I don’t know about that. They do, they need to sell their shares and get out.

Tony  16:47

Well, maybe. I mean. That’s pretty standard, to put that onto a release like this.

Cameron  16:52

We took action. Steven Mabb sent me a great little graphic.

Tony  17:00

Looks like a future coffee mug.

Cameron  17:02

It does, yes. We will steal this and do our own version of it. It’s from Morgan Housel, author of the Psychology of Money, he says. And it’s just a nice little graphic, entitled “some things I’ve learned about money.” And I thought these were good. I’ll read a few of them. “The Joneses aren’t as rich or as happy as you think they are.” You can just put the Kynaston’s in there. Aren’t as rich or happy as you think they are.

Tony  17:28

We are happy.

Cameron  17:31

Oh, the Kynaston’s are as rich and happy as you think they are, but not he Joneses.

Tony  17:37

Funnily enough, my sister is a Jones. She married a Jones. They’re pretty happy.

Cameron  17:41

She’s rich and happy. Oh, that’s good. “The more complicated the investment advice, the less useful it is,” I like that one. “Get rich quick and get poor quick are two sides of the same coin.” Thought that was clever.

Tony  17:56

Yeah, that’s good.

Cameron  17:57

“Ask about anything you don’t understand.” I’ve always lived by that rule. It’s one of the things I noticed early on in my career, was that the smartest, most seemingly confident people I knew were the first to admit they didn’t understand something and ask for it to be explained over and over, rather than fake that they understood it. They’d go, “Hold on.” Like, Microsoft people used to say, “explain it to me like I’m five,” right, which has become more of a common thing on Reddit and places like that. But, explain it to me like I don’t understand, because I don’t, and not be afraid to say that, right? Just explain it to me, because I want to understand it and I’m not embarrassed about saying that I don’t understand it. Whereas a lot of people I think kind of just pretend that they understand stuff, and they, you know, fake it. Not good. “A house is a place to live, not an investment.” Would you agree with that, Tony?

Tony  18:56

I didn’t actually, no. I think it is true a house is a place to live, but they are good investments as well.

Cameron  19:03

Wonder why he says that, though? Do you understand his framing of that, where it would make sense?

Tony  19:09

I don’t know, actually. I mean, people like Roger Montgomery have often said that the property market is a bit of a sham because you can’t value it. Although he does admit you can use the rental yield as a way to value it. But the point he’s making is that most valuations are comparative valuation. So, house A is for sale, it’s the same size as house B, and house B sold last week for a million dollars, therefore house A is worth a million. There’s no sort of fundamental way of, from the ground up, working out what house A is really worth. Although you can rent it out and get an income and you can say that’s a yield. You can compare it to a bond or the bank or whatever and work out what it’s worth. So, yeah, I don’t agree with that.

Cameron  19:49

The thing that’s always confused me about real estate is if I buy a house, let’s say I buy a three bedroom house for $500,000, and then ten years later it’s worth a million bucks, and I sell it for a million bucks, I’ve made $500,000 on my investment over that ten year period. But if I want to move into another three-bedroom house that’s equivalent, it’s going to be worth a million bucks. So, I’m gonna have to spend a million bucks to buy the same kind of house. So, that kind of nullifies my investment return.

Tony  20:22

Yeah, no, you’re right. The other dimension to this is houses are really good to gear against. After ten years, you’ve got the extra $500,000 which you can use as equity to be able to borrow, and then invest somewhere else; either in another house or the stock market or a business or whatever, or a project.

Cameron  20:39

Rather than selling it and just spending that money on real estate.

Tony  20:43

Correct. But no, you’re dead, right. Unless you’re changing the market, it’s a zero-sum game.

Cameron  20:49

Yeah. Or you know, you buy something that’s lesser than the thing that you just sold. Or you’re really smart, and you buy a fixer upper or something every time. I know there’s a lot of people that do that.

Tony  21:01

Yeah. So, when I say change the market, you’ve bought something and converted it into something else. Fixed it up, taken a big block of land and made it into two houses, or something like that. Or you’ve sold out of Brisbane, Sydney, and then moved to the country, for example, or moved overseas. So, yeah, you changed the market.

Cameron  21:18

Here’s another interesting one: “admire people who earn more money than you, not people who spend more money than you.”

Tony  21:26

I really liked the second part about that. I’m not sure I admire everyone who earns more money than me. But yeah, certainly the second part of it. But this whole idea of Instagram people driving around in Maseratis does not impress me one bit, and I certainly don’t admire them.

Cameron  21:40

Particularly when you find out that most of them rented those Maseratis for a day. “Your mortgage broker is lying to you about how much house you can afford.”

Tony  21:52

Yeah, true.

Cameron  21:54

Particularly if you’re in America before 2008, with the Fannie Mae and whatever.

Tony  22:02

Freddie Mac.

Cameron  22:03

Freddie Mac.

Tony  22:04

Well, the mortgage broker has an incentive. They’re paid commission based on the size of the mortgage, so they’re always going to try and shoehorn you in to something bigger. Luckily enough in Australia, APRA does have tests on the banks to make sure you can repay your loans when interest rates rise. But, you know, at the same time, prior to the GFC, there were a lot of people getting loans who had falsified the application process, gamed the application process.

Cameron  22:34

I like the next one: “you don’t need to be a math whiz to make good money decisions. Financial success is 5% intelligence and 95% discipline.”

Tony  22:42

Correct. And 0% emotion.

Cameron  22:46

Yes. Like I always say to new members, new QAV club members, like, it took a lot of intelligence on your behalf to put QAV together. But I feel for those of us that are leveraging your work, it doesn’t take a lot of intelligence to run QAV as a process. There’s a learning curve, but it doesn’t take a lot of intelligence to run. It’s mostly, in my experience anyway, just the discipline. Obeying the rules and following the steps and not letting emotion get involved and not trying to out think the system.

Tony  23:23

Well, it might be a humble brag on my part, but it didn’t take a whole lot of intelligence to set up QAV either. It’s just learning from other people, much in the way scientists often work.

Cameron  23:33

Scientists are smart, though, Tony.

Tony  23:35

Well, they are, I certainly would agree with that. But no, I mean, I didn’t invent value investing. It was just me that learned it was right for me and how to apply it to my circumstances. So, yeah, there’s a certain amount of intelligence in that and discipline, but I think the quotes really good. It’s mainly discipline.

Cameron  23:53

“Raising income shouldn’t mean a rise in lifestyle.”

Tony  23:59

I’ve always said, and probably less so these days, but when I was working, every time I got a promotion, I just got promoted into a bigger class of bills. Bigger car better or better car, bigger house, better school.

Cameron  24:15

And it’s challenging. I find that one really challenging. Like, you know, get a nice block of brie and spend money on kung kung fu lessons. There’s always a way of justifying spending money. It’s not hard. Even when you’re trying not to spend money. It’s always easy. It’s a slippery slope, spending money.

Tony  24:34

Yeah, absolutely.

Cameron  24:36

“Forecasting is for the weather.”

Tony  24:39

And it’s not even good for the weather. That’s a great saying, I think, that’s really good.

Cameron  24:48

Coffee mug quote, right there.

Tony  24:49


Cameron  24:51

“Fees erode performance.” We’ve talked about that on the show many times. “There is an inverse relationship between investment performance and time spent watching financial news.” I like that.

Tony  25:05

Especially when you go to the States and see Bloomberg and MSNBC and all those. The shows are just so vacuous.

Cameron  25:14

Who’s that guy with the big red button?

Tony  25:18

With the baseball bat, who comes out and takes a swipe at things and then hits the red button. Yeah.

Cameron  25:23

It’s entertainment.

Tony  25:24

It’s entertainment. Yeah, exactly. For people who don’t like reality TV, it just morphs into other things. You know, there’s an element of politics in it, there’s an element of culture in it, and all that kind of stuff. Then eventually it gets down to economics. What’s China doing? What’s Russia doing? Like, you wouldn’t hear anything on Bloomberg about Alloggio, even if it was an American company, right? They just don’t get down into that nitty gritty detail.

Cameron  25:47

I didn’t hear anything about it here, either.

Tony  25:50

Yeah, well, there you go. Yeah, so that’s a good one. Hey, you missed out one, which I just wanted to touch on briefly: “never reach for yield.”

Cameron  25:57

Yeah, I didn’t understand that one. That’s why I skipped it. What does that mean?

Tony  26:01

Well, it’s particularly pertinent to our time period right now. And what it means is that… Maybe it’s not as pertinent to now, maybe it’s pertinent to more last year. When interest rates are low, and you can’t get money from putting your money in the bank, retirees in particular — but I guess anyone can fall into this trap — can be presented with offers. “Put your money with us and we’ll give you 4% yield or 5% yield.” Now I’m seeing lots of ads in the paper saying, you know, “we’ll pay you 9% yield on a monthly basis or a quarterly basis, “or whatever. And it’s always a trap, right? It’s risk and reward. You start with the basic building block that a bond is giving 4% yield now. How much extra risk do you want to take to get to the number you need to live on to accept, to take that risk? So, I’m always reminded of Ralph Nader’s documentary Unsafe at Any Speed, which was revolutionary back in the 60s. I think it was GM, one of the big car companies had a car — I think it was a Nova, I think it was a Chevy Nova so it must have been GM — which, under certain circumstances, at a certain speed, would get the speed wobbles, rollover, and the fuel tank would explode into a fiery crash and kill people. And then GM, the executives at GM did an analysis on this and worked out it was cheaper to pay out the families of the people who died in the Chevy Nova crashes, then to recall the Chevy Novas and fix them. Ralph Nader exposed this and the documentary was called Unsafe at Any Speed” right? Because doesn’t matter how fast you drove this Nova, you took a chance that it was going to get the wobbles and all over and explode. And I feel it’s the same logic that applies to yield, right? If a government bond is the riskless yield, you can get and you can get 4%, why do you take the extra risk to get 5/6/7/8/9% and invest in, you know, a fund set up by a property developer who’s promising the world. To me, the grasp for extra yield is Unsafe at Any Speed.

Cameron  28:06

It’s funny you mention that because I had in after-hours to talk about the fact that Chrissy and I rewatched Fight Club over the weekend. There’s a scene in Fight Club that talks about this, I just pulled it up on YouTube.

Speaker 1, Fight Club  28:12

“On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero. I was a recall coordinator. My job was to apply the formula. A new car built by my company leaves somewhere travelling at sixty miles per hour, the rear differential locks up.”

Speaker 2, FC28:37

“The teenager’s braces are wrapped around the backseat ashtray. Might make a good anti-smoking ad”

Speaker 1, FC  28:42

“The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall?”

Speaker 2, FC 28:48

“The father must have been huge. You see where the fats burned the seat? Polyester shirt. Very modern art.”

Speaker 1, FC  28:55

“Take the number of vehicles in the field A, multiply it by the probable rate of failure B, then multiply the result by the average out of court settlement C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don’t do one.”

Speaker 3, FC 29:13

“Are there are a lot of these kinds of accidents?”

Speaker 1, FC  29:17

“You wouldn’t believe.”

Speaker 3, FC 29:19

“Which car company do you work for?”

Speaker 1, FC  29:21

“A major one.”

Cameron  29:24

So, there you go. That’s the economics of recalls.

Cameron  29:27

I think I’ve seen that years ago.

Tony  29:27

Yeah. I apologise if it wasn’t GM that I’m talking about, but I think it was the Chevy Nova that caused the problems. But yeah, I love Chuck Palahniuk’s writing. I’ve read all his books, they’re brilliant, and they always get into these kinds of, you know, egregious corporate greed things, or just quirky bits of society that need exposing. You’d love another movie of his. I think it’s called “Choke” from memory. It’s great, too.

Tony  29:59

It starred Sam Rockwell.

Cameron  30:01

Oh, well, I just watched a bloody Sam Rockwell film this week, too, I’m going to talk about. I love Sam Rockwell.

Tony  30:08

So, it’s about a guy who goes into restaurants and then orders a fancy meal and then chokes so he gets the meal for free.

Cameron  30:14

Oh, right. Yeah. I haven’t seen that. I’ve got to see that. Oh, it’s directed by Clark Gregg. Wow.

Tony  30:22

I don’t know who he is.

Cameron  30:24

Have you seen any of the Marvel films? The Avengers films or any of that kind of stuff?

Tony  30:29


Cameron  30:29

He’s Agent Coulson in Shield and the Avengers films. Yeah. He’s also a director. And he directed Chuck. There you go. Co-wrote it with Chuck Palahniuk and directed it. I watched “Heist” over the last week. You ever seen that? 2001 David Mamet film?

Tony  30:52



Cameron  1:29:25

The QAV Podcast is a production of Spacecraft Publishing Proprietary Limited, authorised representative of AFSL 520442, AFS representative number 001292718. Please don’t make any investment decisions based solely on listening to this podcast. This is presented as general advice only, not personal financial advice. We don’t know your personal financial circumstances. Please see a financial planner before making any investing decisions.