Space ads become economically viable, and other disasters

Adam: [00:00:25] Hello and welcome to comedian versus Economist. We demystify the world of money and help you get a handle on the bigger picture. My name's Adam and we're joined, as always, by my little older brother and real life economist. Thomas. Hi, Thomas. 

Thomas: [00:00:39] Adam, how are you going there? 

Adam: [00:00:42] Get that one out. You're probably still fatigued from FinFest. Awesome time. Awesome time at FinFest in Sydney last weekend. I can't wait to do it all again for FinFest 23, Thomas.Highlights from FinFest for you. 

Thomas: [00:01:02] Oh, look, it was awesome. I had a great time. I mean, Equity Mates and the team did an incredible job. It was. Yeah, it was super awesome. Like mixing festivals and investing was always going to be interesting, but I think they nailed it and it was a super festival. 

Adam: [00:01:16] That's what I've come to. I have coined the phrase. 

Thomas: [00:01:24] Just copyright on that. But actually I really loved just chatting to people because we haven't, you know, you and I have chatted a lot, but we don't really get to meet that many people. We had a great chat too. 

Adam: [00:01:34] Even get to meet each other. 

Thomas: [00:01:39] No. But I had a great, great chat to Maggie. She's been a long time listener and yeah, super impressed with how, you know, how much agencies she's taking with her money. I had a great chat with Riley and Adrian. Shout out to them. Shout out for the Whisky Supergrass. 

Adam: [00:01:54] Oh, that's the whisky guy I remember. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We had a great time with us. Yeah. I wish I had that too. Lauren broke too. I had a great chat with them at the afterparty as well, where there was a few whiskies being consumed. I think the I think the highlight for me was I think I have to go right back to the first session of the day where I was a bit I was a little bit nervous and I was the emcee and then the sound guy, I was like, Look, I'm just gonna need you to stall. For like, I took the stage. I just need you to stall for just a few minutes. 5 minutes. So I just went, all right, what better opportunity am I going to get? I just started plugging in, comedian versus economist. I said, You know, I'm Adam. I'm from the Comedian versus Economist podcast and this lady in the front row, guys, which one are you? And I said, I'm the comedian. And deadpan. She goes, Oh, well, never mind. It's just that parental disappointment on her face that just was. The best heckle I've ever had took. Me back to. To be back to high school. 

Thomas: [00:03:06] Yeah. Shout out. To Mum. It's great to get there. 

Adam: [00:03:08] Yeah. I never change. I love your work. I we, I did. I ask if there is anything on the Equity Mates forum community. Dot Equity Mates dot com during the week. Thanks to everyone who jumped in there and fired some questions at us. That was a bit of fun. Hopefully we'll do it again soon. But don't forget, there's lots of lots of great chat, lots of lots of banter happening in the Equity Mates forum. So head over there community dot Equity Mates dot com but Thomas massive show coming up as always you've got some fresh start us and choice cuts of prime economic figures we'll see what's happening with jobs. And. The Victorian Government is taking charge, pun intended of course of the energy market and look up in the sky. Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's an ad for Audi. Specialbuys could soon be appearing in the sky near the EU. But Thomas, time for another episode of Utopia or as we call in the federal budget. It's not out for us yet, but it will be out for you by the time you hear this. Hopefully work has already begun on the Melbourne monorail, or as it will be called, the Dana Rail, in honour of the Victorian Premier Dan Andrews. Thomas, what are we looking forward to in the budget? 

Thomas: [00:04:32] Uh, yeah. I mean not a heap. Obviously. It's, it's a budget. I mean it is interesting. I mean it's an interesting one in that, you know, the UK just had their mini budget that killed the Treasurer and the Prime Minister with a. Single budget I've always called. 

Adam: [00:04:49] This has been called a mini budget isn't it. 

Thomas: [00:04:51] Yeah. Yeah we normally it's like well it was the election budget. 

Adam: [00:04:54] For two years so we can Yeah. We can't keep having full budgets every night normally. 

Thomas: [00:04:59] I think normally the budgets, the full budgets in May, but I think because we just had an election, they get to reset the agenda right. With the mid-year. 

Adam: [00:05:08] Because I've got to admit, I was worried when it was called the mini budget, the last mini budget delivered by a rookie. And a rookie treasurer or whatever. His role was. Kwasi Kwarteng in the UK didn't get and say, well. 

Thomas: [00:05:23] No, no. Yeah. So yeah, we've covered that and trust and trust has gone. In the meantime, she's gone. 

Adam: [00:05:28] Yeah. So what can we expect from it? From this budget? 

Thomas: [00:05:31] Well I think I think Chalmers is going to play it pretty straight. I think it's going to be. No, no big moves. No, no, not not going to try and rock the boat in any big way. So it should be a fairly dull affair. What we what we. 

Adam: [00:05:47] It's for something different that's opposed to the rollicking good times we've had in previous budgets. This one is this planet Kazoo. 

Thomas: [00:05:58] The line they've been playing in the last week or so is to really set it up as in contrast to the previous government. And so they're really going hard over the past week about saving money by slashing the rorts and pork barrelling that they say characterise the Morrison Government. And so they're on a rorts and waste drive. That's what they're calling it. Yeah. Trimming the fat. The trimming. Yeah. Trimming and trimming the pork. Yeah. And I reckon they can save $10 billion in the budget just by it. Just by cutting back on, on the rorts. 

Adam: [00:06:31] Well no one's worried that we've got rorting. Going on to begin with. Well. The genuine cost saving measure, you know what? If we just stop defrauding people, then we could save some dollars. 

Thomas: [00:06:45] They realised that the Morrison government became quite famous for some pretty dodgy funds and allocation of funds. So the big, big ones they're targeting is the Building Back Building Better Regions Fund. That was seen as a bit of a national slush fund. And then there was the $660 million Urban Congestion Fund, which was funding car parks, rail car parks. And so that that copped a lot of heat as well was seen as pretty dodgy. So they're sort of playing on that and yeah, saying that they can by going hard on those they can they can save money, right. Yeah. Finance Minister Katy Gallagher says the former government used taxpayers' money to cynically buy votes before elections by politicising grant funds. Yeah. 

Adam: [00:07:33] That's what the next government is going to say to that, you know. Because this is the job of the incoming government surely is to just shed the previous governments everything that they did. 

Thomas: [00:07:46] It does seem like that. Well, I mean. Because the funny thing is. Right. So, you know, just before. One thing we know is already in the budget because it got announced a couple of weekends ago, I think while we were in Sydney, was that they're giving $2.2 billion to the suburban rail loop in Melbourne. So this is a Victorian State Government project. Right, and it's seen as a bit of a dog by a lot of people. So it was approved three months before the last state election. Right. So I think that's cynically by votes before elections that Katy Gallagher was talking about. It was done with no business case. It was announced without a business case. Yeah, no, there was no consultation with the Parliamentary Budget Office, the PBO, which is the agency in government that's set up to make sure that the government is getting good value for money and all the projects. So they didn't know about it. There was no consultation with Infrastructure Australia. So Infrastructure Australia is the body that determines the infrastructure priorities.

Adam: [00:08:54] It's utopia. It is. So that's the department that you tell? Yeah. They never talk about the TV series Utopia, if you haven't seen it. It's classic Australian television. Some of the best TV out there. And it is worth watching at budget time as you're sifting through the budget press releases and especially when people are not consulting within the structure of Australia. 

Thomas: [00:09:15] Yeah, yeah, yeah. So they didn't. Talk to Tony from the Nation joining us. So that is right. Yeah. So Infrastructure Australia that they'd supposed to be an independent body determining priority infrastructure needs, they weren't consulted with it and the Victorian Transport Department wasn't even told about it. 

Adam: [00:09:34] Now, well, what would. You work for? Possible IT interests. Could the Transport. Does the Department have a new rail project? 

Thomas: [00:09:42] Yeah. So not only were they not told the project had a code name and there was a gag order on it. 

Adam: [00:09:51] And this is exactly how you end up with a loop as well. It's essentially a rail that doesn't have it doesn't even have a destination mechanism. It just goes round. It's going to. End up back to that. 

Thomas: [00:10:03] But it doesn't because it hasn't the current plan doesn't close the loop between Werribee and Melbourne Airport. 

Thomas: [00:10:10] So it's kind of like on the record. 

Adam: [00:10:12] And it's going to run once again. So they've trimmed off fat and they've saved how much? 

Thomas: [00:10:18] Ten, 10 billion.

Adam: [00:10:19] 10 billion. But this is going to cost 22 billion. 

Thomas: [00:10:22] 2.2. So. A fifth of what they've said is going to this project. So the Victorian PBO, the Parliamentary Budget Office, did get involved. They found out that the cost was initially 50 billion. They reckon it's going to be closer to 200 billion. So bit of a miss and. And the cost benefit analysis has a cost benefit ratio between 0.6 and 0.7, which means that for every dollar spent, the state gets a return of between $0.60 and $0.70 value. 

Adam: [00:10:57] So it's every time. Every time people catch a train, the government loses 30 to $0.40. 

Thomas: [00:11:03] No, no, no. Not the government but the society in general. 

Adam: [00:11:07] Oh, good thing. Nothing, because they've had to do that. All right, Thomas, we got jobs data during the week. Where's the job market at? 

Thomas: [00:11:18] We're still tight. Still hot. Still looking pretty good. Unemployment rates. 

Adam: [00:11:23] Well, it's tight. It's hot. It's looking good. 

Thomas: [00:11:26] That is what it is. Not trying to personify the job market too much, but it's a very sexy miniskirt. Looking great for his age. Yeah. 3.5% unemployment rate that's held steady and the low is still the lowest since 1974. Yeah, things are going. Yeah. Doing full time jobs now up 7% over the pandemic. So they're pumping along part time jobs, down 0.2%. So, you know, kind of nothing. But that's what you get with the job market. The people get pulled from part time work into full time work. So we're seeing that happen. Also seeing participation rate holding at record highs. So just under 67%. So that's some of the highest level. That's the highest level on record. Yeah. So people are loving it. 

Adam: [00:12:14] Is this a good news, bad news story though because like the RBA wants the number to kind of grow a bit so that they can slow down rising rates. 

Thomas: [00:12:25] Yeah, they do want the unemployment rate to be a bit higher, which is an odd position to be in. 

Adam: [00:12:33] Have three cheers for unemployment. 

Thomas: [00:12:35] But we're starting to see this already. So we are starting to see job ads. The job ads are turning. So job ads lead the jobs market. I'm in a data sense by that, you know six months or so six to seek job ads are down 5.2% in September. They've now fallen for four consecutive months. So it's clear and all the jobs' job ads that are sort of telling the same story, the job ads have peaked and things are starting to slow down. Still pretty tight like there's still more vacancies than. Unemployed people in New South Wales and Western Australia. But you know, it's still very tight but it's clearly turned and is slowing. The one thing that came out this week which was a little alarming, is KPMG did a survey of Australian business leaders and that showed that 78% of CEOs plan to impose a hiring freeze on new staff in 2023. Hmm. Yeah. So that's four and five. 

Adam: [00:13:29] So that's yeah. Wow. Yeah. So what's driving that? Is that just costs, uh, getting costs down because money's expensive now. 

Thomas: [00:13:37] I think that's probably part of the story. I think it's all large, largely due to the economic outlook that they're seeing in 2023, the economy slowing, perhaps we're looking at a global recession, definitely a different market than we're in right now, like a slowing economy. And that's on the back of, you know, the obvious rate hikes, 250 basis points. That's having an impact. So things are definitely slowing. Hmm. Yeah. So they're saying 64% of them think they're considering laying off employees due to the economic outlook. 

Adam: [00:14:09] 64%. Yeah. Well we actually we've done pretty quick from hiring freeze to what does the world now we're laying people off at 64, 64%. Yeah, I. 

Thomas: [00:14:22] Things that happened at the same time you're right you don't hire at the same time as you're firing people. 

Adam: [00:14:27] Yeah, yeah. Well yeah but when you. Did it. Before, when you said that then four in five CEOs are going to put on a hiring freeze. You didn't also fail to mention that they were also plants sacking a bunch of people as well. Yeah. So we said we should be worried about this. Is this cause for concern? 

Thomas: [00:14:45] The business survey data is not as reliable as the job ads data. Right. There's a lot of sentiment there. So are they saying, look, we think we might freeze hiring in 2023, but we might get there in four months and be like, oh, shit, things aren't as bad as we thought. And yeah, we're not going to do it. So it says more about where business sentiment is rather than the job market. But it's definitely not a good sign for the jobs market and to see the RBA which I think is probably going to push the unemployment rate higher, which is a win. 

Adam: [00:15:14] Yeah. So if that's the case, if that plays out and people start or companies start laying people off. Hmm. Is that a sign ? The RBA went too far like this that when we all know what we'll all sit back and get I guess was too many rate rises. 

Thomas: [00:15:32] Yeah, potentially. I mean, I think it's probably inevitable. I mean, the current unemployment rate, three and a half percent lowest since 1974. That's not sustainable. Like, I don't think we can hold the unemployment rate at that kind of level without overheating the economy a bit. So it's probably inevitable that the unemployment rate is going to push back towards four and a half per cent. That's what everyone seems to think kind of is how quickly we get. There is probably the question. 

Adam: [00:15:58] We have a target for unemployment? Like do we like in the way that we have an inflation target of 2 to 3%? Is there a target for an unemployment band as. 

Thomas: [00:16:07] It's in the obvious mandate to to target fall in what they call full employment and full employment doesn't have a clear definition. 

Adam: [00:16:20] These are the same people that put the real proposal together where it's a mandate. We must have full employment. Well, it's full employment. I'm not sure. We don't know where we're not when we get there. 

Thomas: [00:16:37] Because you're because you always have some unemployment in the system, because people are changing jobs and businesses are closed and open and people move around. So you never don't want to, you're not targeting 0% unemployment. That's not realistic or desirable. So some level of unemployment is appropriate in a dynamic labour market. Right. But what level it is is unknown, you know, it's not clear. So we tend to talk more in economics about inflation, accelerating rate of unemployment. So the unemployment rate where inflation isn't accelerating, where it's kind of a steady state and that's what we go for. But we don't know what that is either. 

Adam: [00:17:16] Because it seems pretty, it seems pretty bad that I feel like we've got full employment at the moment, right? Everyone's you know, most people who want a job can have a job or get one. It feels like, you know, people, if they want to work, are able to at the moment. 

Thomas: [00:17:29] Through the 2000 and tens, I would have said full employment was somewhere around 5%, four and a half to five. I didn't ever think in my lifetime I would see three and a half per cent unemployment in Australia. I just, you know, just you. 

Adam: [00:17:42] And me both times. I remember when we were kids growing up and dads. Talk about unemployment, we'd say Surely we'll never see three and a half percent. Yeah. Or it just felt like that. 

Thomas: [00:17:56] Jobs market had changed fundamentally from the seventies. And we're never going back there. You know, it's 50 years since this business has been this low. So, yeah. So I think it's yeah, I think it's probably going to go higher and I think we're probably tighter than full employment right now. Right. But the key question here is really like how the RBA is, you know, 250 basis points in six months, that's super aggressive. It's the most aggressive hiking cycle of all the central banks in all the world in terms of speed. Has BNZ gone further but not as quickly? So it's taken Abby ANZ longer to get where they are. 

Adam: [00:18:32] The US is going. Away quicker than the US. The US is going up like 75 points of time. 

Thomas: [00:18:38] Yeah, they have gone more. But it has less impact because the US has their mortgage markets that work at fixed rate, 30 year fixed rates. Right. Because not everyone's on variable mortgages. So when rates go higher in Australia it impacts the economy much more broadly because everyone with a mortgage gets impacted by it. You know in the US it's only people getting a new mortgage, you get impacted by it. So pound for pound basis, point for basis point, Australia has had more impact. But like what Gareth said from CBA says he's saying that the aggressive monetary tightening we've seen is like having five shots of vodka in an hour and saying everything is okay, but you know that it will soon have a big effect. 

Adam: [00:19:25] Yeah, but I look forward to that effect. That's a terrible analogy. It's party time, baby. All right, why don't we pause here, grab a quick word from this week's sponsors and be back with more comedian versus economist right after this. Welcome back here on comedian versus economist. You will find us lurking not lurking in just taking part in the Equity Mates community. Community dot Equity Mates dot com. Head over there for lots of good chatter, but you can of course send us an email at Equity Mates dot com or via the website Equity Mates dot com forward slash CV. But Thomas, we're looking at the energy market in Victoria and the Victorian Government is shaking up the energy market. What have we learnt? What are they up to? 

Thomas: [00:20:18] Big announcement. Yeah, quite, quite groundbreaking. So the context here is the state elections coming up next month and the Andrews Government's announced new emissions reduction targets. So they're now going for 75 and 80% by 2035. That compares with 50% by 2030. So that's much more aggressive. Okay. And it brings forward its net zero target by five years to 2045. So the 2035 targets are bringing that for or ramping up how ambitious they are. By 2035 people are saying that's a coal killer. So that means the end of coal in Victoria, coal fired power. So that's not going to be viable with that kind of target. They're sort of on the way out anyway. But that's really that's really going to bring that forward. The other really interesting thing they're doing is reviving the State Electricity Commission, the SCC. So this was a government or government electricity organisation that existed, was set up like 100 years ago by John Monash or something like 115 years ago, but then got privatised during the Kennett Government. So but they're bringing that back basically they're not super clear on the details, but it could be a retailer, it could be an asset owner. So could own generation assets, could and then could then retail, then it could own those assets in partnership with super funds. So Dan Andrews is saying we've already taken soundings and to say that industry super are excited is an understatement. They're very, very keen. 

Adam: [00:21:52] High fiving, backslapping, going on. Should if cheese was. Going off. 

Thomas: [00:22:02] The starting funding is $1,000,000,000 to develop their own renewable energy assets with a focus on wind assets. 

Adam: [00:22:12] Hi there. How has the plan received as a paper? So industry super is excited. 

Thomas: [00:22:21] Industry I think pretty. Much is known. You have pretty much the response is pretty positive actually. I mean, it's interesting in the sense that it's a big reversal in the sort of the privatisation agenda that's been characterising the last 30 years. So there was this big push to just get the government out of everything, to sell everything and not get involved in provision of services or yeah. 

Adam: [00:22:49] Or things governments should really be involved in. 

Thomas: [00:22:53] That was, that was the idea and even said something so essential like electricity, that was the idea. And that's why all the, you know, retailers and assets were sold. But there's a tidal shift now and they're reversing course and quite unashamedly. So Andrews is saying these assets should never have been sold. No one has won out from that except shareholders in private companies who are about profit. That's their job. This is not a business. It's essential. 

Adam: [00:23:16] So that's good. Yeah. I mean, it's good to say that, you know, like eventually that a government could go, you know, this was a bad idea, you know, like yeah, there's a tendency, I think, for governments to just keep throwing good money after bad to save face. Unless it was the other government that was doing that there was. Yes. And if you shut it down straight away. 

Thomas: [00:23:38] Yeah. And there's a rorts and waste drive.To my reading the jury is in on this like privatisation particularly of essential services hasn't worked, it hasn't delivered better outcomes and has ended up funding funnelling money off to private interests. 

Adam: [00:23:56] And we talked about Transurban on the show. 

Thomas: [00:24:01] But even but even a triple C which is one of the has I think Rod Sims I think was coming out saying it just hasn't worked and just hasn't been it hasn't delivered value for money. Right. This is an interesting case. So one that we're turning the tide on, that we're moving away from privatisation. The AFA was calling it nationalisation which is, is a strong word but it's, you know, it's not too far from the truth. That's sort of what, what's happening. I mean they're not. I mean nationalisation. You take it to a private company and buy it and make it public like a state owned company. That's not what's happening. They're just creating a new agency. But yeah, that's sort of the idea. They're getting heavily involved in the market scene. 

Adam: [00:24:43] So will this be a trend? Are we going to do this like we're doing it with energy or in a. They say the government start buying up all sorts of private companies. 

Thomas: [00:24:50] Oh, I don't think so. 

Adam: [00:24:53] We're heading towards, like, communism, kind of. 

Thomas: [00:24:57] I don't think so. Some people will have you believe that. But I don't I don't think it's going that way. I don't think so. I think we'll see the tide turn on essential services like energy. I don't think you know, I think before and start I think they were maybe where the government was in things where it maybe shouldn't have been and I think maybe you know, maybe Australia Post is probably an example of where it hasn't worked badly. It's done, done a reasonable job. I mean I think what states are seeing is they want to deliver these targets. I want to hit these renewable energy targets and emissions targets. And the national federal settings just aren't doing it. The market isn't doing it. And so they're having to go it alone and make it happen. And that's much easier to make happen when you own the infrastructure and you can directly engage in the market. Mhm. The only group that I've seen who are not loving it is the energy generators and retailers. So Sarah McNamara, who's the CEO of the Australian Energy Council, which represents sort of the peak body for retailers and generators, saying it's a retrograde step. Publicly listed companies have already written off $11.5 billion of shareholder value. This announcement has the potential to further punish shareholders. Government shouldn't need to make direct energy investments, which the private sector has demonstrated is ready and willing to do so. There's no it's not in not an entirely bad point because like, I think the real problem here is that the federal settings haven't given enough certainty to sort of drive this. And without that structure and certainty in place, then the market just hasn't hasn't reacted. And state governments are going like, okay, is the federal government not sorting this out? We need to step in and get involved and that sort of thing, that's where it's at. 

Adam: [00:26:39] And I'm so easily swayed by words like. Like I was all I was all on board, like the nationalisation of energy. And then she. She had some. Good words and I kind of made some good points. Now, I don't know who to trust and I'm afraid. Finally, for anyone who caught our session at FinFest, which was investing for 2050 and we crown in fact an investor of the future, congratulations to Buhari Ross from Magellan for taking home that award. Sweet little trophy, in fact. But Thomas, this headline, this story here seems straight out of our made up BuzzFeed headlines that we had for that session. What is going on? 

Thomas: [00:27:29] So basically researchers have found that space ads, which is where you have floating ads in space. Hmm. Not only possible today, but are already economically viable. 

Adam: [00:27:42] This is tragic news. 

Thomas: [00:27:44] It's terrible. Yeah, this is a horrifying prospect. 

Adam: [00:27:48] Look, there's the Big Dipper, the Southern Cross, and over they could see the golden arches. I thought we were trying to clean up space junk. Yeah. Now we've invented space junk email. 

Thomas: [00:28:01] Yeah, I think it's about monetising space junk. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, it's not entirely as bad as it seems. So it's accrued publishing in the journal Aerospace. From Skoltech and Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology. Lead author Shamil Big Timur of this time looked at the economic side of things, and as unrealistic as it may seem, we show that space advertising, based on 50 or more satellites flying in formation, could be economically viable. 

Adam: [00:28:28] No,. 

Thomas: [00:28:29] But the debate. The idea is that you have these solar sails, 32 square metres, so like a five by six metre sail up in the sky reflecting sunlight back at the earth. 

Adam: [00:28:43] Reflecting heat back at the earth. Good. 

Thomas: [00:28:45] Just some more. 

Adam: [00:28:49] You spent 10 minutes. Talking about the Victorian Government's plan to tackle climate change, global warming and we're going to fire up some satellites and reflect with more, some back to earth. We are after it's gone down. 

Thomas: [00:29:03] Yeah. So you get it. Like a bunch of those and they create a pixel. I think they're like 50 or more sort of like. 

Adam: [00:29:10] So you get like where the rest. Is in your TV. We get so when you get the pixels, arrange to make the picture. 

Thomas: [00:29:16] Yeah. Yeah. And it's only 50 so it's not like. I don't know how that's enough. To make. It's probably a logo. You've got a logo or something. 

Adam: [00:29:24] Yeah, maybe not a logo, but maybe like a couple of words. It's a bit like trying to type words on a calculator, you know? Yeah. So my sister, we're going to write Boobies in the Sky as a pilot. 

Thomas: [00:29:42] Crowning moment of human civilization. So as. Not a neon sign. That's what I imagined when I read the headlines. Floating, floating neon signs are not going to be that yet. That's in the distant dystopian future. But yeah, it's reflecting sunlight. So it's a bit like when you can see a satellite at night, so it's only going to be at sunset and sunrise. So when it's dark enough to see but you can still pick the sun from space. 

Adam: [00:30:09] It's perfect. Nobody likes to look at the sky during sunset. It's a romantic stroll along the beach, looking over the ocean and sharing the joy of discovery. You can save 10% on average here. Now. This could confuse your religious types, though, as I look to the heavens for a sign. Well, you know, listen, I think. God said I didn't have to eat my vegetables if I didn't want to. Instead, he gave me a discount code. Well, this is disappointing. This is a disappointing development. 

Thomas: [00:30:51] Yeah, yeah, I think it is. But I think it's an interesting one. Like I think initially until we get saturated with, I think the first companies to do it will cop a lot of hatred. You know.

Adam: [00:31:04] Oh absolutely.

Thomas: [00:31:05] To pollute the night sky like you think about a billboard on a highway or a building. You're kind of covering up something that's already kind of ugly. Mhm. If you're covering up the night, the bedazzled night sky. 

Adam: [00:31:18] What's something? 

Thomas: [00:31:19] People are going to get upset. 

Adam: [00:31:20] Do you remember when they advertised the horse race at the opera house? They projected the it was for Everest. I think I projected some advertising for the Everest onto the Sydney Opera House. I didn't go there and well don't people weren't people weren't keen on. 

Adam: [00:31:37] On a national. Icon. And you advertise a horse race. I think it was a horse race. There was some advertising that was done on the opera house. Yeah. 

Thomas: [00:31:48] Right, yeah. Something like that. Yeah, I remember that. Yeah. But I mean, the other thing is who owns space? Like once you're in far space, like. Yeah. You know, can we, can we set up a CubeSat network over New Zealand just like you saw. 

Adam: [00:32:09] International sledging go going through 50 pixels at a time. You're a boob. What started drunk again? Uh, all right. I'll remember that. That should definitely do us for this week. Thank you so much for tuning in. Thank you. If you did come and say hi. First we had a blast over there. Really did appreciate people coming up and saying goodbye and having photos and generally just showing an interest in the show because yeah, it does make a huge difference for us and keeps us wanting to do more. So. So thank you very much. Write the show, leave a review wherever you get your podcast that helps out enormously. You can of course send us an email cve@equitymates.com. That's it for us for now for this week. We will chat with you again next time.