Beds, Banks and Bionic Men: WEB Travel in the AI Age: QAV AU #922

QAV AU 922

[00:00:00]

Cameron: Look who’s back in the stu­dio for QAV 922. It’s our Wag­ga stu­dio. The, uh,

yeah, the.

Tony Kynas­ton: stu­dio

Cameron: Yes. Region­al QAV. How are you, TK?

Tony Kynas­ton: Good. Yeah, yeah. Relaxed after a hol­i­day. Lots of trav­el though, so it’s good to have a, have a bed for the, the same bed for a cou­ple of nights in a row

Cameron: Right. And how did the horse sales, buy­ing, what­ev­er you were doing go?

Tony Kynas­ton: Well, it was as wet as the weath­er. It, uh, s- we sold, I sold one, but not for what we’d hoped, and the oth­er one’s passed in, so we’re look­ing at ways of sell­ing her in the com­ing weeks or months.

Cameron: Did you buy any­thing?

Tony Kynas­ton: or keep­ing and, and breed­ing. Uh, no, did­n’t buy any­thing. That’s the only. That’s the one good upside. I was­n’t sur­round­ed by train­ers try­ing to get me to buy a horse ’cause I just sold one, is the usu­al result you

Cameron: Right. H- hey, uh, [00:01:00] did you lis­ten to my Amer­i­can show last week?

Tony Kynas­ton: No, I haven’t yet. Was it

Cameron: I, it was a shame you weren’t on it because,

Tony Kynas­ton: ever.

Cameron: we were, I was talk­ing about a com­pa­ny, uh, and the founder of it, after he left the com­pa­ny, uh, got into the thor­ough­bred horse busi­ness, thor­ough­bred horse busi­ness.

Tony Kynas­ton: Right

Cameron: he also got him­self. He’s also 93 and going through about a dozen sex­u­al harass­ment tri­als, so there’s that part of it which hope­ful­ly you don’t relate to.

But the oth­er part of it I thought you would’ve liked.

And then he put his daugh­ter in charge of it. Here’s a tip for you. Don’t put Alex in charge of your horse breed­ing busi­ness because he end­ed up suing his daugh­ter for mis­man­age­ment. So lessons, lessons to be learned.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah.

Cameron: Alex into hors­es?

Tony Kynas­ton: No, she, she does not like going to the races at all. Mm.

Cameron: Yeah. You know, I. Good for her.

Tony Kynas­ton: abid­ing by the law that, of how to make a small for­tune in the rac­ing indus­try. with a big for­tune,

Cameron: start with a big one?

Tony Kynas­ton: hors­es.

Cameron: Yeah. I saw, I saw a post on, uh, [00:02:00] the val­ue invest­ing sub­red­dit the oth­er day is, um, “I got my port­fo­lio to $200,000 in the last 90 days and I wan­na tell you how I did it.” And at the end of it, it was, “Oh, by the way, I start­ed with 500,000.” Yeah.

Tony Kynas­ton: Oh, very good.

Cameron: Hey, before we get into invest­ing, uh, I got a, Tay­lor just called me. I thought you’d like this sto­ry. He said that his flat­mate, Adam, who he man­ages, um, was, went across the road to the apart­ment build­ing where Amy lives, Tay­lor’s old girl­friend, to pick up, uh, some­body that he was going out with, a girl or what­ev­er or some­thing.

He’s walk­ing through the foy­er, and com­ing the oth­er way is John­ny Dra­ma from, real­ly? k- who appar­ent­ly lives there. And no, but they, they’d just fin­ished watch­ing Entourage, the boys, so he’s like, “John­ny Dra­ma!” Which I’m sure Kevin Dil­lon hates. Maybe he does­n’t, maybe he does, I don’t know.

It’s prob­a­bly the only role he’s real­ly known for, apart from Pla­toon.

Yeah, so they live across the road from John­ny Dra­ma. I [00:03:00] th- thought you’d like that.

Tony Kynas­ton: That’s fan­tas­tic.

Cameron: prob­a­bly my favorite cha– Yeah, I think he was my fa- apart from Ari Gold, he was my favorite char­ac­ter in the show, John­ny Dra­ma. He was so. You know, like, yeah, he was just kind of pathet­ic,

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah.

Cameron: always, always wish­ing he was big­ger than he was.

Uh,

sea­son, Tony. On the show last week, I remind­ed every­body and myself that, uh, we’re in the, what used to be known as, uh, con­fes­sion sea­son. It’s the, uh, Prince ver­sion of con­fes­sion sea­son, for­mer­ly known as con­fes­sion sea­son, which, as seems to be just, yeah, just don’t say any­thing and yeah. It’s a ques­tion mark.

It’s just a ques­tion mark. Are they gonna, are they gonna meet their pro­jec­tions or not? We don’t know.

Tony Kynas­ton: It’s,

Cameron: Um, so I’m not buy­ing any­thing at the moment, and I told peo­ple that.

Tony Kynas­ton: okay. Yeah. Well, uh, okay. I thought we, I thought we [00:04:00] weren’t buy­ing in the month before the results came out. Is not the roof?

Cameron: Well, isn’t this the month before r- results come out?

Tony Kynas­ton: No, it’s the month before the results fin­ish, and they get two months before the num­bers are, are pro­duced and, and released.

Cameron: Ah, god­dammit, how did it. Okay. All right, scrap every­thing I just said then, peo­ple. Buy away. Go nuts. Go crazy.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah.

Cameron: Right.

Tony Kynas­ton: are, I

Cameron: July.

Tony Kynas­ton: on old fig­ures, but we’ve got anoth­er cou­ple of months before we get new ones.

Cameron: All right. Well, I got anoth­er month to buy stuff then. Um, thank you for clar­i­fy­ing that. There you go. Six years, I still don’t know when con­fes­sion sea­son is.

Um, well, that leads me into my next thing. You ever heard of Philip Tet­lock?

Tony Kynas­ton: No.

Cameron: Philip Tet­lock­’s a Cana­di­an Amer­i­can polit­i­cal psy­chol­o­gist who wrote a book in 2005 called Expert Polit­i­cal Judg­ment or some­thing, um, I’ve been read­ing, where he spent 20 y- well, he did­n’t spend 20 years. He was at Berke­ley, and he stud­ied 20 years of [00:05:00] pre­dic­tions from over 82,000 eco­nom­ic and polit­i­cal experts, and then to see how they panned out, and came to the con­clu­sion that they had about the same chances of get­ting it right as guess­ing, or a chimp throw­ing darts at a dart­board, as every­one said.

He came up with anoth­er book called Super­fore­cast­ing, which I’ve also bought, which I’ll read after this one.

Tony Kynas­ton: That’s a great book.

Cameron: Right. So there you go. Well, it’s, it’s, that was sort of the sequel.

Tony Kynas­ton: years ago? Yeah.

Cameron: Yeah, it was like 10 years lat­er, I think 2015 he came out with that one.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah. Good book.

Cameron: Yes. Well, there you go. I, I can’t even pre­dict when con­fes­sion sea­son is, so, um, there you go.

I pre­dict that

Tony Kynas­ton: along every six months.

Cameron: Thought it was June. How, how I thought it was the end of the, like, the last month of the report­ing peri­od. There you go. Well, I’m glad you picked me up on that. See, this is what hap­pens. You go away for a week, and I get every­thing wrong.

Tony Kynas­ton: every­thing? [00:06:00] Yep.

Cameron: I for­get every­thing. Yeah. Yeah. Toby. I wan­na shout out to Toby, who sent me his port­fo­lio results for, mm, I guess the year.

No, up till now, I guess. Since his con­cep­tion. Con­cep­tion? Incep­tion. Not since his con­cep­tion. I don’t know. Maybe he con­ceived some­thing. But the, port­fo­lio. it. He, uh, Toby start­ed his port­fo­lio Feb­ru­ary ’22, which is when I start­ed the first light port­fo­lio. Now, the first light port­fo­lio is 221. Since incep­tion, it is up 5.71% ver­sus 8, 9% for the, uh, 8.5% for the SPDR.[00:07:00]

So it’s still under­per­form­ing. It was under­per­form­ing by 15% at one point. He start­ed it in the same month, but his port­fo­lio is up 19%.

Tony Kynas­ton: Well, Toby, uh, if you’re free on Tues­days, um, Cameron, Cam- Cameron will be tak­ing a long hol­i­day.

Cameron: Oh, there you go. That’s, that’s, that’s loy­al­ty for you, peo­ple. Um, so if I look at his chart it looks very much like mine for the first, um, mm, cou­ple of years. Like, it was seri­ous­ly under­per­form­ing as well, sort of 2023, 2024. But then start­ed to improve from, mm, like, uh, ear­ly 2024 actu­al­ly onwards. Where­as mine [00:08:00] did­n’t real­ly start to improve great­ly until late 2025.

So I, I had a look at, I asked him to send me a list of the cur­rent hold­ings that he’s got, and very dif­fer­ent to mine. Some over­lap, but very dif­fer­ent stocks. So, um, he said prob­a­bly did 70 trades and a bit less the year before. Last year, sor­ry, last finan­cial year prob­a­bly did about 70 trades, bit less the year before.

Been flat this year except a few recent, uh, ones recent­ly. Flat in terms of, um, trad­ing, I think. No trad­ing.

Tony Kynas­ton: 70 trades.

Cameron: port- Yeah. Well, that was, you know, 2022, 2023. You know, it was kind of, remem­ber the, what did we call it? The,

um,

Tony Kynas­ton: This

Cameron: one cycle of death or some­thing? Spi­ral of death. Yeah. But, um, inter­est­ing­ly too, look­ing at our two port­fo­lios, mine has been declin­ing since Jan­u­ary.

It, it w- [00:09:00] it pipped a- got peaked above the SPDR in Jan­u­ary a- and then has been falling ever since. His also has been falling since Jan­u­ary, but, um, he was way above it at the time. So, you know, he’s come back a few points, but, um, he was way above it. So just, like, it’s inter­est­ing because I was doing some analy­sis, um, just last week of the live port­fo­lios.

The, the sec­ond live port­fo­lio that I start­ed in April 2022 is up 13% since then, ver­sus 8% for the SPDR. The third one, which I start­ed in August 2022, is up 24% ver­sus 10% for the SPDR. And the last one, which I start­ed Novem­ber 22, is up 25% ver­sus 9.8. So, [00:10:00] uh, you know, I know that, that, that first cou­ple of months made all the d- made all the dif­fer­ence in a neg­a­tive sense for that first port­fo­lio.

But he start­ed his the same month and it’s doing real­ly, real­ly well. S- so it was­n’t actu­al­ly the month, uh, it was just, you know, the stocks. And, and it still did bad­ly. So at some point he’s, he’s replaced the stocks with dif­fer­ent stocks than I replaced for some rea­son. And, um, you know, it’s made all the dif­fer­ence.

So I just thought, inter­est­ing, the sys­tem worked for Toby start­ing the same month that I start­ed it. Worked bet­ter for him than it did for me. So it’s just real­ly, uh, like. Well, well, well, let me, I won’t say what it is. What do you, what, what, what would you deduce from that, Wat­son?

Tony Kynas­ton: Oh, I’ve, I’ve always thought that start­ing dates mat­ter in terms of returns and, um, some­one claims a num­ber, I look when they start­ed because, you know, if you start in [00:11:00] 2007 before the GFC, you get a lot, you get a very dif­fer­ent result to start­ing just after the GFC or for dot­com booms, the same for COVID, all that kind of stuff.

So I think start­ing dates do mat­ter. Um, that, I think it’s pos­si­bly just ran­dom because it depends on. There is, well, I should­n’t say ran­dom. so many vari­ables at play over the last five or six years in terms of when you sold some­thing, when you bought some­thing, what sell? What did you buy?

Um, that it just, it, it just, you know, I, I don’t know whether his per­for­mance is the upper out­lier and your per­for­mance is the low­er out­lier or, you know, whether we take the aver­age of both to say that’s what the result should have been. It’s, it’s, you know, hard to say.

Cameron: Well, I tell you what I noticed straight away look­ing down his list. The stocks, you know, um, so I had four port­fo­lios run­ning for tho- that peri­od of time, and if I had to, you know, there was quite often times when I had to replace stocks in dif­fer­ent [00:12:00] port­fo­lios in the same week, and which port­fo­lios the new stocks end­ed up in was just ran­dom, right?

Tony Kynas­ton: Right.

Cameron: So my three port­fo­lios that are out­per­form­ing hold PRN, hold NWH.

Tony Kynas­ton: Right.

Cameron: Um, the f- the first one does­n’t, right? Uh, what else has he got in here? KAR. Um, I’m sure I’ve got KAR and it’s not in 223. Yeah, KAR, oh, that has­n’t done that well since I added. Okay, skip KAR. But PRN has had a. Yeah, PRN’s had a great run, right?

Tony Kynas­ton: Yep. It

Cameron: As we all know.

Tony Kynas­ton: own it.

Cameron: So

Tony Kynas­ton: So it’s,

Cameron: the,

Tony Kynas­ton: whether or not you

Cameron: yeah.

Tony Kynas­ton: ship stock. Yeah.

Cameron: Yes. Yeah, NWH, which is in my sec­ond port­fo­lio, is up 163%, uh, PA since I added it, right? So, you know, if [00:13:00] I’d put that in my first port­fo­lio instead of in my sec­ond port­fo­lio. When did I buy that? Um, yeah, May, oh, May ’25. Oh, okay, just last year, and it’s up 163% per annum. Geez. So yeah, uh, if I’d put that in a dif­fer­ent port­fo­lio, it would’ve done real­ly well.

So it is a lit­tle bit of, I, I think he had one port­fo­lio ver­sus my four that I’ve end­ed up scat­ter­ing stocks across, you know?

Tony Kynas­ton: Well, what’s the aver­age for the

Cameron: But

Tony Kynas­ton: It’d, it’d still be doing okay, would­n’t it?

Cameron: Oh, yeah. So th- the aver­age

Tony Kynas­ton: in a port­fo­lio, I guess.

Cameron: Well, the fun­ny thing is the aver­age of my four light port­fo­lios is pret­ty much the same as his one port­fo­lio. It’s 19.5%.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah, right.

Cameron: over that peri­od of time. But they all start­ed in 2022,

Tony Kynas­ton: Mm-hmm.

Cameron: there is some over­lap between them. But, um, [00:14:00] yeah, 19.5 ver­sus 9.8 for the index. So it’s doing dou­ble, the four of them com­bined are doing dou­ble mar­ket.

Tony Kynas­ton: Rock.

Cameron: let me see how many I’ve got. One, two. See, ANZ’s held in three of those. ASG is held in three of those. BFG, BFL, BOL, BRK are in two each. CLX, CVL, DUR are, are in two or three each. EHL, FEX. There’s quite a lot of over­lap between them for some rea­son.

Tony Kynas­ton: So

Cameron: But, um

Tony Kynas­ton: 80 stocks across the four is what we’re start­ing with. 80 indi­vid­ual stocks.

Cameron: Yeah. One, two, three, four, five, six, sev­en, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42. I’ve got 42 stocks across four port­fo­lios.

Tony Kynas­ton: Okay. And

Cameron: and in the first port­fo­lio, one, two, three, four, five, six, sev­en, eight, nine, [00:15:00] 10, 11, 12, 13 in the first one.

Tony Kynas­ton: Okay, so per­haps the first one’s

Cameron: So it does­n’t even have a f-

Tony Kynas­ton: yeah

might be just a lit­tle bit too con­cen­trat­ed, which low­ers your chance of get­ting onto a PRN, I sup­pose. Do you know what

Cameron: Yeah, and I don’t know

Tony Kynas­ton: stocks does he hold?

Cameron: Yeah, cur­rent­ly he’s got one, two, three, four, five, six, sev­en, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15.

Tony Kynas­ton: Right.

Cameron: So yeah, I don’t know why. I, I mean, I, it looks like I’ve got two parcels maybe of WGN, which has actu­al­ly done okay. It’s up 125%. Cou­ple of parcels of CLV. Oh, no, maybe just one. It’s up 90%.

Tony Kynas­ton: Right.

Cameron: Um, any­way, yeah, so it’s a lit­tle bit con­cen­trat­ed for some rea­son.

Maybe there just was­n’t much to buy when I was, uh, hav­ing to replace things back in 2022, 2023. Any­way, bot­tom [00:16:00] line is, I thought that was real­ly inter­est­ing, and I thanked, and will thank Toby again for shar­ing that, ’cause it just proves that, you know, at the end of the day, it’s a lit­tle bit about which stocks you end up putting in, right?

Tony Kynas­ton: Well,

Cameron: Lit­tle bit of luck of the draw.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah, but I s- I sus­pect, um, that the light port, num­ber one light port­fo­lio will improve giv­en, it has improved and will improve giv­en

Cameron: Oh, I do too. Yeah, yeah.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah.

Cameron: Yeah. Like, as I said, it was, it was under­per­form­ing by 15% at one point. Now it’s underf- under­per­form­ing by 2.8%, so it’s caught up a long way, and it was ahead of it, uh, a cou­ple of months ago. So yeah, give it anoth­er five years and I’m sure it’ll be singing. But, um, it’s the one that’s let­ting me down at the moment.

Tony Kynas­ton: Mm-hmm.

Cameron: Not a big deal. Uh, ques­tion f- I’ve got a cou­ple of [00:17:00] ques­tions. Uh, do you want me to do those or do you want to do some of your talk­ing points first? You’ve just got a Pulled Pork, right?

Tony Kynas­ton: A Pulled Pork, yeah.

Cameron: No talk­ing points apart from play­ing golf and wet weath­er. Hmm.

Tony Kynas­ton: day about golf if you like, but you don’t want that.

Cameron: How’s the back doing? The back­’s okay?

Tony Kynas­ton: No, back­’s a bit sore today. We played yes­ter­day, so

Cameron: Hmm.

Tony Kynas­ton: just, just kin­da man­ag­ing.

Cameron: Hmm.

Tony Kynas­ton: Mm.

Cameron: Right. Is it, is Rud­dy giv­ing you lots of mas­sages?

Tony Kynas­ton: No, thank good­ness he’s not. That would, that would be a pr- That would be a s- I don’t know what to describe that as. It would, it would­n’t be fun.

Cameron: Michael, uh, “Hi Cam and Tony, love the show. Lis­ten reli­gious­ly.” Uh, Domine pater, fil­ii, et Spir­i­tui Sanc­ti there, Michael. Uh, “Ques­tion around neg­a­tive gear­ing, and if we should rush in to make changes, as his­to­ry may just repeat itself or it could be dif­fer­ent this time. [00:18:00] Recap, Paul Keat­ing reversed his own deci­sion to abol­ish neg­a­tive gear­ing in Sep­tem­ber 1987.

He reversed the deci­sion as Aus­tralia expe­ri­enced a tight­en­ing in the hous­ing mar­ket and a short­age of res­i­den­tial rental prop­er­ties, lead­ing to ris­ing rents. In his 1987 bud­get speech, Keat­ing stat­ed that revers­ing the pol­i­cy was nec­es­sary to restore invest­ment sym­me­try and encour­age the sup­ply of res­i­den­tial accom­mo­da­tion.

Thank you, Michael.” Um, I don’t under­stand Michael’s ques­tion at all, Tony. Do you under­stand that ques­tion?

Tony Kynas­ton: I, I, I thought the ques­tion was, are we gonna see a drop in hous­ing prices because of the bud­get changes or pro­ject­ed bud­get changes? They still haven’t been enact­ed into law yet, so they could change again dur­ing, um, the pas­sage through par­lia­ment. But, um, so back in the ’80s, uh, late ’80s, Keat­ing, uh, the change he made was to scrap neg­a­tive gear­ing entire­ly, uh, which [00:19:00] was diff– is dif­fer­ent to what’s being pro­posed by the bud­get.

So, Keat­ing, uh, stopped rental loss­es being used as rebates against oth­er income, like wages, for exam­ple. He did con­tin­ue to allow rental loss­es to be off­set against oth­er rental income gains, um, and against cap­i­tal gains. So there was some sim­i­lar­i­ties, but his, um, rescind­ing of neg­a­tive gear­ing was a lot more wide­spread than the cur­rent bud­get, uh, So what hap­pened in the late ’80s was that because, uh, land– uh, because land­lords were hap­py to buy a prop­er­ty and then neg­a­tive­ly gear it, weren’t that con­cerned about mak­ing sure that the rent cov­ered their costs. And as soon as they lost neg­a­tive gear­ing, the rents went up. So they rebal­anced from neg­a­tive yield to pos­i­tive yield, and that was a back­lash which caused, uh, Paul Keat­ing to, uh, put neg­a­tive gear­ing back in place. Um, dif­fer­ent this time because [00:20:00] the bud­get con­tem­plates allow­ing neg­a­tive gear­ing against new builds, so new con­struc­tion of, of hous­ing and apart­ments. it also, pro­vides grand­fa­ther­ing for exist­ing prop­er­ty own­ers, so they can con­tin­ue to, uh, claim neg­a­tive gear­ing on their tax returns. And, um, it, it also, um, still allows for loss­es to be car­ried for­ward and off­set against income and cap­i­tal gains.

So that’s a, a lot– it’s a lot nar­row­er in what it’s doing com­pared to what Paul Keat­ing did. said all that, um, I still think there will be a rise in rental yields, uh, but it may be more mut­ed than, um, than the past. So the risks as I see it are that, new builds don’t meet the rental mar­ket sup­ply, and that forces renters to– back into estab­lished hous­ing there­fore rents go up.

So there’s more demand for the estab­lished hous­ing mar­ket, so rents are gonna go up there. And I also see [00:21:00] that it’s, um, longer term it’s fore­see­able that as own­ers of estab­lished hous­ing change hands and they become exempt from neg­a­tive gear­ing, the new own­ers raise the rent. So I– it, it could wind up being like it was in 1987, but it may take longer ’cause we’ve got­ta wait for who are grand­fa­thered to sell to, to new peo­ple who can’t claim neg­a­tive gear­ing. Um, but I cer­tain­ly see a huge risk in under­sup­ply in the new con­struc­tion mar­ket, which is hap­pen­ing now. So it’s not– not mak­ing any sort of pre­dic­tion. It’s actu­al­ly hap­pen­ing now. so, that’s gonna cause peo­ple to still seek rentals in the in the estab­lished hous­ing mar­ket, which will force rents up there too.

Um, but there are also oth­er sec­ondary effects which, um, I don’t think. prob­a­bly– they won’t reveal them­selves for a while, but they may hap­pen, and that is that, um Uh, neg­a­tive gear­ing is still allowed against shares, and so that may boost the share own­er­ship. Uh, peo­ple might start to direct more of their [00:22:00] invest­ment income into shares rather than prop­er­ty. Um, that’s– I think that’s what the gov­ern­ment hopes for ’cause it will low­er the price of hous­ing, which will let more peo­ple buy hous­es. Um, it may also take more land­lords out of the mar­ket as well. rent­ing may, may still be a con­strained mar­ket and there­fore the rents may still remain high. Um, and it’s also neg­a­tive gear­ing is still allowed against com­mer­cial prop­er­ty, um, the changes that are envis­aged. And so that may boost prop­er­ty syn­di­ca­tion mod­els and who are now hap­py to buy a house and rent it out might decide to enter into a syn­di­cat­ed pool and buy a ser­vice sta­tion or a Sev­en-Eleven or a chain of, um, or a ware­house or what­ev­er. And so that may change the nature of prop­er­ty invest­ing for, um, invest­ments rather than for own­er-occu­pied. So there’s a few things that have to play out there. Um, and I don’t think that what’s been pro­posed in the bud­get is nec­es­sar­i­ly locked in as law at this stage. That’s the [00:23:00] oth­er, uh, hard thing to, um, to come to terms with yet.

And then the mar­ket’s kind of sit­ting on the side­lines wait­ing for the law to be enact­ed because, um, there are pos­si­ble changes com­ing through. There’s a lot of feed­back. A lot of peo­ple are say­ing, “Well, under­stand the gov­ern­men­t’s try­ing to make it eas­i­er for first-home buy­ers to enter the hous­ing mar­ket. does adding more cap­i­tal gains tax to a small busi­ness, achieve that?” And of course, it does­n’t, so there may be some changes there as well. Um, then of course, the big wild­card is what­ev­er gets passed into leg­is­la­tion now get amend­ed in next year’s bud­get or in the year after before an elec­tion if there’s an– if there is indeed a neg­a­tive, um, enough neg­a­tive oppo­si­tion to it.

Um, much the same as it hap­pened when Keat­ing brought in– uh, removed neg­a­tive gear­ing. He then had to put it back two years lat­er. and of course, you know, the lat­est polls are say­ing that, uh, any­one dis­af­fect­ed with the cur­rent bud­get is going to vote for One Nation. Whether that actu­al­ly tran­spires or not, it’s cer­tain­ly putting pres­sure on the gov­ern­ment to, [00:24:00] um, to either rethink what they’re doing or change what they’re doing to put in place what they’ve con­tem­plat­ed, but then maybe amend it before the next elec­tion.

So a lot of mov­ing parts there, I know, Michael. Um, real­ly answer your ques­tion. Uh, I do think it’s– that this time it’s dif­fer­ent to what hap­pened when Paul Keat­ing took neg­a­tive gea- neg­a­tive gear­ing away for a cou­ple of years in the late eight­ies.

Cameron: So what’s Pauline going to do when she’s the PM? That’s the ques­tion that we all need to ask.

Tony Kynas­ton: Well, she’s

Cameron: Queens­land’s revenge.

Tony Kynas­ton: she’s gonna say, “Gina, what should I do?” I don’t think there’ll be

Cameron: Oh, dear me.

Tony Kynas­ton: uh, when Pauline takes over.

Cameron: Hmm. Tay­lor, uh, saw some­thing about the polling, um, from LA and he sent me a text going, “What the hell is going on over there?” And I said, “This is what hap­pens when mil­len­ni­als get all of their infor­ma­tion from Tik­Tok.”

Tony Kynas­ton: [00:25:00] Yeah, well, pos­si­bly. it’s. I’ve got­ta say the gov­ern­ment, the lead­er­ship in the gov­ern­ment has­n’t been great at sell­ing change. They, they did­n’t get the, um, voice to par­lia­ment ref­er­en­dum up, and now they’ve tried some mod­er­ate changes, I would say mod­er­ate to the tax sys­tem, and they’re, they’re trip­ping at the first hur­dle.

So, um, yeah, remains to be seen

Cameron: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.

Tony Kynas­ton: will actu­al­ly hap­pen.

Cameron: Hmm. All right. Well, thank you, Tony. Thank you, Michael. Uh, Sc- only oth­er ques­tion I’ve got is from Scott. This was a late one he sent through this morn­ing. “Hey, Cameron, take a peek at Serv­corp. I bought it in April, and it dropped pret­ty quick, then hov­ered around 7 to 10% off my buy price before jump­ing 11% or so on Fri­day last week in some after-mar­ket closed trades.

Went quick­ly back today, drop­ping about 5%. Scott.” Do you have any insights into what’s hap­pen­ing in [00:26:00] Serv­corp, Tony?

Tony Kynas­ton: had a drill around for about an hour today try­ing to work it out, but I can’t see, uh, any­thing that has caused the price to move quick­ly than a cou­ple of things which are more broad­er. So back in, at the end of Jan­u­ary, they came out and said that they were going to upgrade their on prof­it. So, um, that was upgrad­ed from a range of sev­en­ty-two to sev­en­ty-six mil­lion to, uh, a range of eighty to eighty-four mil­lion, and that gave the sh- the shares a bit of a rock­et. They also fore­cast­ed they were going to increase their div­i­dend from thir­ty cents to thir­ty-two. So, uh, that was all good in terms of, um, push­ing the share price up. they did release their lat­est results, they, um, flagged that, uh, indeed, uh, their sales had gone up a lot and that they were expand­ing quick­ly. But the ana­lysts picked up on the fact that their mar­gins had come down a lit­tle bit, um, large­ly [00:27:00] dri­ven by mar­ket­ing costs of eight per­cent and a three per­cent wage rise due to infla­tion. Um, and mar­gin decline was only from six­teen and a half per­cent to fif­teen point sev­en per­cent. So per­son­al­ly, I would­n’t have wor­ried too much about that, but I know that ana­lysts always wor­ry that if a com­pa­ny’s grow­ing quick­ly, pay­ing for it, um, in, in mar­gin, so it’s the old vol­ume mar­gin game. Um, know if Serv­corp will take that under its wing and slow down its growth a bit and pro­tect its mar­gin or not. most of the ana­lysts, like in Stock Doc­tor, for exam­ple, the con­sen­sus fore­cast is still ten dol­lar six­ty-nine, is way above the cur­rent share price of six-fifty. So that the ana­lysts, that, that val­u­a­tion has come down a lit­tle bit.

I think it was like around twelve dol­lars at the start of the year. Uh, so that might be forc­ing the stock price down. Oth­er things that I look for when I see a stock drop quick­ly or rise quick­ly is things like, has it been includ­ed [00:28:00] in any index rebal­anc­ing? But I could­n’t see that it had. And was it ex-div­i­dend? And it did go ex-div­i­dend in ear­ly March, and it does have a, yield of four point six per­cent. So it did drop, you know, by a sim­i­lar sort of amount at the end of March and, some­times that can lead to, uh, fol­low-on declines. But, um, oth­er than those things, I’m sor­ry, I can’t give much more insight into what’s hap­pen­ing at Serv­corp.

Cameron: And we hold it in a few port­fo­lios. I do. It’s in a cou­ple of the light port­fo­lios where it’s up between 22 and 54%, depend­ing on when I bought it. It’s in the dum­my port­fo­lio, it’s up 54% since I added it in April ’24, a lit­tle over two years. That’s not bad. It’s rea­son­able sort of growth. But I note that it’s very close to its thr- it’s very close to its three-point sell line now despite that.

Cur­rent­ly trad­ing at $6.29. The three-point sell price is about $6.10, and it’s drop­ping pret­ty [00:29:00] quick­ly. It was, uh, $7.88 in Feb­ru­ary, so keep an eye on that. If you, uh, hold it, make sure your alerts are in place, Scott. Um, but yeah, strange one. There you go.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah, no obvi­ous rea­sons that I

Cameron: Well, that’s it. Yeah, I could­n’t find any­thing either.

All right, Tony, what you got?

Tony Kynas­ton: I pulled pork on, uh, W‑E-B, Web Trav­el Group, which was a holdover from a cou­ple of weeks ago. Can’t remem­ber the name of the per­son who request­ed it, but it was a, a lis­ten­er request. Um, I high­light the fact that WEB is now a sell, so it may not have been back then. I think it prob­a­bly was, but, it’s not on.

It’s not a buy for us at the moment, and its QAV score is a lit­tle bit below point one zero. So two rea­sons, it’s not a buy for us. But I’ll, I’ll still go through and pull the pork. It’s an inter­est­ing sto­ry, [00:30:00] um, and of course, it may well come back onto the buy list at some stage or be on the buy list at some stage.

I don’t know if it has been for, um, uh, for a while, if at all. Uh, who are they? Uh, so WEB is the Web Trav­el Group, and it’s a major ASX-list­ed glob­al trav­el com­pa­ny in Mel­bourne. The com­pa­ny is the world’s sec­ond-largest busi­ness-to-busi­ness of hotel accom­mo­da­tion book­ings. So it’s, it’s a lit­tle bit con­fus­ing, uh, for any­one com­ing in to look at, uh, this com­pa­ny now ’cause it was split a cou­ple of years ago. And, um, Web Trav­el Group is the one I’m doing a pulled pork on, which is the code WEB. But there’s also anoth­er com­pa­ny which is of like the one that’s been– that Web­jet has been over the last twen­ty-plus years, and that’s the, um, online air­line book­ing ser­vice. So I’m focus­ing on the B2B, [00:31:00] accom­mo­da­tion book­ing provider. So of his­to­ry. It launched in nine­teen nine­ty-eight, and it was one of the pio­neer­ing Aus­tralian com­pa­nies, and it pio­neered online trav­el agency book­ings in Aus­tralia, which allowed retail cus­tomers to com­pare and book flights, hotels, and hol­i­days, et cetera. Um, it did hold the num­ber one trav­el agency posi­tion in Aus­tralia and New Zealand. Um, I guess it’s been chal­lenged since then and, and cer­tain­ly its oth­er– oth­er Aus­tralian com­pa­ny in the space, Flight Cen­tre, um, was a, um, strong com­peti­tor for it. although Flight Cen­tre came to the web a bit lat­er than Web­jet.

So, Web­jet, know, had the dig­i­tal space to itself for a while, then Flight Cen­tre went online, and even­tu­al­ly oth­er peo­ple have too. At one stage, though, uh, I think this is pre-COVID, back in, uh, two thou­sand and eigh­teen, I think these num­bers are, um, [00:32:00] Web­jet was the big­ger domes­tic air trav­el mar­ket share­hold­er, and both Web­jet and Flight Cen­tre held about twelve per­cent of the domes­tic, um, pre-pan-pre-pan­dem­ic.

So large play­er in the mar­ket. his­to­ry. It start­ed in nine­teen nine­ty-eight, um, and three f- three founders decid­ed that, uh, they did­n’t like a flight either call­ing an air­line or walk­ing into a trav­el agency where the price of the flight was noto­ri­ous­ly opaque and hard to com­pare and hid­den behind fees and com­mis­sions. So they saw an oppor­tu­ni­ty to aggre­gate data from, uh, uh, air­line sys­tems and put them togeth­er into a con­sumer-fac­ing web brows­er. Uh, Web­jet went pub­lic on the ASX in two thou­sand, and of course, that was right as the dot-com bub­ble its peak, then it began to aggres­sive­ly unrav­el. Um, while thou­sands. I [00:33:00] mean, we all know about the dot-com com­pa­nies that sur­vive. Web­jet did sur­vive due to the fact that it actu­al­ly made, um, real mon­ey, and it col­lect­ed fee rev­enue every time a domes­tic flight was processed, unlike a lot of dot-com books that, um. dot-com com­pa­nies, sor­ry, that relied on eye­balls or click num­bers to, um, to, uh, achieve the val­u­a­tion. Uh, anoth­er thing that hap­pened in the ear­ly two thou­sands was the air­lines dras­ti­cal­ly cut back the com­mis­sions they paid to the brick-and-mor­tar trav­el agents. they could see that the future of book­ing was online, and it did­n’t need the same sort of com­mis­sion struc­ture, uh, as, um, the, bricks and mor­tar did.

So they start­ed push­ing more towards com­pa­nies like Web­jet, and that played into their hands. Um, and they, they proved to the air­lines that, uh, chan­nel could move seat inven­to­ry faster and at a much low­er cost than the bricks and mor­tar agen­cies. So they did well, uh, for a long time.[00:34:00]

But of course, like a lot of dot-com star­tups or star­tups in gen­er­al, they did­n’t make mon­ey for, for many years. And, um, it did­n’t. took until about two thou­sand and three or there­abouts when uh, man­aged to build enough infra­struc­ture in their plat­form, uh, achieved enough scale to match their over­heads, and they start­ed turn­ing, uh, a prof­it, ear­ly in this cen­tu­ry. Anoth­er thing that hap­pened around that time was, uh, the MD, John Gou­sich, the board and then lat­er became MD. and he saw, um, a bit of a change for this com­pa­ny, a big tech­no­log­i­cal leap, and, he intro­duced what was called a trav­el ser­vices aggre­ga­tion matrix, that allowed cus­tomers to log on to the web­site and dynam­i­cal­ly mix and match dif­fer­ent air­lines on a sin­gle screen. once that sort of took off, their book­ing vol­umes, um, increased, uh, dra­mat­i­cal­ly, and Web­jet [00:35:00] became high­ly prof­itable. Um- Web­jet did though real­ize that they could­n’t just rely on the domes­tic mar­ket, so they need­ed to expand both inter­na­tion­al­ly and into adja­cent busi­ness­es. John Gou­sich did this, um, by both.

Well, what he called the buy and build strat­e­gy. So both by build­ing out, uh, Web­jet’s IT, but also by buy­ing com­pa­nies to sup­port growth. so at the ear­ly, ear­ly stage of this cen­tu­ry, Web­jet expand­ed into hotel book­ings, pack­ages and trav­el insur­ance. when John Gou­sich joined in two thou­sand and three, he brought with him a lot of knowl­edge of a, um, pret­ty arcane sec­tor of the trav­el mar­ket, uh, which was the whole­sale sell­ing of vacant hotel beds. Um, so there, there are com­pa­nies which go around buy­ing up vacant hotel beds, uh, pool­ing them into a large, um, I guess, port­fo­lio, and then sell­ing them to trav­el agents who then add a mar­gin and sell them off [00:36:00] indi­vid­u­al­ly. Uh, so Gou­sich had been the glob­al chief op-oper­at­ing offi­cer of a com­pa­ny called GTA, was one of the, I think, if not the largest, one of the world’s, largest orig­i­nal whole­saler, uh, of what they call bed banks. he knew that mar­ket well, and he, um, decid­ed that Web­jet should get into that field as well. So to do that, he, um, spent a bit of time build­ing a busi­ness called Lots of Hotels. Um, they spent a min­i­mum amount of mon­ey devel­op­ing that busi­ness, and, uh, it took its first com­mer­cial book­ing in Feb­ru­ary of two thou­sand and thir­teen. They based the team in Dubai and focused on the hotel room inven­to­ries in the Mid­dle East, and then pooled them, bought them, pooled them, and sold them to local trav­el agen­cies to, uh, on-sell to con­sumers. Um, Gou­sich real­ized, though, that scal­ing the Lots of Hotels busi­ness organ­i­cal­ly would take decades. in two thou­sand and four­teen, Web­jet acquired Sun Hotels for twen­ty-five mil­lion euros. And Sun Hotels was a sim­i­lar sort of busi­ness [00:37:00] based in Spain, oper­a­tor with, um, lead­er­ship in the Euro­pean coun­tries, par­tic­u­lar­ly in the north, also big net­works in the Mediter­ranean beach prop­er­ties, uh, So that acqui­si­tion gave Web­jet imme­di­ate high prof­itable foot­print in Europe, it allowed them to pack­age Euro­pean hotel rooms direct­ly into its Aus­tralian con­sumer busi­ness. So that worked well for them. on. Based on that suc­cess, Web­jet then bought a com­pa­ny called Jac Trav­el in two thou­sand and sev­en­teen, and that was a large, um, a large bill for them, three hun­dred and thir­ty mil­lion dol­lars Aus­tralian, it, it did trans­form the com­pa­ny.

So Jac Trav­el was head­quar­tered in Lon­don. it was again, one of these, um, inde­pen­dent, uh, B2B plat­forms for hotels to sell their vacant beds, uh, on and, uh, they spe­cial­ized in large Euro­pean city prop­er­ties. So That [00:38:00] trans­ac­tion pro­pelled Webbeds, is what the inter­nal depart­ment of Web­jet was called, uh, to, um, to, to, uh, house this busi­ness. And that made Webbeds the num­ber two glob­al B2B hotel bed provider world. It added, um, ten thou­sand direct­ly con­tract­ed hotels to the plat­form and obvi­ous­ly, um, rev­enue syn­er­gies across the whole Jac Trav­els, busi­ness in Europe. And, um, they were again able to pro­vide pack­ages to Aus­tralian cus­tomers as well, which, which helped them. and they kept going from that. So in two thou­sand and eigh­teen they paid a hun­dred and sev­en­ty-three mil­lion US for Des­ti­na­tions of the World, anoth­er of these, um, whole­sale bed bank com­pa­nies. Des­ti­na­tions of the World had, prop­er­ties in Mid­dle East and Africa, but also the US and both North and South Amer­i­ca.

So, uh, Des­ti­na­tions of the World pro­vid­ed, uh, Webbeds with, uh, [00:39:00] geo­graph­ic diver­si­fi­ca­tion away from Europe, uh, and the Mid­dle East and made it a, a tru­ly a big play­er on the glob­al scale. Um But it was­n’t just all about acquir­ing. So one of Web­jet’s key advan­tages was an inter­nal­ly devel­oped sys­tem called RezChain, and that used blockchain tech­nol­o­gy to, to track and rec­on­cile bed book­ings. in this par­tic­u­lar indus­try, the whole­sale B2B trav­el indus­try, it was esti­mat­ed by one of the ana­lysts I read that rough­ly one in twen­ty hotel book­ings suf­fered from data dis-dis­crep­an­cies between the whole­saler and the hotel, to, uh, book­ing loss­es and refunds. And every time, um, Webbeds or Web­jet, uh, which owned Webbeds, bought an inter­na­tion­al com­pa­ny like Jac Trav­el Des­ti­na­tions of the World, they imme­di­ate­ly migrat­ed the acquired infra­struc­ture onto RezChain, that sys­tem­at­i­cal­ly erad­i­cat­ed book­ing errors, which pushed up their inter­nal oper­at­ing mar­gins, [00:40:00] and it turned messy acqui­si­tions into clean, auto­mat­ed, uh, dig­i­tal engines. So that’s been work­ing well for them. Um, if I fast-for­ward then to, the end of the twen­ty-teens, there was a cou­ple of major set­backs that the busi­ness took. Um, first­ly, a large trav­el com­pa­ny called Thomas Cook went into sud­den liq­ui­da­tion in Sep­tem­ber two thou­sand and nine­teen. Thomas Cook was the largest client for Web­jet’s, um, divi­sion called Webbeds. the sud­den bank­rupt­cy, bank­rupt­cy, uh, wiped out forty-three mil­lion dol­lars in Aus­tralian rev­enue, or sor­ry, forty-three mil­lion dol­lars in Aus­tralian dol­lars in rev­enue, forced Web­jet to write off mas­sive bad debts, caus­ing it, the share price to plunge per­cent in a mat­ter of days, accord­ing to an AFR arti­cle that I read. Uh, less than six months after the Thomas Cook shock, COVID-19 hit. March twen­ty [00:41:00] twen­ty, uh, the glob­al bor­ders shut, as we all know. Flight sched­ules col­lapsed and Web­jet’s rev­enue plum­met­ed by nine­ty-five per­cent vir­tu­al­ly overnight. And the AFR, in their arti­cle, um, this phase of Web­jet’s, uh, his­to­ry as Sev­en­teen Days in Virus ICU, when the, uh, Web­jet’s exec­u­tive team worked from their liv­ing rooms to save the com­pa­ny from insol­ven­cy. they did that by, um, uh, under­tak­ing a mas­sive, um, injec­tion and a quick insti­tu­tion­al equi­ty raise at a steep dis­count. Uh, so they raised three hun­dred and forty-six mil­lion dol­lars Aus­tralian. They also issued some, uh, debt, notes of a hun­dred mil­lion euros. And though they dilut­ed exist­ing share­hold­ers a lot, it gave the com­pa­ny a cash buffer to sur­vive a full year with­out, um, a sin­gle dol­lar of income.

Um, since then, though, the com­pa­ny has recov­ered well. Um- uh, [00:42:00] trav­els back to pre-pan­dem­ic lev­els and they’ve got plen­ty of, uh, cash flow com­ing in. Um, but the board grap­pled with anoth­er issue, um, that they were, uh, tr- key to solve And that was the fact that the beds busi­ness, Webbeds, was not being prop­er­ly val­ued because it was part of the over­all trav­el busi­ness. so they decid­ed to de-merge the beds busi­ness, um, in twen­ty twen­ty-four. It was a very sim­ple struc­ture where each Web­jet share­hold­er received one new share the beds busi­ness called WEB and one share that they already held in the busi­ness. Um, I’m just try­ing to look up the name.

The trav­el busi­ness, uh, is Web­jet

Cameron: Cor­rect

Tony Kynas­ton: Group, WJL. Yes, sor­ry, I just missed it. Lost its code there for a minute. Um, uh, two, two busi­ness­es since twen­ty twen­ty-four. Um, the WJL is like the orig­i­nal, um, [00:43:00] busi­ness and, uh, con­tains the online trav­el agency and a few oth­er small busi­ness­es. One called GoSee, which is, uh, vehi­cle rentals, and one called Trip which helps you plan a trip, um, and the B2C online, uh, book­ing plat­form. the oth­er one, the oth­er one, WEB Trav­el Group, is the B2B, uh, beds busi­ness, hotel whole­sale bed-sell­ing busi­ness. both busi­ness­es, how­ev­er, since the merg­er have gone down in share price, it, does seem like the web busi­ness, the B2B bed busi­ness is, is the bet­ter of the two. So, uh, both stocks’ prices fell after the imme­di­ate demerg­er. Um, but Web Web Group, WEB, the beds busi­ness, um, has per­formed bet­ter, uh, since the de-list­ing, even though the share, the share [00:44:00] prices So, um, ini­tial­ly investors backed the, um, B2B busi­ness as a high-growth glob­al tech­nol­o­gy play­er. a few things have hap­pened in the last cou­ple of years.

A lot of, um, these, uh, tech com­pa­nies have suf­fered from AI fears and, uh, that’s seen the price sold off, um, as has the fact that, uh, you know, the, changes to trav­el and, uh, oil prices, um, have affect­ed it too. Uh, for exam­ple, book­ings in the Mid­dle East for hotel beds in the last cou­ple of months have been way down. Um, but even that, even though the share price has declined, um, the com­pa­ny is still doing well. uh, their lat­est results, they report­ed that, uh, trans­ac­tion. total trans­ac­tion vol­ume was up twen­ty per­cent to five point eight bil­lion dol­lars, so rev­enue’s up by twen­ty per­cent, and net income, uh, was up by two hun­dred and twen­ty per­cent to thir­ty-five mil­lion dol­lars.

So while [00:45:00] the mar­ket has com­pressed the stock­’s PE ratio, the core, um, B2B busi­ness remains intact, and it’s, um, it’s still grow­ing. Uh, so that’s the bet­ter of the two busi­ness­es. Um, WJL, the oth­er side of things, has, issued a prof­it warn­ing recent­ly, and the share price has been declin­ing. also being fought over by a cou­ple of poten­tial takeover suit­ors, Ari­adne Group being one, um, and Hel­loworld being anoth­er.

Hel­loworld, I’ve done a Pulled Pork on before. It’s a trav­el agency, so makes sense for them to want to take over the online trav­el agency busi­ness, WJL. And, uh, Ari­adne has had a his­to­ry of, um, of cor­po­rate raid­ing. you know, I think Web is the bet­ter busi­ness. Um, the lat­est results for Web are quite good.

As I said, rev­enue up twen­ty per­cent, earn­ings per share up six­teen per­cent, which is good. they did report that there was a slow­down in the Mid­dle East for bed book­ings, as I said. But, [00:46:00] and to put that into con­text, book­ings growth from Octo­ber to Feb­ru­ary, Feb­ru­ary was up nine­teen per­cent, March, the growth dropped to eleven per­cent.

So it’s still grow­ing. It’s just that, um, slowed down a bit, uh, from its past high growth rates. and they also point out that the Mid­dle East busi­ness is only about ten per­cent of the total glob­al busi­ness any­way. So it’s, um, it’s still grow­ing quite well. Um- A cou­ple of com­ments that they’ve made because obvi­ous­ly there must be a lot of ana­lyst ques­tions about the future of a whole­sale B2B bed book­ing busi­ness in the, um, era of AI, they make a cou­ple of points about that in their lat­est results.

So they, they point out that, um, hotel con­tracts and their allot­ments require rela­tion­ship that is dif­fi­cult to repli­cate cheap­ly. So say­ing is they’ve now spent years going around to all the ho-hotel groups and doing deals with them so that they can, um, you know, agree [00:47:00] prices and terms to buy­ing up, these, uh, vacant beds to then on-sell, and that, um, a kind of moat around this busi­ness. oth­er thing they’re also posi­tion­ing them­selves, uh, by say­ing is that, um, they’re call­ing them­selves a, a B2A busi­ness. So they’re say­ing that they’re see­ing a, they’re fore­cast­ing a shift away from B2B to becom­ing busi­ness to agent. And, uh, they’re say­ing that, you know, they expect that both buy­ers and sup­pli­ers of beds will deploy AI agents that select part­ners based on per­for­mance using exist­ing inter­faces, um, but that see them­selves as being the bedrock for that.

So they say, “Giv­en their strength in data aggre­ga­tion and trans­ac­tion vol­ume at scale tech­no­log­i­cal inte­gra­tion capa­bil­i­ty, Webbeds is well-placed to cap­ture that oppor­tu­ni­ty as it emerges.” So they’re clear­ly, um, stock price is feel­ing the heat from AI, but they’re, try­ing to posi­tion them­selves as being com­ple­men­tary to AI. [00:48:00] Uh, if I move on to the num­bers, and bear in mind that this com­pa­ny is a sell on sen­ti­ment, so we can’t buy it at the moment. Um, I can say they’re a high ADT trad­ing of, you know, near­ly sev­en mil­lion dol­lars per day, so that’s pret­ty large. share price, um, the, the share price I’ve used for analy­sis is two dol­lars fifty-five, and that’s almost half the con­sen­sus tar­get.

So, uh, it’s under­val­ued on that met­ric, it’s over the price that, uh, we cal­cu­late for IV1, which is fifty-four cents IV2 of two dol­lars twen­ty-three. Inter­est­ing­ly enough, it’s not scor­ing well on the, the inde­pen­dent raters. So Stock Doc­tor finan­cial health and trend is sat­is­fac­to­ry and recov­er­ing, and Stock Doc­tor has decreased the finan­cial health from good down to sat­is­fac­to­ry half. Stock­o­pe­dia rank it poor­ly. They, they give it a sev­en­ty-one for qual­i­ty, sev­en­ty-four for val­ue, nine­teen for, um, [00:49:00] for momen­tum, their over­all rank is only fifty-eight. Uh, PE is twen­ty-four times, um, but it is in the range between the high­est and the low­est. Uh, we don’t score it for that. PROPCAF is inter­est­ing.

It’s less than sev­en. It’s six point nine sev­en, so we do score it for that. Uh, net equi­ty per share is val­ued at one six­ty-one and if I add thir­ty per­cent, two dol­lars and nine. we can’t score it for being less than book or book plus thir­ty. Uh, com­pa­nies fore­cast­ing or ana­lysts are fore­cast­ing large growth in the EPS of a hun­dred and eigh­teen per­cent. growth over PE, even though the PE is rather high, is still scor­ing at four point nine, which is, two ticks for us. There’s no div­i­dend, so we can’t score it for that. Inter­est­ing­ly enough, direc­tors only hold one per­cent, includ­ing, Gou­sich, who’s been around since the start of, um, pret­ty much of Web­jet.

So I was a bit sur­prised to know. I thought he might have had a big­ger hold­ing. Um, so it’s not real­ly a vote of con­fi­dence by him. [00:50:00] Um, it does not have increas­ing equi­ty, so we can’t score it for that. Uh, Gou­sich would prob­a­bly qual­i­fy as an own­er-founder, but he has a small share­hold­ing, so we can’t score it for own­er-founder. Over­all, the qual­i­ty score is sev­en­ty out of fif­teen or forty-sev­en per­cent, and the QAV score is point o sev­en. it does­n’t, um, rate as a buy for us. course, a cou­ple of risks that sprung out at me was that, um, if the oil price remains high, inter­na­tion­al trav­el will, may be con­strict­ed, and so that’s a risk. of course, you know, they may not turn out to be a good, um, a, a good place for AI agents to do their busi­ness. if they’ve got that wrong too, that’ll be a risk for them as well. But on the pos­i­tive side, they are a fast-grow­ing busi­ness, and they have a, a glob­al pres­ence with a very high mar­ket share.

So, um, they’re well-posi­tioned in this space, and they’re still grow­ing, which, um, is very inter­est­ing. So that’s Web, W‑E-B

Cameron: Thank you, Tony. While you were talk­ing, I [00:51:00] jumped into Google Gem­i­ni and said, um, you know, “Can you find me the cheap­est flight from Bris­bane to Mel­bourne leav­ing on July 2nd before 10:00 AM and return­ing three days lat­er?” Just to see what it would do. And, uh, it’s giv­en me a num­ber of options. Jeps- Jet­star, Jet­star, Vir­gin Aus­tralia, and then a link to Google Flights com­par­i­son.

Um,

Tony Kynas­ton: Well, that’s the flight com­par­i­son

Cameron: and in

Tony Kynas­ton: is the B2B bed, uh, sell­er

Cameron: Yeah. I was, I was look­ing for

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah

Cameron: Y- yeah. Well, I think whether it’s flights or it’s beds, um, you know, I do think this stuff is all gonna be inter­me­di­at­ed some­how by AI

Tony Kynas­ton: So I do have some sym­pa­thy with what WEB are argu­ing, and that is that they have the infra­struc­ture. So you ask Gem­i­ni to find the cheap­est hotel in Paris right now or [00:52:00] some­thing like that, they’re still reliant or the, or the agen­tic AI is still reliant on to the per­son who’s aggre­gat­ed all the beds in Paris and then sell­ing them through trav­el agen­cies.

So it might. AI might be able to go and look at the trav­el agents’ web­sites and find you the cheap­est price, but that price is because WEB have aggre­gat­ed the vacant beds in Paris and then on-sold them

Cameron: Hmm. Yeah, no, I get that. It’ll be inter­est­ing to see, though, how they com­pete with all of the oth­er busi­ness­es around the world that do the same thing, though. Like, they don’t, they don’t have

Tony Kynas­ton: share, so they’re com­pet­ing rather well

Cameron: Glob­al­ly?

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah.

Cameron: It’s glob­al.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah

Cameron: Yeah, right. Yeah, it’ll be inter­est­ing to see how it plays out

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah, def­i­nite­ly. But, but you know, the mar­ket sort of is skep­ti­cal at the moment and the share price is half since the demerg­er. It’s, it’s still going down. So yeah, um, until they– until I think it becomes clear­er exact­ly [00:53:00] what role AI has in this whole space there, gonna be depressed, the share price will be depressed.

But the busi­ness is still grow­ing sort of rates at the moment any­way

Cameron: Yeah. Yeah, all of these busi­ness­es, you know, Xero and Atlass­ian and these guys, Mm-hmm. are all try­ing to make the argu­ment that they’re gonna sur­vive and thrive in an AI world. So

Tony Kynas­ton: As you’d

Cameron: we’ll see how it plays out. Yeah.

Tony Kynas­ton: No,

Cameron: Yeah, yeah

Tony Kynas­ton: no CEO ever got up and said, “Jeez, I did­n’t get any sleep last night shit­ting myself about what I was gonna do to my busi­ness.”

Cameron: Yeah.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah

Cameron: Yeah, no, a- and it’s, it’s gonna be inter­est­ing to see how it all plays out

Tony Kynas­ton: Mm.

Cameron: Thank you for that. And I don’t know, I tried to fig­ure out who request­ed that, and I could­n’t fig­ure it out either, but I know it was a cou­ple of weeks ago.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah

Cameron: What episode are we doing now? Nine twen­ty-two, so it prob­a­bly would’ve been nine twen­ty

Tony Kynas­ton: Might even be a month [00:54:00] ago, ’cause it, like I was away last week and I did a cou­ple of oth­er Pulled Porks in between that were requests as well

Cameron: Oh, right. Okay. Yeah. Um, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo. Any­way, it does­n’t mat­ter

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah

Cameron: So what else you got for me, Tony?

Tony Kynas­ton: Just after hours, Cam. Um, that what we’re

Cameron: Yeah, what’s in after hours? It is

Tony Kynas­ton: I mean, I’ve been away, so lots of trav­el­ing. Uh, played at Top­golf in the after­noon. It’s been rain­ing a lot down the east­ern seaboard, as peo­ple will know who live on this side of the coun­try. I think it’s even rain­ing in Perth. In fact, there was one morn­ing I looked up, the weath­er fore­cast and every major cap­i­tal city in Aus­tralia had rain at the same time, I can’t recall ever see­ing before, so, um,

Cameron: Hmm

Tony Kynas­ton: So any­way, we could­n’t play golf on the

Cameron: Hmm.

Tony Kynas­ton: so we went to Top­golf on the Gold Coast instead, we’ve spo­ken about in, uh, the US show before. That was a lot of fun.

Cameron: Hmm.

Tony Kynas­ton: [00:55:00] Um,

Cameron: Hmm

Tony Kynas­ton: yeah. Uh, it– look, it’s, it’s– I enjoyed it. It’s a, it’s a good out­ing, good thing to do on a rainy day. Um, I mean, I guess if you– it’s– I think it’s prob­a­bly aimed at peo­ple who aren’t golfers because the equip­ment was­n’t that great, um, to use.

And I guess you can bring along your own clubs. Some peo­ple were doing that. But, um, you know, if you com­pare, I think it was like six­ty-five bucks an hour to play, um, which is, you can prob­a­bly eas­i­ly find a golf course to play eigh­teen holes for four hours at six­ty-five dol­lars. So, um, if you’re a, you’re a golfer look­ing for a, um, val­ue, you’re bet­ter off going and play­ing golf than going to Top­golf.

So it’s prob­a­bly at the hit and gig­gle sort of mar­ket that it’s at. But it was, it was, it was– I think it was packed. It was like almost full when we were there on a rainy after­noon. I think it was a Wednes­day. So yeah, it’s pop­u­lar

Cameron: Hmm. Hmm.

Tony Kynas­ton: And then,

Cameron: Hit and gig­gle, is that what you called it?

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah, hit and gig­gle. Yep. And it’s got a bar, so it was hit and gig­gle and get [00:56:00] drunk as well, think. So, um, that

Cameron: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah

Tony Kynas­ton: And then, uh,

Cameron: And you watched Bego­nia

Tony Kynas­ton: Bego­nia, have you seen that?

Cameron: I watched it. Well, we, Chris­sy and I watched it last week, yeah

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah. I, it was great. I real­ly enjoyed it. Anoth­er one of those, uh. Is it Chris­tos San­tos, I think the chap’s name is, who made it? Um, has a his­to­ry of mak­ing out-there movies, Poor Things and oth­er ones, and, uh, yeah, I real­ly enjoyed it

Cameron: Lan­thi­mos. Lan­thi­mos. Yeah, he made The Lob­ster and a cou­ple of things with her. Um, I real­ly enjoyed it too, and, and I thought it was very orig­i­nal until I found out it was a remake of a 2003 Kore­an film, and the direc­tor of the Kore­an film was gonna make the Eng­lish lan­guage ver­sion, but then he had to step down for health rea­sons or some­thing, and Lan­thi­mos, uh, took over.[00:57:00]

But, you know, I thought the cast was fan­tas­tic. I thought Jesse Ple­mons did a great job and, uh, kept me on the edge of my seat for the whole thing. And, uh, yeah, I real­ly, real­ly enjoyed it. I thought it was great

Tony Kynas­ton: he’s becom­ing the new Philip Sey­mour Hoff­man, isn’t he? Tak­ing on those quirky sort of roles. He’s, uh, very good

Cameron: Eh Yeah, he’s, he’s real­ly has, uh, built a career for him­self as a ter­rif­ic char­ac­ter actor. Yeah, I enjoyed that.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah.

Cameron: Um, well, what have I. Uh, well, Chris­sy and I went to see Spa- well, Chris­sy Fox and I went to see Sparks on Sat­ur­day night at QPAC. Uh, again, they were in town, and that was fan­tas­tic. We loved that.

Tony Kynas­ton: They’re only here

Cameron: I fin­ished The Colos­sus. It was two and a half years ago. Yeah.

Tony Kynas­ton: a half years ago. Did they release a new album or some­thing in between, or what was the rea­son for back­ing up so quick­ly?

Cameron: Uh, they’re real­ly old and they need to get as much tour­ing in as while they can still do it. Yeah, no, they [00:58:00] have had an album come out,

uh, months ago, so they’re tour­ing to sup­port that. And they- this, the, their top sin­gle off their, um, most recent album is the QAV theme song, Do Things My Own Way it’s called.

You ever heard that? It’s great.

Tony Kynas­ton: I

Cameron: It’s a banger, banger track. Yeah.

Tony Kynas­ton: Okay.

Cameron: It’s got some great lines in it. It’s all about doing things our own way. Uh, peo­ple invit­ing them out to lunch, they don’t wan­na do lunch. There’s a great line, “Called the Pope, told him nope, gonna do things my own way. My guru told him too, gonna do things my own way.”

It’s all just about them say­ing, “No, we’re gonna do things our own way, and we don’t care what you think,” which has been their career, which is, you know, why they’ve sur­vived, I think, as long as they have. Um, I fin­ished the Colos­sus book that I men­tioned to you a while back. Uh, the, the first of the tril­o­gy.

Real­ly enjoyed it, and then man­aged to get a copy of the film. It’s got, like, a 90% on Rot­ten Toma­toes, the film.

Tony Kynas­ton: [00:59:00] Okay. It was okay,

Cameron: Chris­sy and I are gonna sit down and watch that at some point. Hmm.

Tony Kynas­ton: it’s

it’s I’ve watched the first five min­utes of it. It’s beau­ti­ful­ly shot.

Okay

Cameron: Yeah, but it’s, it’s got real­ly great cin­e­matog­ra­phy and visu­als, that sort of ear­ly ’70s epic style AI with com­put­ers with lots of flash­ing lights and spin­ning tape wheels and yeah, punch tape com­ing out of stuff and what­ev­er.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah It’s, which is always fas­ci­nat­ing to me. Like, the sci­ence fic­tion writ­ers and film­mak­ers could imag­ine a super pow­er­ful AI, but they could­n’t imag­ine get­ting beyond tick­er tape and spin­ning tape wheels, you know?

Mm-hmm.

Cameron: E- except for Kubrick, like you know, in 2001

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah. true. But even when they did in, um, sci­ence fic­tion movies, it w- they would some­times just have like a puls­ing of clay with some lights inside flash­ing on and off, you know, as, as sup­posed

Cameron: Eh?

Tony Kynas­ton: kind of positron­ic brain of the [01:00:00] future.

Yeah

Cameron: And per­son­al­ly, I say bring back the flash­ing lights. I, I, I think I’d feel much bet­ter if my com­put­ers were cov­ered in flash­ing lights. I like that. I was actu­al­ly look­ing at my hard dri­ve dock, my exter­nal hard dri­ves. It’s got flash­ing lights on it to tell me if the hard dri­ves are active, and I was like, “Yeah, good for you.

Keep the flash­ing lights. That’s good.”

Tony Kynas­ton: Good.

Cameron: Um, we fin­ished the Dan Levy series, Big Mis­take, which I think I may have men­tioned to you before. I know you did­n’t like Schit­t’s Creek, but, um, that’s. This is a, is a real­ly good series. It’s, Okay. it’s very fun­ny, about a cou­ple, a broth­er and sis­ter who get them­selves into, uh

It’s one of those shows where some­thing rel­a­tive­ly innocu­ous hap­pens in the first episode, and then there are con­se­quences, and then con­se­quences to the con­se­quences, and con­se­quences to those, and it just keeps spi­ral­ing out, out of con­trol, and they find them­selves in [01:01:00] deep shit. It’s good.

Tony Kynas­ton: Like, uh, like

Cameron: And the Nico­las Cage-

Tony Kynas­ton: increas­ing cap­i­tal gains tax? Is that the on con­se­quences that’s far out of our con­trol? You know

Cameron: yeah. Unknown unknowns, as

Tony Kynas­ton: Yes

Cameron: liked to say. Spi­der-Man Noir, Nic Cage. Have you, I haven’t that yet?

Tony Kynas­ton: yet, no. It’s. I haven’t real­ly watched much TV since we’ve been away. Yeah

Cameron: Three or four episodes into it. Not, no, not real­ly sold on it. Um, and I love Nic Cage, as you know, but, um, yeah, it’s, yeah, it’s not real­ly, it’s not.

Tony Kynas­ton: Do you

Cameron: Out of,

Tony Kynas­ton: we

Cameron: you know, I have, I have a, a buck­et list goal of watch­ing every film he’s ever made. It’s sort of my buck­et list,

uh,

Tony Kynas­ton: Mm-hmm.

Cameron: work­ing my way through them. This is, I think there are prob­a­bly bet­ter places to go.

He’s just too mut­ed so far in this. He, I wan­na see him go, if you, he, he, he, you know. You spend an hour with Nic Cage, you want him to go full Nic Cage at least once in [01:02:00] that hour, right? What’s the point if he’s not going full Nic Cage? So,

Tony Kynas­ton: a

Cameron: yeah

Tony Kynas­ton: read in, I think it was in The Week­end Fin, said it was a slow burn, would take it to about episode four to, to take off. But I mean,

Cameron: That’s what Hunter told me, and that’s why I’m still watch­ing it

Tony Kynas­ton: Haven’t we reached peak Mar­vel? I

Cameron: Well, the inter­est­ing thing about this so far is it’s real­ly, you know, it’s real­ly not a super­hero thing. It’s more of a detec­tive noir. Bren­dan Gleeson’s in it as the Irish mob boss in New York, and Bren­dan Gleeson’s always fun to watch, even when he does­n’t have a lot to work with.

He’s play­ing your stock stan­dard Irish mob boss, but,

Tony Kynas­ton: Yep.

Cameron: you know, he’s great. You know? He c- he could do it stand­ing on his head with that face and that voice. You know, he can make any­thing sound inter­est­ing.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah

Cameron: So the two of them togeth­er, Bren­dan Glee­son and Nic Cage, it should be a com­plete scream­er, you know?

But it’s, there’s very lit­tle super­pow­ers in it so far. It’s more of a Bog­a­rt-era,

Tony Kynas­ton: [01:03:00] okay.

Cameron: know, Big Sleep kind of thing. Yeah, not as good as a Bog­a­rt film though, obvi­ous­ly, but, you know. it’s

Tony Kynas­ton: No.

Cameron: they’re g- they’re, they’re lean­ing more heav­i­ly into the noir than they are the super­hero side of it, which I assume is why Nic Cage signed up to it in the first place

Tony Kynas­ton: Hard to beat Lau­ren Bacall, isn’t it? The Big Sleep was fan­tas­tic

Cameron: Oh, oh my God. I just watched that again. Was it that one? It was one of her ear­ly films with Bogie I watched again recent­ly, and, um, I think it was The Big Sleep. She was just stun­ning. Just, she’s like 19 years old, he’s like 50, and she’s just, just n- she’s just a knock­out. Just the amount of cool, calm, charis­ma, sex appeal that she had was just,

Tony Kynas­ton: And I, I’m a

Cameron: eh,

Tony Kynas­ton: of The

Cameron: phe­nom­e­nal

Tony Kynas­ton: it up there with Casablan­ca. Can be under­rat­ed,

Cameron: Oh yeah

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah

Cameron: Fan­tas­tic films. And even, uh, Bogie, [01:04:00] just going back and watch­ing Bog­a­rt films, like just, you know, he’s, he’s icon­ic for a rea­son. Don’t know what it was about him, but he just. That sort of cool deliv­ery for every­thing is just, it’s holds up so well, what­ev­er, 70, 80 years lat­er. It’s just amaz­ing.

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah.

Cameron: All right.

Well,

Tony Kynas­ton: I had– Also, before

Cameron: H-

Tony Kynas­ton: say I had, had

Cameron: Mm.

Tony Kynas­ton: intro­duc­ing Rudy to a cou­ple of clips on YouTube, so just by the by. So have you– I for­get now what he was doing. He was say­ing, “What?” a lot, so I s- start­ed call­ing him Cap­tain. I said, “What?” “Cap­tain.” did­n’t know that song, so I played it

Cameron: What?

Tony Kynas­ton: him. I said, “Cap­tain.”

Cameron: ” Cap­tain.” I said, “What?” I said, “Cap­tain.” I said, “What you want?” Wow

Tony Kynas­ton: the cheese­burg­er, cheese­burg­er, cheese­burg­er, no Coke, Pep­si sketch either on Sat­ur­day Night Live, so I played

Cameron: Wow

Tony Kynas­ton: So we’ve been [01:05:00] repeat­ing that a lot on the trip.

Cameron: I had a friend of mine,

Tony Kynas­ton: I rec­om­mend peo­ple go and look

Cameron: yes. I had a friend of mine over here the oth­er day. Yeah, and he came over one night. I was look­ing after his kid. You know, he’s one of Fox’s friends, and I had, uh, the Blues Broth­ers on.

was the, um, it was the Aretha Franklin scene, and so we were watch­ing that and, and then I was try­ing to remem­ber who the band was, like w- whose band the band was, and he goes, “Well, aren’t they just actors?”

And I was like, “No, no, no.” Yeah, that’s right. I could­n’t remem­ber. I was like, “Sam Cooke or.” But it was Otis Red­ding. It was a bit of Otis Red­ding’s band, and Book­er T, and the SNL band and, you know, a bunch of them pulled togeth­er. But then I said to him, “You’ve seen the orig­i­nal SNL Blues Broth­ers clip, haven’t you?”

He goes, “No, nev­er seen it.” So I had to put that on for him, ’cause that’s– I said, “Look, this is one of my favorite things of all time.” Like, if, if I’m ever wan­na, if I ever just want a smile on my face, I just pull that up. And when they start danc­ing, when the

Tony Kynas­ton: Belushi [01:06:00] cart­wheel­ing.

Cameron: kicks in.

Tony Kynas­ton: great, isn’t

Cameron: Yeah, yeah.

Tony Kynas­ton: you don’t. It’s so unex­pect­ed, but it’s, it’s joy­ous, yeah.

Cameron: Oh, it nev­er fails to put a smile on my face, that clip. Um, agree I was gonna say some­thing else too. Uh, clips. music. Oh, yes. In bed last night, I dis­cov­ered on YouTube, uh, an extend­ed clip from a 1989 m- movie, maybe 1990, called The Bion­ic Show­down

Tony Kynas­ton: Ooh

Cameron: Uh, Lee Majors,

Tony Kynas­ton: Mm-hmm.

Cameron: Lind­say Wag­n­er,

Tony Kynas­ton: Mm-hmm.

Cameron: and San­dra Bul­lock as the Bion­ic Girl pre her whole career

Tony Kynas­ton: There was­n’t a bion­ic dog

Cameron: fight­ing.

Tony Kynas­ton: And Lex Luthor?

Cameron: Well, that was, that, that was in, uh, that was in The Bion­ic Woman. Lind­say Wag­n­er had the bion­ic dog, I think. But, um, this was the- they’re, like, fight­ing [01:07:00] evil Sovi­et bion­ic peo­ple. And, and so I watched, like, 20 min­utes of this, and it was just fan­tas­tic.

But as, so I saw some­body in the YouTube com­ments say, “Who was the genius?” And I need to look this up. Who was the absolute genius, right up there with Euler, and Galileo, and, and Ein­stein, and da Vin­ci, who fig­ured out in the ’70s that Steve Austin runs real­ly fast, and the way we’re gonna show that is by putting him in slow motion?

Because the audi­ence will fig­ure out that he’s so fast we need to slow him down so you can see how fast he’s going. Like, who fig­ured we would buy that as an audi­ence? But we did. We total­ly bought into that.

We, we will show him go real­ly slow, and, and you will f- you will some­how trans­late that [01:08:00] as real­ly fast.

And when. And real­ly strong. When he’s lift­ing things, if we make it real­ly slow,

Tony Kynas­ton: And use a sound

Cameron: A, it uses up min­utes. It what?

Tony Kynas­ton: And you put a sound effect behind it too

Cameron: Oh, your sound effect. Yeah.

Tony Kynas­ton: Hmm.

Cameron: My dad used to love to tell that when I was play­ing soc­cer when I was, like, five or six in Bund­aberg, I would run s- in slow motion and do the sound effects out loud. Did we?

Tony Kynas­ton: Oh,

Cameron: But I was sup­posed to be, I was sup­posed to be defend­ing the goal. Peo­ple were scor­ing goals while I was doing Steve Austin slow motion run­ning.

My team and my coach was not hap­py. Uh, yeah, but I mean, just, oh, brought me so much joy just watch­ing The Six Mil­lion Dol­lar Man. And at this stage, like in the late ’80s, ear­ly ’90s, when­ev­er it was, Lee Majors,

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah

Cameron: had put on a few [01:09:00] pounds. He was­n’t look- he was­n’t look­ing that bion­ic. I guess bion­ics just, uh, don’t.

I mean, I mean, it must be hard to stay fit when you’re bion­ic. You go, you go for a jog, you don’t burn any calo­ries ’cause it’s your, it’s your bion­ics that, that, that are doing the work, so got­ta feel sor­ry. Lind­say Wag­n­er looked in good shape, though. She was hot. She was still very, very hot. Had a whole Olivia New­ton-John vibe thing going on

Tony Kynas­ton: Okay. So if the Bion­ic Man, we– if we see the Bion­ic Man in the street today, he’s got a big beer bel­ly, uh, big man cans, one, big arm, one small arm, and two, two chick­en legs

Cameron: Well, actu­al­ly, I did some look­ing up and I saw that, uh, Lee Majors and Lind­say Wag­n­er were at a Com­ic-Con or some­thing like that. He’s still alive. He’s 87.

Tony Kynas­ton: Wow

Cameron: And they’re. And he look- he’s in good shape. Like, he looks pret­ty fit for an 87-year-old. They’re still out there doing, you know, con­ven­tions, a bit like [01:10:00] Shat­ner, you know, out there doing stuff, wag­ging the, shak­ing the what­ev­er.

Pro- prob­a­bly get­ting paid to turn up to con­ven­tions and that kind of stuff, so

Tony Kynas­ton: that her father

Cameron: good for him

Tony Kynas­ton: Yeah

Cameron: Yeah, I’ve seen that on the wall. I, I saw it in your place in Syd­ney, in a bed­room in Syd­ney. Mm-hmm. All right, we got­ta go and do this US show, ’cause I got kung fu to go to soon.

Tony Kynas­ton: All right

Cameron: All right, hap­py hunt­ing every­one

Tony Kynas­ton: Hap­py ASX