The Big Picture

Transcript: McKeel Hagerty, CEO and Chairman of Hagerty Insurance



 

 

The transcript from this week’s, MiB: McKeel Hagerty, CEO and Chairman of Hagerty , is below.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube (video), YouTube (audio), and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

~~~

Masters in Business: McKeel Hagerty, CEO & Chairman, Hagerty

Barry Ritholtz (00:00:08): This week on the podcast, another extra special guest. McKeel Hagerty is chairman and CEO of Hagerty specialty insurance. Fascinating company. They took a little niche wooden boat insurer and turned it into a publicly traded company by embracing the community around collector cars, trucks, boats, et cetera. I thought this conversation was really quite fascinating, not just as a car guy, but as a business guy. And I think you will also. With no further ado, my conversation with Hagerty’s McKeel Hagerty.

McKeel Hagerty, welcome to Bloomberg.

McKeel Hagerty (00:00:56): Thanks for having me.

Barry Ritholtz (00:00:58): So let’s start with your background. You get a BA in English and philosophy from Pepperdine, and then you get a master’s in theology at St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary. What was the plan — to become a priest?

McKeel Hagerty (00:01:14): I think about my academic career in a couple of phases. I was an entrepreneur from the time I was young — I had a bunch of businesses when I was very young — and thought I would go study business in college. And I ended up falling in love with philosophy and literature and all these things; I was a philosophy and English major. I was a good student and I thought I’d get my PhD, but I needed a little break to work on languages and some things. And I learned about St. Vladimir’s, which is just north of New York here — it’s up near Rye or Scarsdale. And it was this incredible experience, because I got to work on my languages. I learned a lot about leadership, actually, at the seminary, because there are some pretty extraordinary individuals there. And there is no doubt about it — you are there to study to become a priest. And while that was not my driving reason to go there, it’s a little bit like Michael Corleone — they kind of drag you in, and before you know it, you’re suddenly thinking about becoming a priest.

I didn’t become a priest, because then I moved on and started my doctoral work in philosophy up in Boston, and did not complete that because the family business called. I had worked in it during the summers up until then, with mom and dad and my two sisters. And all of a sudden I found myself no longer thinking about exams and a dissertation and all those things, and thinking about this really cool business.

Barry Ritholtz (00:02:44): So let’s talk about this business. The hagiography is: your parents, Frank and Louise, started Hagerty Insurance Agency in Traverse City, Michigan (Yes.) for what I never would have guessed was an actual business — collector wooden boats. (That’s right.) Are there enough collector wooden boats to sustain a full business?

McKeel Hagerty (00:03:07): There are enough wooden boats to insure to sustain a very small family business, with a few employees. It was kind of a retirement gig for my mom and dad. They had had a general insurance agency, and they sold that, and they wanted something else to do. But there were a couple of principles in the back of their mind: they wanted a national business instead of a local one. They wanted one that was in a niche, rather than sort of general purpose. And they wanted one that could have real sustainability over a long period of time. So wooden boats was an unoccupied business space — a literally unmet need. They matched the unmet need with an underlying interest in wooden boats and in cars — my dad was a wooden boat, vintage boat guy and also a car guy. And so this was just the fun of combining the business knowledge with a passion. And again, my sisters and I all kind of helped out when it was much smaller, and we kind of stumbled into the car insurance business, which was much, much larger than the wooden boat business.

Barry Ritholtz (00:04:10): Even the collector car business is orders of magnitude —

McKeel Hagerty (00:04:13): Oh, orders of magnitude larger. Millions of vehicles.

Barry Ritholtz (00:04:15): But let’s not jump quite that far ahead. You and your dad used to work on cars — rebuilding projects. You mentioned you had a couple of side hustles: lawn mowing, things like that.

McKeel Hagerty (00:04:29): Yeah, my apple orchard.

Barry Ritholtz (00:04:30): You spent 500 bucks buying a 1967 Porsche 911S when you were 13. (Yes.) I wouldn’t be allowed to buy a car at 13 — I was lucky I had a bike. And then you and your father rebuild this.

McKeel Hagerty (00:04:46): That’s right. I will also note it was the only really good car deal I’ve ever done in my life, so just for what it’s worth.

Barry Ritholtz (00:04:52): So I’m going to assume that was the spark that started your enthusiasm for cars.

McKeel Hagerty (00:04:58): Yeah, it was. And you know, my dad was a do-it-yourselfer, hobbyist, restorer guy in the garage. And both my sisters also restored cars with him — they were older than I was. And then I was the third along, and we convinced this older gentleman in our town to sell us this 911S for 500 bucks. And I had to mow an awful lot more lawns and sell a lot more apples out of my orchard to buy the parts to restore the car. But by the time I could drive, it was ready.

Barry Ritholtz (00:05:27): Good planning.

McKeel Hagerty (00:05:27): It was great planning. And I can tell you, there was nobody in my high school driving a Porsche, so I would sneak it into the teachers’ parking lot, because no one would believe that a student had a Porsche. (That’s hilarious.) But back then, in the eighties, cars like that were not expensive. They were not considered to be necessarily that valuable. They were just kind of cool older cars. And so we kind of approached it as a family — like, hey, you can get a lot of car for not a lot of money, and you can have something really fun to enjoy. And so that was just my life growing up.

Barry Ritholtz (00:05:59): I love that. The 300 SLs from the fifties were being sold at a depreciated price in the sixties and seventies. (Oh, of course.) It’s astonishing.

McKeel Hagerty (00:06:07): Well, the most valuable car today, people will tell you, is the Ferrari GTO — 1962. They’re worth tens and tens of millions of dollars. But in the 1970s, you could buy them for 15 grand. They were nothing. And now they’re 50 million, 60 million dollars.

Barry Ritholtz (00:06:22): Unbelievable. That 911S you restored — still have it?

McKeel Hagerty (00:06:27): Still have it.

Barry Ritholtz (00:06:27): Still drive it?

McKeel Hagerty (00:06:28): Of course. It’s my first car out every season and the last one I put away.

Barry Ritholtz (00:06:32): Wow, that’s amazing. We could spend a lot of time talking about what else you drive, and we’ll get to that later. I’m curious — when did you first realize Hagerty could become something a whole lot larger than a niche wooden boat insurer?

McKeel Hagerty (00:06:50): Oh, we had already started the car business in the early 1990s. I’ve had a couple of aha moments, and this one — I remember it like we were sitting here today. It was the fall of 1995. I was doing my doctoral work in Boston, and we were reading Plato’s Republic in Greek. So I’m up at Boston College, we’re working on Plato’s Republic in Greek — that’s a big slog, I can tell you. And I was trying to help out the family business kind of from a distance.

And the challenge with insurance — insurance is an incredible industry. It’s stable. There’s a lot more interesting stuff to it than people think. But it is just not very sexy to talk about. Nobody loves talking about insurance. And even with these big brands and stuff today, they still don’t want to talk about it very much. And so I was literally sitting in this Plato’s Republic class, and on the side of my notebook I wrote this thing: if we would just stop acting like an insurance business and start acting more like a club for car owners, it would just transform the conversation that you’re having with people — because then you’re acting more like a car person, instead of an insurance person trying to sell a car person something. And I literally wrote this idea of: turn Hagerty into a car club. I wrote it in my notebook, and I closed my notebook. I went home that night to my apartment, and I dropped out of my PhD program right then and there, and I went home the next week.

Barry Ritholtz (00:08:12): Well, let me validate that — not that you, as a public company, need my validation. Full disclosure: I have a few of my cars insured with Hagerty. I’m a member of the club. I get the Driver’s Club magazine. But it’s obvious in hindsight — oh, of course you’re going to focus on this niche that is kind of ignored (Yes.) by the major insurance companies. How challenging was it to convince the rest of the family — hey, this is the way to go; we are not an insurance company selling to car collectors, we’re car people checking a few of their boxes?

McKeel Hagerty (00:08:53): It took me a few years. You know, we were a very close family. It was really fun to work together with everybody in those early days. My dad retired in kind of that late nineties; my mom retired shortly thereafter. I was working with my sisters. So they gave me enough rope to go test it out — that if we just changed the dialogue and acted like we’re going to build an automotive branded business that happens to sell insurance, and we’re going to do it around this membership concept.

It wasn’t like no one had ever done something like that. If you think in the early days, AAA was kind of like that — the motor club (they’re very different than that now). Or if you were to even think of something like AARP, which is a different sort of segment — they sell a lot of insurance and they treat this group of people well. USAA, serving military families. It’s just, nobody had ever done it in a business like ours. And so it took a little while to convince them that that was the way to go to market, and that we could change the way we were thinking.

But you mentioned something — there was another piece in this, which was the next aha. And the next aha was that most of these cars were insured by the big insurance companies. So think State Farm, Allstate — today, Progressive, Geico, everybody. And we’re a little company. I mean, we had a tiny family business. How the heck are you going to compete against these monsters? And so after we got the club up and running, I realized — well, what if we just partnered with these companies rather than competing against them, and said: look, we are going to do one thing and one thing only. We’re going to be expert in these cars. We know the customers really well. We’re building a really big, rich bunch of data. What if we partnered with them? And so the first big partnership like this, we landed 22, 23 years ago, and that was with Allstate. And Allstate’s huge — again, huge company. I knew they insured hundreds of thousands of these cars.

Barry Ritholtz (00:10:50): Spun out from Sears so long ago.

McKeel Hagerty (00:10:51): Exactly. Lots of interesting things in that company. And I met the CEO at the time, through people who helped connect us. And I said, look, I think I can make you better at this one tiny little thing if you just give us a chance. And they’re still a partner today — that program still grows every year. And now we’ve just moved through the entire insurance industry. We’ve partnered with virtually all of the big insurance companies. And so today, if you insure your home and your auto and everything with one of them, but you have a vintage car, collector car, whatever you want to call it, that usually comes to us. And so the big scalability of the business was: one, show up like a club, this member organization; and two, partner rather than compete. Because if you’re small, it’s impossible to compete against a huge company. But if you partner with them, it changes the game.

Barry Ritholtz (00:11:45): Well, when you say it’s impossible to compete — one of the fascinating things about insuring an old ‘Vette or an old Porsche is, any of the big firms are going to charge you 1,500, 2,500 a year. Alright, so I have a ’67 ‘Vette, which is actually my least favorite car to drive.

McKeel Hagerty (00:12:08): I’ve got to ask — which motor?

Barry Ritholtz (00:12:10): The 327. Yeah, but with a stick. Nassau blue over white. (Very nice. Spectacular.) But it’s a pig to drive. But it doesn’t matter, because I think Progressive was like 2,200 — you guys were 500 and change. Because of the data: you guys know how often these are driven, know the value, know they’re really not going to get stolen. (That’s right.) As much as Gone in 60 Seconds made it look sexy, everybody knows these cars, their VINs, where they are — especially something rare and valuable, which the ‘Vette is not. It’s really fascinating that nobody else saw this until you guys did. How did the pricing model come along?

McKeel Hagerty (00:12:58): Well, you talked about how you drive your car, but you probably don’t drive it very much. You probably have daily drivers that you drive more, and you are less concerned about where you park them and that sort of thing. My late mother passed away just two years ago. I remember asking her every year — her memory wasn’t so great towards the end of her life — like, Mom, what made this business special? And she would just say: because people take good care of their toys. (Of course.) And that is the core emotional nugget of this business. People have a toy, they spent real money on it, and they take good care of it. And wherever there is care, there is better insurance risk. So you can charge less. You can build marketing around that. You can get a little bit of momentum.

Barry Ritholtz (00:13:41): But not just a little less. It’s not like you’re beating them by 10%. It’s a fraction of what you pay for regular insurance.

McKeel Hagerty (00:13:48): Well, right. And look, the typical ’67 Corvette owner probably drives that car a thousand, maybe 1,500 miles a year. Some years less.

Barry Ritholtz (00:13:56): Half the guys in my car group — and they’re almost all guys, but not exclusively — some of these guys have 10, 20, 30 cars.

McKeel Hagerty (00:14:07): Exactly.

Barry Ritholtz (00:14:07): So if they’re driving a car, it’s something different. Maybe they’re putting 500 miles a year on each car, at most.

McKeel Hagerty (00:14:16): So, one of the things you asked about — pricing. Not only is the pricing on the physical car less expensive with us; the liability is too. And it’s exactly to that point: you can only drive one car at a time. Liability follows the person, not the car. And so we had an ad very early on in the program — there was a now-late collector out in the Pacific Northwest with over 2,000 cars. We put his name and face on one of our ads, and it said: here’s Harold LeMay, our worst nightmare, because he has 2,000 cars, but we charge him only one time for liability.

Barry Ritholtz (00:14:50): So how do you — is that a fleet insurance? How do you do something —

McKeel Hagerty (00:14:52): Kind of like that, yeah.

Barry Ritholtz (00:14:53): If someone has more — and I think the line I heard about tattoos applies to cars: two tattoos is either too few or too many. And if you have half a dozen or a dozen cars, it’s probably too many to manage yourself, but too few to hire a full-time Jay Leno-like guy to run it. (That’s right.)

McKeel Hagerty (00:15:15): Most people are space limited. If they have enough money to be into it, they end up buying everything that they can afford and still store.

Barry Ritholtz (00:15:24): The storage is the problem. I’m waiting for permission to build a garage. (There you go.) A detached garage, as opposed to my built-in garage. And if that gets approved by the town, that’s going to be both dangerous and expensive.

McKeel Hagerty (00:15:39): Well, I’m going to love it though, because then I’ll have more to insure for you.

Barry Ritholtz (00:15:41): That’s six more cars’ storage for you guys. Yes. Really, really interesting.

Coming up, we continue our conversation with McKeel Hagerty, CEO of the specialty insurance firm, talking about how he built the company into a one-and-a-half-billion-dollar revenue driver. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

Barry Ritholtz (00:16:10): I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special guest this week is McKeel Hagerty. He is the chairman and CEO of Hagerty collector car insurance. The firm insures every collectible vehicle — and a handful of boats — for almost 3 million collectors. So: 2025 revenues of 1.5 billion. 1.3 billion in written premium — a record. 371,000 new members. Net income plus 91%. This is a real publicly traded company — HGTY. (Yes.) Wow.

McKeel Hagerty (00:16:49): I used to have hair when we started all of that. But, you know, things are going well.

Barry Ritholtz (00:16:53): So I guess if you’re not pulling your hair out of your head, you’re not public. Let’s talk about how you’ve driven this. One of the interesting insights that seems to have shaped your strategy was that collector cars aren’t just financial assets — they’re emotional assets. You described them as favorite toys. How did that shape how the firm developed?

McKeel Hagerty (00:17:20): Well, we started in the simplest possible way, which was as an insurance agency — you might have mentioned that in the first intro, and that’s true. That’s the easiest way to get into one of these things. As I mentioned, we started with kind of a specialty product, which was insuring special cars. The insurance policy forms were unique; our pricing — we had a unique approach. We had this Driver’s Club model that started really helping that compounding aspect of it. But one of the big pieces that I guess I dreamed of is that if we actually started taking real risk and became the insurance company itself — not just an agency selling policies for somebody else — it would be the same customer coming in, but we’d have so much more of a chance to really build revenue behind it.

So the other big piece — my first aha was the Driver’s Club; the second aha was really realizing we needed to partner rather than compete with the big insurance companies — was: how do we start taking risk? That’s been a multi-year, really decade-long journey that we started in 2017, got up and running, and it was really a big key piece of how we went public in 2021. Everybody knew we had a unique angle on this market, that our economics looked great in the business, but that we could realize even that much more. And so that’s really been the next big piece of all of this. And it all kind of compounds on itself, because if you insure a car, we use the club to kind of engage people. You mentioned reading the Hagerty Driver’s Club magazine — by the way, I don’t think the word insurance is mentioned in that magazine anywhere.

Barry Ritholtz (00:19:06): Not at all. It’s cars and roads, really.

McKeel Hagerty (00:19:07): Yes. And it is now the highest-circulation car magazine in the world. (No kidding.) It is. Yeah.

Barry Ritholtz (00:19:13): I did not know that. That’s really interesting. So the evolution from insurance to an automotive lifestyle brand goes beyond the club membership, goes beyond the magazine — events, auctions, valuation data. Walk us through how that all evolved.

McKeel Hagerty (00:19:33): Yeah — I was a big fan of car magazines, a big fan of automotive media. I mean, that’s how I read my way into understanding the car world, and going to events. And I always remember somebody told me once that if you’re going to go into a niche business that you’re really proud of, you kind of need to have the high ground on your side. And for me, the high ground was, if I could have a media property where we would kind of have that intellectual high ground, that would help.

The other piece is the data aspect of it. When I was growing the business and the team — you know, we have incredible teams — we’re out there trying to figure it out. Valuing these cars was so tricky, because there were a lot of opinions about what cars were worth, but not a lot of really good data. And so as we were investing in the media pieces — talking about cars and entertaining people — we built the data resources. We call it our Automotive Intelligence group. We have by far the richest sets of data about how to value these things, and it’s down to that VIN or serial number.

You mentioned — well, how does a big insurance company… why didn’t they do it? I remember this conversation years ago, in one of those partner discussions, where the CEO was a car guy, really wanted to kind of compete with us, wasn’t sure if he wanted to partner with us. And I said, well, do you know what a 1969 Camaro is? And he said, I sure do — he was pretty happy with himself. And I said, you may not know that in 1969, the Camaro came in 147 different variants. (Wow.) And that year, the least expensive one was worth about 11 grand, and the most valuable one was worth about 1.1 million. And you can’t tell the difference by looking at them from the outside. You have to understand what that serial number is. And I said: we built a patented serial number decoder for all cars pre-1981, so that we could understand our universe and start providing that data. And that’s why our partners like us.

But it’s a real asset to have that kind of data, and then build on it every year. You mentioned 371,000 new customers — we’ll do quite a bit more than that in 2026. Those are all — it’s not just insurance revenue, it’s also data coming our way. What are people buying? What are they insuring them for? What do they sell? When somebody sells a car, it’s also a data point. And so for us, that data piece — and it’s all a big… not just because I’m a car person — I view it as a flywheel. It all kind of spins, and insurance is a beautiful thing, but the rest of it speeds up the flywheel.

Barry Ritholtz (00:22:01): Yeah, to say the very least. So the valuation tools you have are really interesting. The Bull Market List you have has become very influential. I actually reference some of your valuation tools in a chapter of my book, on selection bias. Every time some car goes for a new record high, there’s always a bunch of media coverage, and they talk about — look at what a great investment this is. And it’s like, no, that’s all survivorship bias. Show me the other 10. Don’t show me what was the best car of the past 50 years — what car are you going to buy now to put away for the next 50 years? (Yes.) That’s a much harder question, because you don’t know the answer. But your valuation tools have been really helpful, that sort of stuff. How did you build that capability? Is it simply just — hey, every data point we come across from clients, we’re going to suck into a database and figure out?

McKeel Hagerty (00:22:57): That was exactly it. I mean, most media outlets that weren’t part of our world — if they were covering the space, they were using a lot of anecdotal information, kind of dealer-fed information, or just looking at public auctions. And I love public auctions too — you can learn a lot from watching what all the different auction companies do. And now, with so many good online places, it’s even more data. But what we realized, with our scale, is we just had way more data points than all of that. Because again — people buying cars, insuring them with us, adding, deleting — it was just this big flow. And yeah, it took a lot of people a lot smarter than I am to build not just the database stuff, but the analytics capability around it. And now, with AI, it’s even better. And then, as we started realizing we could get other data sources that help us validate even more — not just in the US, but outside of the US — it’s really been a fun part of the business. I’ll tell you what — it’s a smart team, and I love learning from them. They teach me stuff every day that I need to know.

Barry Ritholtz (00:24:00): You mentioned auctions and online auctions. In addition to Bring a Trailer and Cars & Bids and PCARMARKET, you guys are now going to get into online auctions for your clients’ cars? Or are you just partnering with someone?

McKeel Hagerty (00:24:16): Oh, no, no. We have our own — the Hagerty Marketplace platform, which is online auctions. And then also now —

Barry Ritholtz (00:24:24): You’ve had online classifieds for a long time. (Yes.) How rapidly is the auction side growing?

McKeel Hagerty (00:24:29): It’s growing rapidly now. We have such a supply — we have way more supply than you think. And if you think about some of those other great companies — Bring a Trailer has been such a darling in this space; Cars & Bids, the number two in the US — there’s a supply and demand balance that everybody has to strike. Because if you flood a digital marketplace with too much supply, then the bidders go away. And if the bidders go away, then nobody’s happy — people won’t put their cars on it. So it’s a fast build, but it’s steady.

The live auction side of the business — Broad Arrow, which was an acquisition we did after going public — that’s a remarkable business, because I had followed that industry for a long time around the world. But it’s all about getting the right team. And in my mind — because I’m very protective of our brand and our reputation — we had to have the kind of team that wasn’t just prepared to build the number one live auction business; they have to do it in a way that I’m proud of. Because things will go wrong. You have to make things right for customers. Sometimes cars that people bring to you to sell aren’t described exactly as they actually are, and you have to find that out and politely tell them — well, I’m not sure this is a million-dollar car; it’s a hundred-thousand-dollar car. And sorry — if you want us to sell it for a hundred thousand, we will, but we’re not selling it for a million. Because it’s our reputation too.

And so the way I think about it now is: most people come to us to insure a car. Then they buy the membership thing, and we engage them and do media and a lot of fun stuff, invite them to our events. And about every seven years, on average, somebody buys or sells a car. And that’s where I want to be there and present in their minds, so that we help them on that transactional side. Plus, you’ve probably been to auctions or watched them on television. (Sure.) They’re fun. Car auctions are super fun. It’s live, it’s vibrant, it’s interesting. Sometimes there are multimillion-dollar cars up there selling, where you can’t even believe anybody would pay multimillion dollars for this car. And we do that too — that’s why we have Broad Arrow. We connected it with some of our concours events — in many cases, around the world. We just had our Broad Arrow auction at the Villa d’Este concours, the Concorso d’Eleganza. And that was a really successful sale, and a super cool place to have an auction — right on Lake Como. (Yeah.) In Italy.

Barry Ritholtz (00:27:01): Looked beautiful. You’ve been a judge at Pebble Beach for a while, I know.

McKeel Hagerty (00:27:08): 25 years — I think this is my 25th year.

Barry Ritholtz (00:27:09): Wow. And I know there was an affiliation with one of the local concourses here. Maybe it’s Greenwich?

McKeel Hagerty (00:27:14): Greenwich, yeah. That is an event we own. So we produced that just recently.

Barry Ritholtz (00:27:19): That’s — it’s too close to a holiday weekend, otherwise I would be there.

McKeel Hagerty (00:27:24): Oh, you’ve got to come.

Barry Ritholtz (00:27:25): I’m usually out at the beach on Memorial Day weekend. But we’ll circle back to that. I’m also a big fan of your YouTube channel. I really like Jason Cammisa’s work. I’ve learned a lot about cars that I think I know — and then he does a deep dive into a particular model, and I’m like, I didn’t know that about the Toyota Supra. Who would’ve guessed? How did YouTube become such a major part of your brand?

McKeel Hagerty (00:27:54): Well, it’s really the de facto platform for people watching kind of introductory-level automotive content, and obviously lots of brands are putting stuff out there. But what we realized — if you think about the big arc of how people have learned about or consumed automotive media, where it’s shifted since the nineties: magazines were the main platform for a long time. Then you got the first dedicated cable networks — Speed, Speedvision, AutoWeek — you started seeing auctions on there. But then a lot of that content started migrating to YouTube. What I wanted to do was do it at the same high quality we were doing in the magazine. So hire total pros, shoot the stuff really well — great cameras, great locations, all of that.

Barry Ritholtz (00:28:48): It is obvious high production value. There are a lot of YouTube channels that are kind of interesting, cars or otherwise, but the appeal has always been: two iPhones, a wireless mic, and a GoPro — you could cobble something together. I’ve seen a bunch of channels that are using these. You guys really put a lot of thought and a lot of time, effort, and money into it.

McKeel Hagerty (00:29:19): Well, we do. And they’re not all just drag races — nothing wrong with drag races; I like them too. It’s a kind of data point about what makes a car cool. But I think Jason just takes it to a whole new level. We also have — by the way, we have a FAST channel on Samsung TV, on Amazon Prime; our content is available out there like a digital television show. Our Barn Find Hunter show, for years — you’ve probably seen it — which is this incredible talent, Tom Cotter, going around and finding great cars in barns and kind of doing the big reveal. Like an Antiques Roadshow kind of concept, but in the garage, rather than brought to some studio somewhere. And people like it. There’s some interesting fascination with the US television audience of finding the treasure in the garage — and don’t you wish it was you who found it? I find them fascinating.

You may have even seen one of the shows we produced for a long time — they’re kind of winding down — called Redline Rebuild. (Yep.) It was where we would do these time-lapse rebuildings of an engine, where you take a big dirty engine apart, and it would all kind of appear to assemble itself on an engine stand, and then it would start. It was just mesmerizing.

Barry Ritholtz (00:30:34): That’s the word I was about to say.

McKeel Hagerty (00:30:36): Just mesmerizing. Yes.

Barry Ritholtz (00:30:37): There’s another channel that does the same thing with old watches (Oh wow, interesting.) and rebuilds them. And it’s the same sort of — why is this so fascinating? It’s the exact same thing as Redline.

Coming up, we continue our conversation with McKeel Hagerty, CEO and chairman of Hagerty specialty insurance, discussing the collector car community today. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

Barry Ritholtz (00:31:11): I’m Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special guest today is McKeel Hagerty. He is the CEO and chairman of the namesake specialty insurance company specializing in collectible cars — automotive everything, from cars, trucks, military vehicles — including classic wooden boats. Are those all Chris-Crafts, or are there some other brands that make their way through that?

McKeel Hagerty (00:31:35): Well, Chris-Craft and Century were the two big manufacturers in the United States. There were sort of some more boutique brands, like Gar Wood and Hacker-Craft, which were really high end.

Barry Ritholtz (00:31:46): I’ve been in a Hacker-Craft. Those are big — they tend to be a little bigger.

McKeel Hagerty (00:31:49): Right, a little bit bigger — triple-cockpit kind of style boats. And for those who are really into the artisanal cheese of the boat world — the Canadian brands. There was a whole group of really fine boat builders up there: Minett-Shields, Ditchburn, Greavette — brands that most Americans would not know of. But if you ever get a chance to go up to the Muskoka Lakes, which is just north of Toronto, they’re just exquisite, beautifully built boats. They’re considered like national treasures up there. So you don’t see many of them in the US. But that was part of my upbringing. When my mom and dad were building the boat business and I was a teenager, it was like — huh, we’re going to a boat show, going to Canada, going to Lake Tahoe, going to the Finger Lakes of New York.

Barry Ritholtz (00:32:37): That’s so interesting. I took some friends to the boat show last year, and the new Chris-Crafts are shockingly beautiful. (Oh yes.) They have aged into modernity really well. It’s almost like a retro-mod, because it’s very contemporary and very modern, but clearly the design language from way back when.

McKeel Hagerty (00:33:02): I think it’s a little bit like that Hinckley crowd (Yes.), where they’re trying to find a retro-modern boat, but with kind of retro looks.

Barry Ritholtz (00:33:10): And I love it. So let’s keep this on cars, away from boats. There’s a quote of yours that I have to start with, because I really like it: “The best piece of advice is to buy the car you want to drive, and then buy the best example you can afford. This may sound obvious, but not all vintage cars drive the way people hope they would.” There’s nothing in that I disagree with. Discuss.

McKeel Hagerty (00:33:41): Yeah. I think there are so many people that envision — someday, when they have that little bit of extra resources — you know, that’s going to be my toy; I want to get into the car world. And if they weren’t a hundred percent in this their whole life, or their parents weren’t into it, or you didn’t have an uncle or somebody in your life who let you drive in these things, I often recommend people try to get a chance to drive what you think you want. Because the older cars do drive very differently. (Yes.) And even if you think of, say, muscle cars from the sixties — they were very fast. I mean, these are cars that are —

Barry Ritholtz (00:34:14): In a straight line.

McKeel Hagerty (00:34:15): In a straight line — a lot of power. They do not stop or turn as well as you think, and you just have to get used to that. I mean, I love cars of all generations. I love driving very early cars; I have some newer cars. And I always just have to kind of center myself when I get behind the wheel, to remember — okay, this is not my Porsche Taycan, which is this incredible piece of technology, an electric car. It’s a vintage internal-combustion car with funky brakes, and you have to be ready for it. So I always recommend people drive them. And recognize that maybe it had air conditioning, maybe the air conditioning doesn’t work — it doesn’t matter. Roll down the window and just enjoy yourself.

Barry Ritholtz (00:35:00): Manually —

McKeel Hagerty (00:35:01): Manually roll down the window.

Barry Ritholtz (00:35:02): I tell the story — the ‘Vette, the ’67: it’s a lap belt, not a three-point belt. They couldn’t be bothered to put a passenger-side mirror on, because, you know, what are you even going to see? And the steering is just beastly. But I also like the concept of buy the best example you can afford. And I find myself constantly saying to people: a cheap Aston Martin is the most expensive car you could possibly buy. (Yeah.) But people don’t really get that.

McKeel Hagerty (00:35:35): Yeah. And look — different areas of cars come with their own challenges sometimes. As we’re seeing this onslaught of new generations coming in and wanting to buy slightly newer cars — I mean, it’s 60-whatever percent of all of our new quotes and new cars coming into the space are all relatively newer cars: 1980s, nineties, two-thousands cars. Some of those cars, for example — it may not be a mechanical issue that can drive you a little crazy; it’s an electrical issue that’ll drive you a little crazy. If you think of some of the screens and the CD players and all the little control things that, back in 1990-whatever, were the biggest whiz-bang feature — well, it doesn’t work so well anymore. The car runs fine, but you’re not going to be able to use the antiquated nav system. I just tell people: relax, it’s fine. Enjoy the car, drive it. All my kids always ask — well, does the radio work in this thing? I’m like, I have no idea. It’s never been on. I’m there to drive. And it’s such a fun activity, as you know, to go and just enjoy driving a car for pleasure.

And the first thing I tell people who are sort of new to the space — they say, well, I want to take it out to dinner. And I’m like, make sure you take it out during the day first a few times, because sometimes cars leave you in the restaurant parking lot at night. So people always ask, why don’t you drive them at night? And I’m like — because I’m not sure I’m going to get home.

Barry Ritholtz (00:37:06): If you’re used to modern cars, you will be shocked at how terrible the headlights are — on, forget sixties, even eighties-era cars. Those were not really great headlights.

McKeel Hagerty (00:37:19): They weren’t great. They’re not dangerous or anything. You just have to be aware (Right.) that they don’t have all the modern technology.

Barry Ritholtz (00:37:24): When all the headlights were that way, you just said, this is what the lighting is, and you had to be aware of it. (That’s right.) It’s when you go backwards, you take a lot of things for granted — forget the blind-spot warnings and the backup cameras, just your expectation of field of vision (Yes.) is so different.

McKeel Hagerty (00:37:43): It’s a different kind of attention, driving a vintage car.

Barry Ritholtz (00:37:47): It’s much more focused.

McKeel Hagerty (00:37:48): It’s more focused. And I love it. And I encourage people — just try it out. It’s a great experience.

Barry Ritholtz (00:37:55): So what are some of the bigger trends you’re seeing in collecting? What’s changing these days?

McKeel Hagerty (00:38:02): Well, again, big story — contrary to data that we were reading a few years ago, the next generations are absolutely into cars. They like them. They’re just into different kinds of cars than our parents were, or we were.

Barry Ritholtz (00:38:13): Well, doesn’t every generation sort of lust after the cars from the high school parking lot?

McKeel Hagerty (00:38:19): I think that’s right. And they’re different. One of my little cottage industry things that I do: if I’m ever driving anywhere near a high school parking lot, I look to see where the young car people park their cars. And they usually park them in the back of the parking lot, not up near the school, and they all park next to each other, so they can go hang out afterwards. And what you’re going to see right now, with the 17- and 18-year-old car people in these high schools: you’re going to see BMWs, you’re going to see Audis, you’re going to see various performance Japanese cars. You’re not going to see anything fancy — they can’t afford them. But those are the cars they’re starting with.

Trucks are, of course, another big entry point, and it’s been another huge trend. So not just pickup trucks, but kind of vintage SUVs. So Jeeps are still, right now, one of the hottest brands — it’s huge. Broncos are one of the hottest things, of course, if they can afford them. A Land Rover, or International Scouts — these are the cars that people are interested in, because so many cars today are SUVs anyway, and the vintage versions of them are these kind of more off-road vehicles. And there’s a big industry of modifying them, making them work a little bit better. So that’s another big trend — next generation, trucks, I guess I would say.

And flying over the top of the whole industry, at the top end of the market — just to add on to the answer to your question — the ultra-luxury, kind of supercar manufacturers are making more cars than ever before. And so you think of those brands — like Ferrari or Lamborghini or Bentley, or even Porsche, my beloved 911s — those companies are just building a lot more cars and pumping them out into the market, at price points that are different than they used to be. When Ferrari or Lamborghini were building hundreds of cars a year — well, now Ferrari is a 14,000-unit-a-year manufacturer. Lamborghini, when you add their SUV in, is an eight or nine thousand vehicle manufacturer. I mean, when I was a kid, you never saw a Lamborghini unless you just happened to be in Beverly Hills or Palm Beach or something. And now they’re everywhere. I mean, even in my little town in northern Michigan, there are a couple of Lamborghinis driving around. I’m like, oh my goodness. That’s amazing.

Barry Ritholtz (00:40:34): What’s crazy is, where I live, I am 15 minutes from a Ferrari dealer, two Porsche dealers, the Bentley-Lamborghini dealer. And I take it for granted — I see these cars all the time. But as a kid, you hardly ever saw these around. A Porsche was an exciting thing.

McKeel Hagerty (00:40:54): It was. So they are building my next generation of customers. Every one of these manufacturers is like my best friend, because they’re building the cars that I will be insuring this year — and 25 years from now.

Barry Ritholtz (00:41:07): So your boy Jason Cammisa mentioned he’s only a manual driver. I embrace that — makes the car even that much more difficult to steal. But I’m curious — amongst the trends in collecting, I’ve been hearing about a move towards analog, towards manual, away from the big dominant screens. What does your data say?

McKeel Hagerty (00:41:33): Well, it’s true. And in fact, you think about some of those very same supercar manufacturers that signaled years ago — we’re getting rid of manuals; everything’s going to become this super electronic sort of driving experience —

Barry Ritholtz (00:41:46): Faster on a track. Faster on a track.

McKeel Hagerty (00:41:48): Yeah. And they are. And by the way, the one nice thing about the PDK — if you drive them in the winter… I happen to love driving Porsches in the winter. PDK is pretty nice in the snow, for what it’s worth. But setting that aside — I’m just totally impressed that many of these car companies are kind of going back on what they said they were going to be doing, and starting to — not reintroduce manuals, but they’re producing another extra model with the manual in it.

Barry Ritholtz (00:42:15): At a very high price. At a very high price. You look at the Porsche S/T, or all the GT3s, if you want a manual. My GTS was the last year it came with a manual, which was ’24. And the Turbo — I think 2013 was the last year with a manual, something like that. So it’s amazing — they took the supply away and said, all right, if you want a manual, we’ll give it to you, but it’s $300,000.

McKeel Hagerty (00:42:46): Yes, yes. And what they saw — they were looking at the auction data, from our auction companies and others, and suddenly the manual version of something: huge, absolute premium.

Barry Ritholtz (00:42:55): And now manual swaps are showing up in V12 Aston Martins and 430 Ferraris. I see these all the time.

McKeel Hagerty (00:43:08): Absolutely. So again, I think it’s the return of the analog — people more interested in driving. I mean, I think we’re all trying to absorb what COVID did. COVID was a boom —

Barry Ritholtz (00:43:20): I’m sure.

McKeel Hagerty (00:43:20): — time for these kinds of cars. But even afterwards, I think people were embracing slower hobbies, slower things: playing music, camping, hiking, outdoor pursuits. And in some of these things, cars sort of fit into that a little bit. Something to just go out and take a long, slow Sunday afternoon drive is not something from the rush-rush world of what mileage does it get and what’s the lease payment on it. It just comes from a different place, and there’s a bigger audience than people think who are willing to spend real money on it.

Barry Ritholtz (00:43:59): There’s a data point you guys have referenced that I want to ask you about. Quote: “We estimate that approximately 12 million enthusiast vehicles will transfer to a new generation in the United States over the next 15 years, either via estate plans or inheritances.” What is this generational handoff — from, I guess we could call them boomer collectors, to millennials and Gen Z — what does this mean for the car collecting community?

McKeel Hagerty (00:44:31): Well, I think we’ve all read that there’s this huge, gigantic wealth transfer, whatever the headline number is. I’ve heard —

Barry Ritholtz (00:44:37): 65 trillion.

McKeel Hagerty (00:44:38): I’ve heard a hundred trillion, 70. And our estimate, just on that number of 12, 13 million vehicles, is about $570 billion worth of car value right now. Most of those are held in the hands of the generation of baby boomers. I’m an older Gen Xer — Gen Xers are starting to come into their peak wealth years, past peak earnings, buying a lot of cars. But 15 years from now, about a third of that whole market will come loose. And again, we’re seeing this. Certainly the entry points are different than they were a generation ago — people are interested in sporty cars, trucks, younger kind of “youngtimer” cars, as they refer to them in Europe. We’re seeing the data. We want to position ourselves well to see that the transfers are kind of smooth, where you’re kind of helping the next generation get into these cars. We’re actually doing things like teaching manual driving classes — because it’s not just an anti-theft device, or some slow hobby like brewing beer or whatever it is. We need to teach the next generation how to drive manuals. And it’s not that hard to do it.

Barry Ritholtz (00:45:58): Not only is it not that hard, it’s just so much more engaging. And not to be a stick snob, but it really is a very different experience. And yeah, I know the GT3 in the PDK is faster than the stick — but how often am I taking my car on a track? If that’s once or twice a year, it’s a lot. What about the other 360 days a year?

McKeel Hagerty (00:46:24): Well, and even if you did — you and I, neither of us are good enough drivers to really make a difference.

Barry Ritholtz (00:46:30): Speak for yourself, McKeel!

McKeel Hagerty (00:46:31): Okay, one second — different than the laptop.

Barry Ritholtz (00:46:35): Whatever it is. It’s funny, because I’ve done all the high-performance driving classes, and the reality is, if you’re in a Roush Mustang up at Lime Rock, they said: put it into third, leave it there for the whole track. (Right, right.) So really, driving the stick isn’t that much different. But if you’re really doing a competitive course, of course not. First of all, the car doesn’t stop — the dual clutch is so fast, the engine is always engaged. (Yes.) So you’re not losing that tenth of a second when the clutch is down and you’re losing power. But it still just feels so much more engaging.

Related question to the analog and the manual: you do a Bull Market List every year — the 2025 Bull Market List. The average model year of featured cars used to be in the late eighties, early nineties. All of a sudden, it’s 2001. How did that happen? What’s driving that shift in bull market attractiveness? Is it that pre-screen, analog, manual feel — but not quite as old as the seventies, eighties cars?

McKeel Hagerty (00:47:52): I think so. But it’s also a combination of what’s driving demand. One, there’s absolutely a new cohort of people getting in, making a little bit of money, buying these things. At the top end of the market, though, it’s not just — oh, the new young tech guy who’s going to be in the OpenAI IPO and is going to make money and go buy a car. Older-generation collectors are also buying a lot of these new cars at auction. And it’s interesting — I’ve seen this twice in my career. In the big muscle car era, which was 2005, ’06, ’07, right before the great financial crisis, everybody said, oh, it’s a new generation of people buying all these American muscle cars and paying a lot of money for them. And that was true. But it was also the older generation of collectors, who liked earlier cars, saying — well, maybe those are cool and I want one too. And by the way, I have more money than you, so I’m going to outbid you at auction, and it’s mine.

Same thing right now in this, let’s say, supercar segment, where a lot of these cars from the nineties and two-thousands — we see these values going up. It is the newer money, newer collector. But it’s also an older generation of collectors saying, well, I don’t want to be left without a cool car. In fact, one guy told me recently — he bought a Bugatti Veyron and a couple of newer cars — he said, well, I want to have a car that my grandkids think is cool. And so I’m like — got it.

Barry Ritholtz (00:49:15): And that’s not the Bugatti Veyron?

McKeel Hagerty (00:49:18): Grandkids don’t like that? He says he loves it. He said, I’m taking my grandkids for rides in the Bugatti Veyron. And so they think it’s cool.

Barry Ritholtz (00:49:25): Yeah, I can imagine. Alright, last question before I get to my favorites, because I know (Yep.) we’re watching the time. So you guys crunch so many numbers, so much data. What do you think the casual observer of collector cars misses that your data is revealing?

McKeel Hagerty (00:49:44): Well, I think those big headline cars attract so much attention, and people just think it’s this crazy, very high-end market of very, very rarefied cars. And while that is true — those are the headline-grabbing numbers — the big story is that there’s just a much, much wider opportunity for people who want to play in this space. Every single price point, every little bit of reliability, and everything from pickup trucks — like I said, if you live in that part of the world and that’s something that’s interesting to you. It’s a very broad-based hobby.

It’s also — this was a hobby that for many, many years was very much male-oriented, male-driven. And I can see that in the data of who our insureds are and everything else. There’s a really rising cohort of young women — women who want to have these cars and have it be part of their lives too. I think that’s probably one of the most exciting trends. So: very broad-based.

Barry Ritholtz (00:50:43): I’ve noticed a lot more women YouTubers talking about cars.

McKeel Hagerty (00:50:47): And coming to cars and coffee with their cars, and that sort of thing. So there’s just a lot more to it. It’s much broader-based. And sure, it’s fun to see a multimillion-dollar whatever sell someplace, but that’s just not the average reality. The average is actually much broader-based and much more interesting.

Barry Ritholtz (00:51:04): So I want to get to our favorite questions, but I’ve got to throw some other stuff first. Let’s just do a quick speed round. Someone comes up to you and says: hey, I’m interested in a fun weekend car. I don’t have a lot of money, but I’d like a convertible, stick shift. What do you say?

McKeel Hagerty (00:51:19): Mustang.

Barry Ritholtz (00:51:22): Mustang, of course. Other than a Ferrari, you say “of course” — because I would’ve said Miata.

McKeel Hagerty (00:51:26): Oh yeah. Well, Mustang or Miata. And I always tell people — the oldest Miata is now 33 years old, something like that. And they made over a million of them for the US market. Super reliable. If you want to go track driving, they’re the great track cars. If you want to just cruise around on a weekend, they’re inexpensive — 10, 15 thousand dollars. (Right.) But same thing with the Mustang.

Barry Ritholtz (00:51:49): And a little more horsepower in the Mustang.

McKeel Hagerty (00:51:51): A little bit more horsepower. They made a lot of convertibles. They’re manuals — they’re automatics, if you don’t feel comfortable with that. And very, very affordable cars, and easy to get serviced. So those would be my two recommendations. Of course, the most collected car, though, still in the United States is the Corvette. They’ve been making them forever. There are lots of them. Easy to service.

Barry Ritholtz (00:52:13): And not that expensive — especially like a C6 or C7. Not for a semi-modern car.

McKeel Hagerty (00:52:19): They’re amazing. They’re amazing cars.

Barry Ritholtz (00:52:22): Someone says, I’m interested in something European, a little more interesting, sporty. Where do you send them?

McKeel Hagerty (00:52:29): Well, I’m a Porsche person, so I would say: great, you want a 911, but let’s start you in a Boxster — some more entry point there. And that younger generation that I talked about — the 3 Series BMWs: super fun cars, lots of them built, with a lot of quality, and they kind of have style. They look good. That’s where people go.

Barry Ritholtz (00:52:53): Yeah, those have aged beautifully — the design of the early BMWs. Someone who has a little more scratch, a little older, says: hey, I’m looking for something fun, but it’s going to retain its value, and I’m willing to spend more than my kid buying a Boxster.

McKeel Hagerty (00:53:12): Well then — again, my bias here — I’d still probably say 911, but you’re going to pick a year that was maybe slightly off. They’re going to hold their value well. I actually did a kind of market-cap comparison between every 911 ever built versus every Ferrari ever built. Because people talk about Ferrari GTOs and all this sort of thing, which are worth tens of millions, but I’m like —

Barry Ritholtz (00:53:36): 275s. Yeah. And they were just spectacular.

McKeel Hagerty (00:53:39): They are. I love them. But when you look at all the 911s that were built — they were really undervalued for a long time. I mean, people used to give me a hard time, because my ’67 911S — when I spent over a hundred thousand dollars having it professionally restored, not that many years ago — I mean, after my very amateurish high school restoration — I spent a hundred thousand, or a little bit more than that, and it was worth about 70. (Right.) Well, now it’s worth about 300. (No kidding.) Yes — 250, 300 for a ’67 S. And people say, what’s your 911 worth? I’m like, I don’t care. It’s my baby. I and my family will have that car forever.

Barry Ritholtz (00:54:22): I have a bias against garage queens, but I’m curious as to your thoughts — people who buy cars, put them in a garage, never drive them.

McKeel Hagerty (00:54:30): I think those are really sad cars.

Barry Ritholtz (00:54:32): Right? They’ve got to be great for business, because there’s zero risk.

McKeel Hagerty (00:54:35): Yeah, the claims are low. But they’re sad cars. And especially — by the way, there’s almost not a single generation of cars that fares well when it sits around for a long, long period of time. Tires age, belts and hoses age. And some of those nineties and two-thousands cars, they age particularly badly when they sit in the garage. Lots of maintenance required. So my view is — if you’ve got a car, unless it’s got six miles on it, or 15 miles, and you just think that’s what makes it cool (and there are a lot of customers that we have that like that), my view is: go drive it. We sold at our Amelia sale one of the two record-setting Ferrari Enzos. We sold it for $15 million. The car had, I think, 249 miles on it. A Ferrari Enzo. And everybody’s like, what do you think of that? I’m like — I would rather have the 20,000-mile Ferrari Enzo that I could go drive. I mean, that’s just personally myself. And I congratulated the buyer — wonderful buy, sir. But I would like the —

Barry Ritholtz (00:55:30): Please drive it. Please drive it. Doug DeMuro said something really interesting about his Carrera GT. When he was hunting for one, he found one with higher mileage, because he said: I won’t go through the process of “I’m not going to drive this because I’m depreciating it.” Starting out higher mileage, you’re more inclined to put miles on it.

McKeel Hagerty (00:55:50): I have one vintage car that has super low miles on it. It’s a Jaguar E-Type, 1966. (Lovely.) It had 13,000 miles on it when I bought it, and it has about 15,000 miles on it now. And it just bugs me, because I feel like it should be driven — and then I worry that I’m just putting a bunch of miles on it. So I don’t know — I have the same quandary. So I just like to drive cars.

Barry Ritholtz (00:56:11): So we are recording this right after Ferrari dropped their new Elettrica — electric appliance, I don’t even want to call it. My Ferrari buddies are not big fans of all the new versions that have been coming out. I still think the 458 is really handsome. I love the 812 GTS — if I ever get that garage built, one of those has my name on it. But the question for you is: when you see these new cars coming out, and they’re so technology-heavy and so screen-focused, how do you think these will fare as collectibles 20, 40, 60 years from now?

McKeel Hagerty (00:57:01): Well, I can tell you, I will never bet against Ferrari. Not ever once. Because it is just — forever, since the day the first one was built, there’s been something magical about that brand. I love the history — the fact that when Enzo Ferrari, back in the day, would show up with one, everybody knew: well, that’s the car to beat, period. And even though sometimes you beat them, sometimes you didn’t, they were just the car to beat. And I also remind people that companies like Ferrari have always had different lines of cars. Ferrari always had race cars, but they also always had their, like, businessman’s car — a front-engine, slightly less performance —

Barry Ritholtz (00:57:40): The 550s, 599s, 612s. Exactly. Even the 575.

McKeel Hagerty (00:57:44): Well, and the SUV — the Purosangue, right? People said they’ll never build an SUV. And I remember I was talking to Bob Lutz, and he just said: watch. I’m like, why do you think they will build an SUV, Bob? And he said: because they have to.

Barry Ritholtz (00:57:58): I was going to say — the Cayenne and the Macan saved Porsche.

McKeel Hagerty (00:58:02): They saved Porsche.

Barry Ritholtz (00:58:03): All right. (Yes.) Ferrari had to be watching that. They had to be seeing the Urus sales. (Yes.) Which is essentially a rebadged truck from Audi with a whole lot more horsepower. I mean, how do they not do that?

McKeel Hagerty (00:58:18): They had to. And I think — I get it. This particular electric car has not necessarily had the most favorable initial reviews. But my view is, I will never count Ferrari out. And I think they probably are seeing some things in their data, and with some certain customers who want this. And we’ll see.

Barry Ritholtz (00:58:34): We’ll certainly see. So let me jump to my favorite questions (You bet.) so I don’t make you late for your trip back to the Midwest. Who were your early mentors who helped shape your career?

McKeel Hagerty (00:58:48): My mentors went from kind of macro mentors to micro mentors. In the early days, of course, it was my parents. My parents had very different skill sets, and I was so blessed that I got to work with both of them. There were some teachers early on who were really extraordinary professors, who I think triggered my love of learning. One gentleman — his name was Gary Hart, still living; I kind of look after him in his old age — he just fundamentally taught me how to be a good student.

But what I found, though, is my mentors have become more micro mentors now. Less of — it’s my whole life, learning everything about something from this person. Now I find somebody who’s really good at one thing, and I learn from them. I become friends with them. My current lead director on our public company board, Bill Swanson — he was the chairman and CEO of Raytheon. Wonderful man, car collector, and just brilliant at board governance and how to think things through. And I’m just learning so much listening to him. And so he is a real mentor of mine. And so I think I’m very much of that tribe-of-mentors approach. I’ve had many, and I love mentoring myself.

Barry Ritholtz (00:59:58): Huh — really, really interesting answer. What are some of your favorite books? What are you reading right now?

McKeel Hagerty (01:00:02): So I’m an avid reader. I read 30 to 50 books a year, typically. (Wow.) And a lot of biographies. In the last four or five years, I was definitely on a music biographies stint — so, a lot of rock and roll biographies.

Barry Ritholtz (01:00:17): Give us a few names.

McKeel Hagerty (01:00:18): Oh, everything from the Keith Richards to Slash to — you name it. I read a lot of biographies: Springsteen, anybody. Then I did an interesting kind of parallel set, which was music producers. And that was fun. So everything from — there’s a famous book on Warner Brothers music called Sonic Boom, which was about all of the music producers that did that — to Clive Davis, to those types of folks.

For this year, though, my reading theme is all about the founding of America. So I’m reading a lot of kind of American founding stuff — I just figured it’s a good time to do that. (Sure.) So, biographies so far this year on George Washington, Benjamin Franklin; there were a bunch of other books around a lot of the founding fathers. I’m also wading through Wealth of Nations again, for the first time since college — because it was also published in 1776. I’d forgotten that.

Barry Ritholtz (01:01:13): That’s a little bit of a slog.

McKeel Hagerty (01:01:14): Yeah, that’s a beast. That’s a beast. But I would say one final piece — I was a sci-fi fan forever. (Oh really? Same.) And I decided, for the last two years, to start rereading a bunch of the great series that I read a long time ago. So I just read the entire Dune series for the third time in my life. (Wow.) And that was fun. The Foundation series, all of Clarke. I think what I had forgotten is that almost all of those sci-fi authors knew each other. (Yes.) They all kind of subscribed to some of the same magazines, and they’d get together for these little get-togethers, and they were all kind of envisioning a future together. And a lot of the same themes — and especially right now, the challenges with AI — are all embedded behind the Foundation series, and even in Dune. You kind of have to read into it, but it’s fascinating stuff.

Barry Ritholtz (01:02:08): Larry Niven, Philip K. Dick — any of those?

McKeel Hagerty (01:02:12): Yes. And of course, Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy — for a little bit of humor.

Barry Ritholtz (01:02:17): Classic. Yes. What are you streaming these days? Give us your favorites — either YouTube or Netflix, or even podcasts. What’s keeping you engaged?

McKeel Hagerty (01:02:25): Yeah — so my workout companion is a lot of podcasts. And they’ve kind of shifted, I guess, a little bit. During COVID, it was a lot of sort of habits-and-mindset stuff and that sort of thing. And then I discovered people like Scott Galloway — his very humorous way (Sure.) to think about business. Tyler Cowen, I think, is just absolutely brilliant — so, great podcast there. I’ve also been impressed with — Audible has a number of their own. Again, back to the musical biography thing — they have a lot of these short-format podcasts, kind of quasi-musical performances that are both kind of spoken word and music in one. It’s actually called the Words and Music series. And that’s been really fun to listen to some of those.

Barry Ritholtz (01:03:13): Words and Music. Yes — I’m going to have to check that out. All right, our final two questions. What sort of advice would you give a recent college grad interested in a career in either automobiles or insurance, or business?

McKeel Hagerty (01:03:27): I’ve just been to two different commencement ceremonies. One was my daughter’s, and another was some friends’. And all of the commencement speakers right now are so focused on AI, and trying to tell them it’s going to be okay. And not only do I think it’s going to be okay — as I always remind them, and people, of my own career: my core business is what some people would call a relatively boring industry, insurance. You don’t have to go into the cool stuff. I think there are so many opportunities in these industries that are established, they’re stable, and they need really smart people who want to work hard and remake what they are. So don’t overlook things that you consider boring today. Look at some of those, and think about the types of people that are going into them, where you can make a great career. I never imagined I’d be doing what I am today, and I think I have the coolest job you can have.

Barry Ritholtz (01:04:23): Huh. Really, really interesting. And our final question: what do you know about the world of automobiles or insurance today that might have been useful 30, 40 years ago when you were first ramping up?

McKeel Hagerty (01:04:36): I think the world has been predicting the demise of certain parts of the automobile industry for years. And we saw it very recently with this almost, like, holy war of how people view the difference between EVs and internal-combustion cars. And I’m very agnostic about all of that stuff. And it’s very easy to kind of get sucked into those arguments — like, well, what do you think of EVs? I’m like, I don’t know. There were EVs back in 1908. (That’s right.) There were steam cars in 1910. And now, you know, we’ve been on internal combustion for a long time. I think there will be more electric cars in the future, but I also think there are going to be great internal-combustion cars. So I think I would just continue playing the big long game, and don’t worry about some of the little petty arguments that people can have. It makes for good cocktail party talk, maybe, but I’d like to see the big picture.

Barry Ritholtz (01:05:29): McKeel, thank you for being so generous with your time. We have been speaking with McKeel Hagerty, chairman and CEO of Hagerty specialty insurance. If you enjoy this conversation, well, be sure and check out any of the 648 we’ve done previously. You can find those at YouTube, Apple, Spotify, Bloomberg — wherever you get your favorite podcasts.

I would be remiss if I didn’t thank the crack team that helps us put these conversations together each week. Alexis Noriega is my video producer. Sean Russo is my researcher. Anna Luke is my podcast producer. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’ve been listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

 

~~~

 

 

 

The post Transcript: McKeel Hagerty, CEO and Chairman of Hagerty Insurance appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Tuesday AM Reads

My Two-for-Tuesday morning train WFH reads:

Gold’s Faithful Think Twice as Prices Slide From Record Highs: The metal declined again Monday after the U.S. and Iran traded a fresh round of attacks. Gold slides off record highs and the faithful are wobbling. Nothing tests conviction quite like a drawdown. After the U.S. and Iran traded a fresh round of attacks, gold took yet another dip Monday (Wall Street Journal)

Returns to “Do-Nothing” Portfolios. Hendrik Bessembinder studies outcomes for a variety of “do-nothing” portfolios constructed from constituents of the S&P 500 index, from 1971 to 2025. These portfolios maintain their positions even for those stocks that exit the index. The findings include (i) initially equal-weighted portfolios outperform initially value-weighted portfolios over the full sample period, (ii) value-weighted “do-nothing” portfolios essentially match the index on average… New SSRN research on ‘do-nothing’ portfolios: buy, hold, resist the urge to fiddle. Sloth as alpha — my kind of strategy. (SSRN) see also Strategy: The AI Arms Race. Starting in the mid 1990s, the US and China embarked on radically different but complementary paths that led to a sharp growth divergence with other advanced economies, most notably, Europe and Japan. US innovation focused on the value layer of the digital economy, including internet platforms, software, semiconductors and cloud. China, by comparison, focused on the infrastructure and manufacturing layers of the physical economy, climbing the value chain over time with technology innovation. (MUFG)

The World Is Cutting Ties With America. It’s Already Costing Us.: The world is quietly rerouting trade, alliances, and trust around America — and the bill is already arriving. (New York Times)

Why Are Berries Everywhere, in Every Season? Driscoll’s.: The NYT on the company that engineered year-round berry availability — and what that triumph of supply chain management means for agriculture, flavor, and the way we eat. (New York Times)

States with the most—and least—housing market inventory: heading into the core summer season National active housing market inventory growth is at a crawl—but not in Washington. The geographic divergence in housing inventory is dramatic. Some markets are flooded; others are still bone-dry. Fast Company maps where buyers have leverage and where they don’t. (Fast Company)

• A Robot Army Remakes Ground Warfare in Ukraine: They began as supply mules. Now ground robots evacuate the wounded, hold trenches and even do the killing. Ground robots are remaking warfare in Ukraine — the drone war has officially come down to earth. (New York Times) see also See How Ukraine Is Taking Out Russia’s Refineries: Ukraine is targeting Russian energy infrastructure with its growing fleet of long-range drones and missiles, causing fuel shortages in one of the world’s biggest oil and gas producers and embarrassing President Vladimir Putin. The long-range strikes on Russia win rare praise for Ukraine from Trump. The Journal’s visual dive into Ukraine’s campaign against Russia’s refineries — degrading Moscow’s war economy one strike at a time. Long-range strikes unleash fuel crisis in Russia and win rare praise for Ukraine from Trump (Wall Street Journal)

Some Monsters are Real: What’s coming has never been seen before in the history of modern global industrial civilization … and it’s just getting started. Climate Casino on the extreme weather events that used to be theoretical and are now showing up in the data with alarming frequency. The tail risks aren’t in the tail anymore. (Climate Casino)

Lindsey Graham sacrificed his reputation to Donald Trump. He got plenty in return. His career explains why so many Republicans made peace with Trump — and what they gave up to do it. His career explains why so many Republicans made peace with Trump — and what they gave up to do it. (Vox)

50 Parting Thoughts From 2026 Wimbledon: Jon Wertheim’s annual tradition: 50 parting thoughts from Wimbledon — the champions, the chokes, and everything in between. (Sports Illustrated)

• The Hydration-Break World Cup: It is axiomatic that countries hosting the World Cup try to put their best face forward. During the monthlong tournament, streets are cleared of anything (and anyone) that might offend the eye, political evils are swept under the rug, warm welcomes generally abound, and even authoritarian states, or those with notoriously disturbing human rights records, present themselves as sporting, full of bonhomie, and as cuddly as their official stuffed mascots. This time around, Mexico and Canada appear to have offered the standard warm embrace to teams and tourists alike; Mexico went so far as to provide a base for the Iranian team after the U.S. refused to allow its members to train, or even stay overnight, on American soil.. Jonathan Wilson on the hydration-break World Cup — soccer in the age of extreme heat, where the beautiful game melts. (The Paris Review)

Video of the day: How America Turned The Dollar Into A Weapon:

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with McKeel Hagerty, CEO and Chairman of Hagerty. We discuss how he transformed the family boat insurance business into a “sexy” driver-forward business. We also discuss our love of collectable cars and his love of his first car, a Porsche, that he bought at the age of 13.

 

Only two names from the Dow Jones Industrial Average of July 1976 remain today. Many of today’s tech Blue Chips didn’t even exist then.

Source: Barron’s

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

 

The post 10 Tuesday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Monday AM Reads

My back-to-work morning train WFH reads:

• War Leaves Economy With More Stubborn Inflation, In latest Journal survey, economists have lowered the probability of recession but see inflation staying higher longer. The Iran conflict is embedding higher costs into the economy in ways that won’t reverse when the fighting stops. Economists are raising their inflation forecasts for 2027 and beyond. (Wall Street Journal)

Oh, the Stories the Dow Can Tell. Lessons From the Index’s Past 50 Years. Only two names from the Dow Jones Industrial Average of July 1976 remain today. Many of today’s tech Blue Chips didn’t even exist then. (Barron’s)

All you never wanted to know about corporate bond market issuance: How the debt capital markets sausage gets made. FT Alphaville’s deep dive into the plumbing of corporate bond markets—the mechanics, the distortions, and the risks hiding in plain sight. (FT)

The Economics of Friendship: Why does loneliness seem to be on the rise? In part because we’ve made life frictionless and efficient. The Wall Street Journal opinion page goes long on something economists rarely study — the measurable economic value of having close friends. Social capital isn’t a metaphor; it shows up in earnings, health outcomes, and longevity data. (Wall Street Journal)

• Publishers Are Preparing to Opt Out of Google Search: After years of giving away content for free traffic, major publishers are seriously considering pulling the plug on Google indexing entirely. The economics of search have finally broken. (Adweek)

The first American autonomous ground vehicles are fighting in Ukraine: Forterra, a U.S. builder of autonomous vehicles, revealed today that more than 100 of its self-driving ATVs have been deployed in conflict zones in Ukraine for the past nine months, in what the company believes is the largest deployment of autonomous ground vehicles in combat by any U.S. defense tech company. (Techcrunch) see also Ukraine’s Killer Robots Show How War Is Changing: Autonomous weapons are no longer theoretical. Ukraine’s battlefield is the live proving ground for AI-driven combat systems that will define the next generation of warfare. (The Conversation)

China, Russia and Others Seek to Inflame Debate Over A.I. Data Centers: State actors in China, Russia and Iran have sought to exploit the U.S. public debate over the effects of the technology.  We have seen bad overseas actors use social media to influence elections, debate of Israel, Ukraine, and now AI. America needs to wake up and recognize this credible security threat to our sovereignty and democracy. Foreign adversaries are exploiting local opposition to AI data center construction — amplifying environmental and energy concerns to slow down America’s AI infrastructure buildout. (New York Times)

How Physicists Track and Trap the Elusive Neutrino: The hunt for these ghostly particles has required some of the most audacious experimental setups ever built. In the 1960s, Raymond Davis Jr. and colleagues at Brookhaven National Laboratory placed a tank 1.5 kilometers underground in the Homestake mine in South Dakota and filled it with nearly 400,000 liters of a chlorine-based cleaning fluid called perchloroethylene. On the rare occasion that a passing neutrino struck a chlorine nucleus, it would be transformed into a radioactive form of argon that could be detected and counted. The experiment, which would run for 25 years, found just one-third the number of neutrinos coming from the sun that had been predicted in theoretical models. (Quanta Magazine)

• The U.S. men played ‘scared.’ Fox’s Carli Lloyd was fearless in her candor.: The USMNT’s World Cup performance was underwhelming: “I felt like they lost the game before they even stepped out on the pitch,” said Lloyd, the Fox Sports analyst on the post-match show. “And I’m not sure why, and I don’t know the reasons. But just from the beginning: chasing. Tentative. Scared. Just not confident on the ball.”   (The Athletic)

Robert De Niro Only Wants to Shoot in New York: The actor and his partners recently opened Wildflower Studios, a 775,000-square-foot production facility in Queens. The NYT real estate section catches up with De Niro’s long love affair with the city and his insistence on keeping production local. A profile that’s half cinema, half urbanism. (New York Times)

Video of the day: How America Turned The Dollar Into A Weapon

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with McKeel Hagerty, CEO and Chairman of Hagerty. We discuss how he transformed the family boat insurance business into a “sexy” driver-forward business. We also discuss our love of collectable cars and his love of his first car, a Porsche, that he bought at the age of 13.

 

America’s missing middle: The shrinking 45-64 population

Source: Axios

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

 

The post 10 Monday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Sunday Reads

Avert your eyes! My Sunday morning look at incompetency, corruption and policy failures:

It’s a World-Class Investment. It’s a Junk Investment. What Is Going On With SpaceX? The answer starts with Wall Street’s long-held distinction between “smart money” and “dumb money.” In that view, the roughly $2 trillion value that the stock market is affording SpaceX — about the same as Amazon’s value, and more than JPMorgan’s and ExxonMobil’s combined — is being set by naïve investors who think Elon Musk’s promises will all miraculously be realized. The debt, on the other hand, is being priced by seasoned investors, the ones who understand that profits actually have to be earned, and who are rightly skeptical of Mr. Musk’s grand pronouncements. SpaceX is simultaneously the most coveted private asset on earth and a governance nightmare. Bethany McLean on the paradox of a company that’s worth $350 billion and run like a startup with no board oversight. (New York Times)

How Rogue Nations Are Using Cryptocurrencies to Evade Sanctions: Blacklisted entities handled $100 billion in crypto in 2025, financing terrorism and weapons. The WSJ maps the workaround economy — and it’s bigger than you think. (Wall Street Journal) see also Trump’s $1.4 billion crypto disclosure: The White House insists there’s no conflict of interest as Trump reports $1.4 billion in income from an industry he’s deregulated. Molly White digs into the president’s financial disclosure and finds the conflicts of interest are no longer theoretical — they’re on the form. (Citation Needed)

Jessica Burbank on the Rise of Flock Safety and America’s Surveillance State. Investigative journalist Jessica Burbank explains how the company quietly won government contracts across the country—and why communities are starting to push back. Current Affairs interview on how Flock Safety’s license plate readers have quietly blanketed the country — and why most Americans have no idea how thoroughly their movements are being tracked. (Current Affairs)

Has America Crossed the Asshole Threshold? Civilizations can carry a surprising number of parasites and live. But there’s a line — Rome crossed it, the Gilded Age toed it, and for the first time in history, we can measure it. The Grim Historian asks the title question: whether there’s a tipping point at which institutional rudeness, bad faith, and cruelty become self-reinforcing cultural defaults. (Defector)

The End of Reading Is Here: Optimists once believed that universal literacy was inevitable. Now it seems that the age of reading might be a short anomaly in human history. The Atlantic‘s cover story on the collapse of sustained reading as a cultural practice — and what a post-literate society actually looks like. Not the death of books, but the death of the attention required to read them. (The Atlantic)

Watchdog warns of risks to patients as private equity’s stake in US healthcare grows: New report details slew of ventures between private equity and nonprofits and calls for greater government oversight. Color me unsurprised. (The Guardian)

The Supreme Court is corrupting American democracy: One cannot hope to bribe or twist/ (thank God!) the U.S. chief jurist. To understand this, you need to think more systematically about the relationship between democracy and corruption. The best way of understanding this relationship that I know of is laid out in an academic article that was published the year before John Roberts was named Chief Justice, Mark Warren’s “What Does Corruption Mean in a Democracy?” Henry Farrell argues the Supreme Court is corrupting American democracy — not decision by decision, but structurally. (Programmable Mutter)

Why U.S. measles outbreaks have grown harder to extinguish: The nation is already nearing last year’s record case total, and experts say the virus is forcing doctors to relearn a disease many thought had been consigned to history. Why measles outbreaks keep getting harder to extinguish: falling vaccination rates meet a weakened public-health system. Entirely predictable, entirely preventable. (Washington Post) see also As Parents Reject Vitamin K Shots, Some Babies Develop Devastating Bleeding: Doctors described treating brain and abdominal hemorrhages in infants who hadn’t received the routine injection. Several said the images of those patients were seared in their minds. • As Parents Reject Vitamin K Shots, Some Babies Develop Devastating Bleeding: The NYT documents the real-world consequences of vaccine hesitancy’s cousin: parents declining a routine newborn treatment that prevents a rare but catastrophic bleeding disorder. (New York Times)

Bari Weiss Is Filling CBS News With British Right Wing Propagandists: from the you’re-simply-not-very-good-at-anything dept; As we’ve long explored, Weiss wasn’t hired to do journalism. She was hired to do right wing agitprop. But given she’s not good at that either, CBS just saw its lowest ratings in a quarter century.  (Techdirt)

• How Olivia Rodrigo Is Getting Back at the Trump Administration: The pop star is turning her platform and her festival into an organizing machine. The Hollywood Reporter on her evolution from heartbreak anthems to political action. (Hollywood Reporter)

Video of the day: How Hinckley Outlived 90 Years of American Boatbuilding Disasters.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with McKeel Hagerty, CEO and Chairman of Hagerty. We discuss how he transformed the family boat insurance business into a “sexy” driver-forward business. We also discuss our love of collectable cars and his love of his first car, a Porsche, that he bought at the age of 13.

Americans are set to lose nearly $250B gambling this year—a record high, up more than 60% since 2019—and that’s before counting unofficial betting via prediction markets or crypto

Source: Joseph Politano

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

The post 10 Sunday Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

MiB: McKeel Hagerty, CEO and Chairman of Hagerty Insurance



 

 

This week, I speak with McKeel Hagerty, CEO and Chairman of Hagerty. We discuss how he transformed the family boat insurance business into a “sexy” driver-forward business. We also discuss our love of collectable cars and his love of his first car, a Porsche, that he bought at the age of 13.

A transcript of our conversation is available here on Tuesday; A list of his current reading is below.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube (video), YouTube (audio), and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Jason Wenks, founder and CEO of Altruist, a modern custodian built as a clean sheet from the ground up, fully integrated with artificial intelligence. He began his career at Morgan Stanley before launching Retirement Wealth Advisors, and then FormulaFolios. The through-line of his career has been creating lower-cost, tech-enabled, financial advice.

 

 

 

Current Reading/Favorite Books

Lots of musical bios:  Keith Richards, Slash others
Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
Sonic Boom
George Washington
Benjamin Franklin
Wealth of Nations
entire Dune series
The Foundation series,

The post MiB: McKeel Hagerty, CEO and Chairman of Hagerty Insurance appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Weekend Reads

The weekend is here! Pour yourself a mug of Danish Blend coffee, grab a seat outside, and get ready for our longer-form weekend reads:

The Anti-Amazon. One brilliant feature of the Costco experience is, paradoxically, the constraint: as opposed to Amazon, with its near infinite assortment, or even Walmart, which has approximately 130,000 SKUs (stock keeping units, or distinct items) in the average Supercenter, any given Costco will only hold 4,000 SKUs to choose from. While most retailers today assume that consumers want ever greater assortment, Costco’s popularity speaks to a countervailing desire for less choice. Indeed, the pre-selection of items for sale in their warehouses is part of the value proposition: not only are you going to get a lot of a particular thing for a good price, but you also won’t have to deliberate over micro-differences in a more robust assortment. Benjamin Fong on what a genuine alternative to Amazon’s logistics empire would require. A serious, wonky look past the everything-store. (Phenomenal World)

How do you solve a problem like social media? Part I It’s all well and good saying we should regulate social media. But social media is already regulated. So why is it failing? And what could we do in response? The first installment of a serious policy analysis of what regulation would actually look like—beyond the usual hand-wringing and congressional hearings that go nowhere. (Chaminda Jayanetti) see also At 17, She Sued Meta and Google, and Won. Now She’s Ready to Tell Her Story: Kaley Glenn-Mills’ lawsuit reshaped the fight to protect children from social media. She says she still can’t stop scrolling. . (Bloomberg free)

The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom: The market misremembers 2008. That same blind spot sits at the center of the AI boom. The second derivative problem: bulls and bears alike are arguing about the AI boom’s level when the rate of change is what matters. (Groundbrkr)

‘There Is No Going Back’: The Inside Story of Europe’s Rupture With America: Trump’s tariffs, threats against Greenland spurred a rebellion by top leaders; the limits of ‘flattery diplomacy’. The WSJ’s inside story of Europe’s rupture with America: “There is no going back.” The post-war alliance, unwinding in real time. (Wall Street Journal) see also The Canadian Who Steered Europe Away From the U.S. Facing threats from Trump, Mark Carney emerged as a central figure in a project to reshape the Western alliance The WSJ profiles the diplomat who helped Europe decouple from American strategic dependence — a realignment that will outlast any single administration. (Wall Street Journal)

The Great Blogging Collapse: What Happened to 100 Successful Blogs? [Study] I tracked 100 once-successful blogs over four years to understand what happened after Google’s Helpful Content Updates and the rise of AI Overviews. The results were striking: the median blog lost 85% of its organic traffic, while only 21 continued to grow. This study reveals the patterns behind the winners, the losers, and what it takes to build a blog that can survive in 2026.(Daniel Stanica)

What Makes Humans Stupid: It takes intelligence to get things spectacularly wrong. An essay on our undoing. Nautilus on the cognitive biases, social pressures, and structural incentives that systematically produce bad decisions—even among the smartest people. (Nautilus)

Capitalists Love This Podcast. So Do Their Critics. “Odd Lots” goes deep on lentils in Saskatchewan, the global tractor supply and trucking markets. Is it the skeleton key to understanding this strange economic moment? Congrats to Jope & Tracey!  The NYT profiles Odd Lots, the Bloomberg podcast that’s become required listening for both the financial establishment and the people who want to dismantle it. The rare show that doesn’t condescend to either audience. (New York Times)

The Inside Story Of Leverage Research 1.0 Between 2011-2019, Leverage Research explored the deep psychology of Effective Altruism and Silicon Valley, then suddenly dissolved among rumors of “demons.” What happened? Lydia Laurenson’s firsthand account of Leverage Research 1.0 — one of the rationalist movement’s stranger experiments, told from the inside. (Substack)

The Terrorist in the Brain: What Robin Williams and Bruce Willis can teach us about dementia—and about the industry that has grown up around our fear of it Skeptic on Lewy body dementia — the ‘terrorist in the brain’ that claimed Robin Williams and afflicts Bruce Willis — and what medicine can actually offer. (Skeptic)

How Lizzo Became One of Pop Culture’s Great Flops: The singer is experiencing a new form of downward mobility—and she’s not alone. The Atlantic on how Lizzo became one of pop culture’s great flops — a case study in how fast fame’s flywheel reverses. (The Atlantic)

Video of the day: Every Jon Favreau Movie, Explained by Jon Favreau | Vanity Fair

Be sure to check out our bonus episode of Master’s in Business with David Risher, CEO of Lyft, one of North America’s largest ride-sharing networks. He joined Lyft’s board in 2021 when the firm was burning cash and losing ground to Uber. Lyft has returned to profitability, with its stock rising more than 75% since Risher took the reins as CEO in 2023. In Q1 2026, the firm had 28.3 million active riders and did $4.9B in gross bookings, with $1.7B revs, and $132.8m in EBITDA. Previously, he held senior roles at Microsoft and Amazon.

Mag-7 underperformance returns top 5 S&P 500 weighting to the level 2 years ago

Source: Deutsche Bank Research Institute

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

 

The post 10 Weekend Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Friday AM Reads

My end-of-week morning reads:

Europe chose insurance. America chose growth. Europe and America chose different points on the efficiency-equity trade-off. That used to be a matter of preferences. It isn’t anymore. Visitors notice something else, even the ones who have never heard of a purchasing power parity adjustment for GDP per capita comparisons across borders. They notice the wealth. The cars, the houses, the restaurants, the sheer scale of consumption. They notice the contrast between what is happening here and what is happening back home. You don’t need the IMF’s World Economic Outlook to see it, though the WEO will confirm it: even after adjusting for purchasing power, U.S. GDP per capita is now roughly 38% higher than the EU average. (The Two Cents)

Boomers’ massive wealth will mostly be passed down to people who are already rich: Baby boomers are expected to pass $36 trillion to their heirs in the next two decades, an analysis found. The great wealth transfer is coming — and it’s going exactly where you’d expect. The Washington Post on the data showing intergenerational wealth concentration accelerating, not dissipating. (Washington Post) but see Hey … can you pay me back now? Welcome to the summer of financed fun, where one friend books the Airbnb and everyone else promises the money is coming. The psychology of the awkward IOU — why asking friends to pay you back is one of money’s great social minefields. (Substack)

The Insider’s Guide to San Francisco’s A.I. Boom: The city is the tech industry’s hub for artificial intelligence, 30 miles north of the home of companies like Meta and Google. What if San Francisco is the new Silicon Valley? San Francisco has had its share of tech companies since the dot-com boom, but the money pouring into artificial intelligence has lately supercharged the city’s tech profile.
Last year, they raised nearly $35 billion of venture capital funding. The change is visible. Rents are climbing again. City buses are filling back up. And the face of San Francisco is starting to look younger. The NYT maps the geography, social dynamics, and power structures of SF’s AI scene. Where the money is, where the talent eats, and who’s actually building things versus just talking about them. (New York Times)

The Fun Shortage Is Real, and It’s Making America Miserable: With fewer places to relax and socialize, and steeper prices for entry, having fun is quantifiably harder than it used to be. Bloomberg on the fun shortage: hotels, theme parks, and summer camps priced past the middle class. Even leisure is bifurcating. (Bloomberg free)

The creator economy is above the law: How influencers get away with anything. the Polymarket campaign was definitely illegal. However, there’s a reason that Polymarket and most content creators don’t abide by these laws: They’re barely being enforced. Scott Galloway’s shop argues the creator economy operates in a regulatory vacuum. Influence without accountability rarely ends well. (ProfG Media)

The year is 2063 and you were never interesting. You’re never going to be someone’s eccentric grandmother because you spent your best years consuming the lives of strangers. A sharp bit of speculative fiction: the year is 2063 and you were never interesting. The algorithm always knew. (Substack)

Navigating by Aliveness: One thing that’s missing from those discussions is any consideration of aliveness. Yet I think it might be the key to understanding how to think and feel about AI, how to respond to it, how to integrate it into our lives or not – and how to ensure, as technology marches on, that we don’t lose sight of what really matters for a meaningfully productive life. Oliver Burkeman on navigating by ‘aliveness’ rather than obligation — his usual gentle antidote to productivity culture. (Oliver Burkeman)

The last astronomers: Amid a flood of AI advances, astrophysicists are questioning the soul of their field. (Science)

The only bias uncovered in the White House’s Smithsonian report is its own: A White House report alleges radical bias at the National Museum of American History. But the assembled evidence reveals a large and vibrant institution carrying out its mission. A pointed WaPo column: the only bias uncovered in the White House’s Smithsonian report is its own. (Washington Post) see also A Huge Escalation in Trump’s Smithsonian Meddling: A White House report details what the administration wants to change in museums—and suggests that a crackdown could be coming. The Atlantic on a huge escalation in Trump’s Smithsonian meddling — the American History museum is now squarely in the crosshairs. (The Atlantic)

The Wimbledon boy living a dream that defies belief: If it were a movie script, Arthur Fery’s remarkable Wimbledon adventure would probably never have made it to the big screen because it seemed ​too far-fetched to be believable. A 23-year-old who grew up within walking distance of Centre Court. Ranked 114th in the world. A wildcard ‌entrant with only two previous Grand Slam match wins. Wimbledon semi-finalist? Reuters’ profile of the young tennis sensation whose run at the Championships is the feel-good sports story of the summer. (Reuters)

Video of the day: Why The Best Player Alive Barely Runs

Be sure to check out our bonus episode of Master’s in Business with David Risher, CEO of Lyft, one of North America’s largest ride-sharing networks. He joined Lyft’s board in 2021 when the firm was burning cash and losing ground to Uber. Lyft has returned to profitability, with its stock rising more than 75% since Risher took the reins as CEO in 2023. In Q1 2026, the firm had 28.3 million active riders and did $4.9B in gross bookings, with $1.7B revs, and $132.8m in EBITDA. Previously, he held senior roles at Microsoft and Amazon.

 

Percent Change in Median House Prices from 2000 to 2025 in the US

Source: Data is Beautiful

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

The post 10 Friday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Ticker Take: The Biggest Mistakes Investors Make

 

 

What a fun conversation!

I sat down with Jon Erlichman (formerly of Bloomberg, now at Ticker Take) to discuss the biggest mistakes investors make.

Here is the overview:

Most investing advice tells you what to buy. Barry Ritholtz would rather tell you what NOT to do. This week on Ticker Take, we sit down with Ritholtz, co-founder and chairman of Ritholtz Wealth Management and the author of How NOT To Invest. Barry walks us through 9 mistakes investors (including pros) often make — from trying to time the market to anchoring to what you paid. Plus, he walks us through the simple approach he uses to avoid making mistakes. As always, this is not financial advice.

Chapters:  0:00 Intro
0:16 What you should NOT do as an investor.
0:54 Why avoiding mistakes is the key to investing!
1:39 Some of the ways to be a successful investor.
3:34 Pros make these mistakes too!
4:44 Mistake 1 – Timing the market
7:34 Mistake 2 – Complex over simple
9:11 Mistake 3 – Politics over patience
11:33 Mistake 4 – Ignoring compounding
14:08 Mistake 5 – Survivorship bias
17:00 Mistake 6 – Panic selling
19:03 Mistake 7 – FOMO buying
20:29 Mistake 8 – Action bias
21:52 Mistake 9 – Anchoring to cost

Video below…

 

Apple Podcasts

Spotify

YouTube

 

 

 

 

The post Ticker Take: The Biggest Mistakes Investors Make appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Thursday AM Reads

My morning train WFH reads:

SpaceX Bonds Are Trading Like Junk Bonds. What Does That Mean for Investors? BB-rated bonds are viewed as carrying a substantial credit risk for their holders. While investment-grade bonds have a historical default rate in the range of 0% to 1.02%, the default rate for BB-rated bonds has been about 4.22%, 4X higher than the riskiest investment-grade bonds. SpaceX carries a substantial debt load, about $29 billion in long-term bonds. A useful reminder that even the shiniest private darlings answer to the credit market. (The Globe and Mail)

5 Myths About AI’s Economic Impact, and What the Data Actually Shows: The AI economy is full of myths. Here are 5 worth challenging. Morningstar takes a data scalpel to five myths about AI’s economic impact. Sober counterprogramming to the hype cycle. (Morningstar)

Private-Equity Firms Are Sitting on a Nine-Year Backlog: Investors’ artificial-intelligence worries weigh on efforts to exit software holdings. A nine-year backlog of unsold companies is clogging private equity’s plumbing. The exits everyone assumed would come are simply not coming. (Wall Street Journal)

Pump.Fun’s Bounties Platform Is a Black Hole of Circular Grifting: The crypto platform claims you can “pay anyone to do anything,” from quitting a job on camera to getting a memecoin-themed tattoo. But it seems like people trying to scam each other. Wired on Pump.Fun’s bounties platform — a black hole of circular grifting, where the crypto grift funds the grift about the grift. (Wired)

Wikipedia Is Battling for the Soul of the Internet: The internet’s largest stockpile of free knowledge is under threat from MAGA, A.I. and foreign autocrats. A bibliophile ex-ambassador is here to help. Wikipedia — the last great noncommercial site — is battling for the soul of the internet, squeezed by AI scrapers and Elon Musk alike. (New York Times) see also ‘Let’s Go Kill the Internet’ Zuhair Lakhani ​is creating an army of AI influencers and flooding feeds with “propaganda campaigns.” What could go wrong?  Doublespeed is just one of a growing number of start-ups devoted to fabricating genuine virality online, some of which pay Discord users to create clips of podcasts, make fan edits of movie stars, and post glowing praise of whatever pop star has hired them. Lakhani’s pitch is one step beyond this: He wants not only to manufacture the trends but also to replace the real people involved with an army of AI influencers free of the human need for nuisances like payment or sleep. Each account is connected to its own physical phone in order to circumvent TikTok’s bot-detection systems. (New York Magazine)

Nobody Wants To Earn Their S***: A blunt cultural critique: nobody wants to earn their stripes anymore. Grumpy, yes — but not entirely wrong. (Panoptica)

There’s a New Way of War, but Is It Evolution or Revolution? Militaries worldwide are grappling with breakneck technological change and the lessons from Ukraine and the Persian Gulf. The WSJ asks whether drone-era warfare is evolution or revolution. Either way, the old playbook is toast. (Wall Street Journal)

US Air Force Engineer Charged With Sawing Down Flock Surveillance Cameras Receives Thousands of Dollars from Supporters Across the Country: “There’s also no shortage of citizens who prefer a more direct-action approach. Armed with garbage bags, spray paint, and even chainsaws, a not insignificant number of privacy vigilantes have taken the fight to Flock, using any means to free their neighborhoods of the ominous surveillance poles.” An Air Force engineer charged with sawing down Flock surveillance cameras is collecting thousands from supporters. Folk hero or felon — America can’t decide. (Futurism)

Extreme Heat Isn’t the Only Climate Impact Shocking Scientists: Much of the US just sweltered through the July 4 holiday weekend as an intense heat dome bore down, straining power grids and prompting the cancellation of many events. Wash, DC, saw a high of 102F (39C) on Saturday, a new local record for the date. In Europe, punishing temperatures are set to return days after a deadly heat wave pushed thermometers as high as 43.8C (111F) in France. A troubling pattern has emerged in this summer’s heat: Broken records, it’s done so often by margins far above the previous all-time highs. (Bloomberg free)

The World Cup gives America a unified look. The rest is complicated: These are images of America, at 250 years old, hosting the world’s grandest sporting event and partying like it’s 1776. But the jersey has never been just a jersey. It is a visual manifesto of a complicated country, and in the upkeep of long-recited ideals, it becomes a battleground. The politics of exclusion have infiltrated these colors, this flag, narrowing perspectives about who counts as a real American and who does not. In response, the politics of inclusion have turned to elitist derision, partly as a shield, but that only makes it easier to exile the faction from national pride. The Athletic on the World Cup’s tidy image of a unified America — and everything messier lurking just beneath the flag-waving. (The Athletic)

Video of the day: The Larry Sanders Show: The Show that Revolutionized TV Comedy – But Devastated Its Star

Be sure to check out our bonus episode of Master’s in Business with David Risher, CEO of Lyft, one of North America’s largest ride-sharing networks. He joined Lyft’s board in 2021 when the firm was burning cash and losing ground to Uber. Lyft has returned to profitability, with its stock rising more than 75% since Risher took the reins as CEO in 2023. In Q1 2026, the firm had 28.3 million active riders and did $4.9B in gross bookings, with $1.7B revs, and $132.8m in EBITDA. Previously, he held senior roles at Microsoft and Amazon.

 

America at 50, 100, 150, 200 & 250

Source: Bruce Melhman

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

The post 10 Thursday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

MiB: Lyft CEO David Risher

 

 

This week, I speak with David Risher, CEO of Lyft, about his career path from Microsoft and Amazon to leading the ride-sharing platform. We discuss Lyft’s financial turnaround, cost-cutting measures, and strategies for expanding market share. Plus customer-centric features, the mechanics of ride data, and the decade-long transition toward autonomous vehicle networks.

A transcript of our conversation is below; His current reading is “Apple in China: The Capture of the World’s Greatest Company” by Patrick McGee, and “Good People: A Novel” by Patmeena Sabit.”

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube (video), YouTube (audio), and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Master’s in Business this weekend with McKeel Hagerty, CEO/Chairman of Hagerty Specialty Insurance. He transformed a family specialty-insurance agency into an enthusiast-driven platform focused on collectible cars, events, valuation data, and auctions. HGTY is now a public company that insures everything from classic cars to boats, trucks, tractors, and military vehicles for over 2.8M collectors.

 

Spotify

 

 

MASTERS IN BUSINESS An Interview with David Risher, CEO of Lyft
Hosted by Barry Ritholtz  ·  Bloomberg Radio

 

ANNOUNCER (00:00:02):  Bloomberg Audio Studios: podcasts, radio, news. This is Masters in Business with Barry Ritholtz on Bloomberg Radio.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:00:16):  This week on the podcast — man, was this a fascinating conversation. David Risher has been CEO of Lyft for the past three years; he’s been on the board for the past five years. What a fascinating discussion about a company that is probably an app on your phone, and you may not be aware of all the different things they do — from bike share, to autonomous vehicles, to fleet management, and everything in between. I thought this was absolutely fascinating, and I think you will also. With no further ado, my conversation with Lyft’s CEO, David Risher.

DAVID RISHER (00:00:55):  Thank you, Barry. I am happy to be here.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:00:56):  I’m thrilled to have you. Before we start talking about your technology background, I gotta roll a little further back: a bachelor’s in comparative literature from Princeton. That doesn’t sound like the sort of career plan for someone who’s gonna work his way through technology companies. What was the original idea?

DAVID RISHER (00:01:16):  So this goes way back, and the funny thing is, it even goes to high school. My mother bought an Apple II computer a million years ago to help her run a small business, and I sort of got into technology that way. I will admit, part of it, I think, is I had terrible handwriting. And so when I used the computer to print out stuff for my high school English teacher, she could finally read what I was writing. It probably gave me a better grade as a result. So I sort of got into computers a little bit as a kid, ended up at Princeton, writing my thesis on a computer — again, this is a million years ago, when that wasn’t normal. And so I found myself just interested in technology, and after going to a consulting firm for a couple years to learn about the business world and going to business school, I found myself as an intern at Microsoft — again, back in 1990 — and the rest is sort of history.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:02:09):  So, Harvard Business School — we know what that typically leads to. I’m curious how the humanities background helped shape the way you think about business, about leadership, about working with people. What was the upside of humanities for you?

DAVID RISHER (00:02:26):  You know what, I really appreciate the question, and I actually think it’s more relevant now than ever. Look, the humanities is all about curiosity and understanding, and maybe even empathy, right? If you read a book, you have to understand — you’re exposed to different people’s perspectives. It’s almost like you’re crawling inside someone else’s brain, particularly if you’re reading fiction. And so, to a certain extent, I think nothing could prepare you better. Now, you have to have an analytical brain. You might also have to be good with numbers in business. But the humanities world — I sort of think of it as this kind of magic vaccination against irrelevance, because that curiosity is always gonna matter. And it certainly helped me through my whole career.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:03:05):  I love that answer. So you intern at Microsoft. You end up beginning your career there, where you helped to launch their first database product, Access. Tell us about that.

DAVID RISHER (00:03:17):  Sure. So Microsoft was famously ahead — or at least getting ahead, let’s say — with the launch of Windows, in word processing, in spreadsheets, of course. And again, this is sort of ancient business history, but it’s a fascinating tale of a technology shift, completely reshuffling the deck away from old companies like WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3. We don’t even know who those companies are anymore, because Microsoft took over that space. And it’s really because Windows shifted the platform — we might come back to that idea when we talk about autonomous cars. But they didn’t have a database, and that was sort of the third big product that a lot of companies wanted. I helped develop it; I was the first product manager on it. And really, all that meant is my job was to go around and watch other people use competing products at the time — Paradox, dBase, again, products that don’t even exist anymore — and try to pay attention to what they were doing with these products. How were they using them? Where were they stumbling? That was my first role. And in a sense, it has been one of the most important jobs I ever had, ’cause it’s what sort of taught me about understanding what customers want.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:04:17):  Huh, interesting. And then you founded Microsoft Investor and launched that product. That is so far afield from databases. What led to that transition?

DAVID RISHER (00:04:29):  Okay, so you’re making me realize that there’s a theme of my life I hadn’t really thought of before, which is platform shifts. So when I joined Microsoft, Windows was the product, right? This was the thing that was gonna run software, and of course it became incredibly successful. But then 1995, 1996, 1997 comes around — the internet is here. And Microsoft, like any tech company at the time, had to figure out its internet strategy. And it decided that there were a couple of key products that needed to be available on the World Wide Web. Actually, I think “the information superhighway” literally was the way people talked about it. It’s crazy. So —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:05:04):  Cliché. It’s amazing.

DAVID RISHER (00:05:05):  So cliché. But there it was — no one even knew how to talk about the thing. So anyway, I had been a little bit interested in personal finance, and a couple of threads came together. Microsoft tried to buy a company called Intuit — still very successful — and was unsuccessful, blocked because of the Justice Department. And so we decided we needed personal finance. And I said, you know what, why don’t we develop this product — a personal finance product — for the internet, not as packaged software.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:05:29):  Huh. Really, really interesting. And then, staying with the theme of platform shifts: employee number 37 at Amazon. That is just an absolutely bonkers number. Senior VP of US retail — when you joined the firm, revenue was $15 million. You helped ramp that up to $4 billion. Obvious question: when you joined Amazon, did you have any idea what the behemoth it would become? Or was it still, hey, we’re hanging on by our fingernails and maybe this’ll work out — or anywhere in between?

DAVID RISHER (00:06:07):  It was sort of both at the same time, and it was almost always gonna be one or the other, right? So I remember — I’ll tell you a little of the story of how I got there. My phone rings one day at Microsoft, and it’s this guy Jeff, and he’s doing a reference check of a woman who used to work, actually, at Microsoft in the personal finance group. So it all kind of connects. And so we get to talking, and one thing leads to another, and he is very precise about the way he’s asking questions. Remember, the company had maybe 10 people at this point. It was very, very small. But he had a big vision. You know, he was gonna be Earth’s biggest bookstore.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:06:42):  At the time — wait, hold on, let me just stop you. When you say “this guy, Jeff” — this isn’t just some guy in HR. Jeff Bezos is calling you to do a background check on a potential hire.

DAVID RISHER (00:06:55):  Exactly.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:06:56):  So go on — Jeff calls.

DAVID RISHER (00:06:58):  So Jeff calls me, and literally, at the time, he was just this guy, Jeff.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:07:02):  “Hey David, some guy named Jeff on the phone. Pretty much a background check for an employee.” So what was that conversation like?

DAVID RISHER (00:07:09):  Well, he had — to take you back then, but in a sense it’s still the Jeff of today — he had a plan, and it was a 25-question plan for the phone call, right? And to this day, the question I remember the most clearly was: “It’s very clear you are a fan of this person — give me an example of a job that she wouldn’t be a good fit for.” And it was such a clever question, because inevitably in background checks, you’re trying to say nice things about the person, right? But this is an invitation to say, well, you know, maybe a very detail-oriented job might not be the best fit. Or maybe something that manages a lot of people. It’s something like this that would give him some sense of where an area to probe more is. Anyway, at the end of that conversation — literally 45 minutes into it — he says, you know, you sound like a good guy. I said, oh, you sound like a good guy as well. And so a couple days later, he and MacKenzie, his wife at the time, and Jen, my wife currently still, and I went out to dinner, got to know each other, and over the course of the next year, got to know each other a little bit better. And then I ended up applying for this job to help Amazon grow beyond just books. That was really the job.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:08:16):  And how’d that work out?

DAVID RISHER (00:08:18):  It worked out pretty well. But you know what, it wasn’t obvious at the time. During the interview, I remember he said — look, if we play our cards right — and as you say, it was a $15.6 million store at the time, so tiny, tiny little thing — he said, if we play our cards right, maybe by the year 2000 — this is in 1996 — we might be a billion-dollar company. Maybe, maybe. But a lot has to go right in order for that to happen. Obviously we got there, and then we got, you know, far beyond. But there were all kinds of people who frankly were sort of rooting for our failure — competitors, Barnes & Noble at the time, a bunch of Wall Street analysts who thought this was just some sort of crazy Ponzi scheme, whatever.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:08:56):  It was, “No one’s gonna buy anything on the internet. What are you guys doing? This is a dumb idea.”

DAVID RISHER (00:09:00):  Totally, totally. Well, and not only that, but also: the costs are gonna be huge. You’re gonna have to build out these distribution centers and warehouses. The internet is unproven technology. All sorts of things that just —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:09:12):  No one’s giving you a credit card over the internet, correct?

DAVID RISHER (00:09:14):  Correct. Who’s gonna trust you?

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:09:15):  I remember getting an Amazon gift certificate from my college roommate — this was decades ago, right after Amazon formed. And the first time you go through the experience of buying something, it’s like, oh, this makes perfect sense. I don’t have to go to the store, I don’t have to waste time. This is great. I mean, there are certain stores that are fun to browse, but for the mundane sort of stuff, he was just decades ahead of everybody else.

DAVID RISHER (00:09:46):  In that way — and in realizing that it’s really the customer experience and customer obsession that’s gonna drive your continued growth. Because all those things are true. And as he would say, famously, you’re always one click away from competition. So that’s the downside, right? How do you continue to compete in a world where theoretically someone else could start, and someone else could start, and someone else could start — and you don’t have any geographic advantage over them?

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:10:09):  And they kind of owned that space for the longest time. Really, it was only the pandemic, when people were outta things, that forced everybody: all right, now I have a Target account, now I have a Walmart account, now anybody else who could deliver. And what’s been surprising is how they’ve just powered right through. Hasn’t really slowed him down very much.

DAVID RISHER (00:10:27):  That’s right. That’s right.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:10:31):  So you go from Amazon — you kind of tap out a couple of years later. You teach at the University of Washington’s business school; you were elected Professor of the Year in 2004. And then you spend 13 years running Worldreader, a nonprofit dedicated to helping children learn to read in underserved communities. This is yet another pivot — platform shift, right? What was it? Just like, all right, I have my Microsoft stock came in, Amazon recovered from the dot-com implosion, that’s doing fine — I could just do something for fun? What was the thinking behind the shift?

DAVID RISHER (00:11:11):  No, it wasn’t that, actually — it was sort of a different thing. So you asked me a couple questions ago what my career idea was as a kid. Honestly, if I had had to guess, I might have said, you know, maybe I’ll be an English professor someday, or something like that. I’d wanted to teach, and I loved reading. And so this was a way for me to bring together a couple of different things in my life — obviously books and literacy, ’cause that was sort of the passion and focus, but also technology. The thesis of the company was: kids are gonna read using tech. And that’s how it’s gotten to be — millions and millions of kids later are all reading on the platform. It started out with Kindle, a product I know something about because of my Amazon days, and brought sort of technology and reading together. So that was really the focus.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:11:53):  And then what ultimately ended up bringing you back into the corporate sector, after a long time in academia and nonprofits?

DAVID RISHER (00:12:01):  Yeah. So here it was — one day my phone rings, and a guy named Sean Aggarwal is on the other end of the line. Sean and I had worked together many years before, back at Amazon. He was my kind of finance partner. He had subsequently become an investor and then the board chair of Lyft. And he and John and Logan, the co-founders of Lyft, really were looking to do something quite unusual at the board level, which was: bring someone in who is a real customer advocate. So boards — for those of you who haven’t gotten a chance to be exposed to a board — typically are made up of kind of finance people, business strategists, maybe people who’ve built companies before. But often, by the time you get to sort of the board level of a company, you’re pretty far away from the customer. And John and Logan, again to their credit, said, you know what? We need some more customer advocacy right from the top. We need some more support, frankly, for that kind of vibe, as well as someone who’d helped scale a company like Amazon. You know, I also learned a lot about competing at Microsoft, and even at Worldreader — nonprofits, people sort of look at them and think they’re not very much, but it’s very, very difficult to actually scale a nonprofit, because the funding is always tight and so forth. So I think they were looking for someone with a combination of scaling experience but also real customer advocacy. And so I joined the board as a result.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:13:18):  And then eventually, a couple of years later, you get offered the role of CEO. What was that like? How did that come about? Infrequently do board members become CEOs.

DAVID RISHER (00:13:36):  So, funnily enough — and this one I’ll sort of slow the story down again, because it actually was Sean Aggarwal again, same board chair — he calls me up. It happened to be on Valentine’s Day, of all days, so I remember the day, in 2023. And the backstory here is John and Logan, again, the co-founders of Lyft — this is what they had been doing for 15 years nonstop. It was literally their first job outta college: founding this whole new company, withstanding the onslaught of an incredibly competitive environment, an incredibly operationally complex environment, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, for year after year. So at the end of the prior year, they said to the board, you know what, it’s time for us to move on. We’ve sort of done what we need to do. And frankly, the company was going through a bit of a tough time financially and operationally, and I think they realized that they were sort of getting to the end of where they could really help. So the board did what it does — boards do this — they form a special committee, they start to recruit, look around. I wasn’t on the committee; I was sort of watching from the side. But, as they say, then my phone rings one day, and it’s Sean on the phone with John and Logan, and they basically say: you know what we’ve been thinking? As we’ve been looking at external people, frankly, we think we might have the right person to at least apply for the job — let’s be clear, apply for the job — sitting right here, you know, on the board. And I said, what are you talking about? They said, we’re talking about you, David. I said, absolutely not.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:14:56):  Really — your first reaction was, hey, thanks, but no thanks?

DAVID RISHER (00:14:58):  Zero percent chance. I literally said, you should hang up the phone right now, because you’ve got better things to do. There’s just no way. But you know what? As the day wore on, I found myself saying, you know what, this is a really interesting opportunity. How many people get this opportunity? To run a — and I’d never run a public company before. I mean, my God. But at the same time, I had learned some things at Microsoft. I’d learned some things at Amazon. I learned some things at Worldreader. I learned some things in various different ways in my life. And I had a lot of passion for the company, having been on the board — and also a real understanding that as a board member, you really only have so much power and influence. It’s fairly limited. But as a CEO, it’s a different thing. So anyway, one thing led to another. I applied, and went through kind of a harrowing experience, but ended up getting the job.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:15:40):  Huh — really, really fascinating. So, we mentioned earlier: you joined the board in 2021, you’re named CEO in 2023. When you joined the company, they were still reeling from the pandemic and all the factors that drove the company — losing not only money, but also losing market share to their big competitor, Uber. What did you find when you looked under the hood? What surprises were awaiting you as CEO?

DAVID RISHER (00:16:11):  So the first, maybe, meta-observation — and you’re teeing it up — is: gosh, you’re on the board of a company for a couple years, you kind of think you know the company. You don’t really know the company. I mean, if any board members are out there, you think you do, and you probably have a pretty good sense of certain things, but you get in there and everything is 10 times bigger, worse, better — all the things. Then you realize: okay, what did I see? I saw a company that had some real innovative spirit at its core. Remember, Lyft was actually the one that really revolutionized rideshare. So the other guys, they came up with a sort of black-car concept — you know, black car on an app — but it was really Lyft that said, you know what, it can be anyone with a Prius. You know what I mean? Anyone can pick up. So this company had innovated from the early days, but honestly, its innovative spirit had maybe gotten a little the best of it. Tried a few too many things, spread a little too thin, losing share. And its core business, as you say — not priced well, not paying competitively. So a number of different, just basic issues. So what do we do the first, frankly, couple of weeks? Well, first thing is lower prices. We were just priced too high.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:17:15):  Did you do big announcements around that? Because I don’t — 2023 is still kind of a blur to me.

DAVID RISHER (00:17:20):  So we didn’t, and here’s why. In order to withstand a price drop — because it’s a very competitive business and you’re doing a lot of volume — if you drop your price, you gotta make sure you can pay for it. We had to do some other things as well. So, for example, we had to reduce our costs significantly. So we laid off — it was about a third of the company. And yeah, 26%, actually, of the company, now I think about it.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:17:41):  Wow.

DAVID RISHER (00:17:45):  $330 million of savings. That was a very, very significant shock to the company, by the way. We also had to raise driver pay. So we had a lot to pay for.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:17:53):  So wait — you’re simultaneously lowering prices for Lyft riders and yet bumping up pay for drivers. That sounds like that’s gonna cause a big problem for profits.

DAVID RISHER (00:18:03):  So that’s exactly right. So in order to pay for it, you have to figure out how to pay for it. And frankly, our cost structure was just sort of outta control. We were doing too many things. We had too many people — and by the way, those people were all working remotely, which makes it quite difficult to really kind of change the culture to a customer-obsessed culture, which was my other big thing. And by the way, we were also overpaying in stock-based compensation, which was bugging investors. So in the first couple of months, it wasn’t really the time to be bragging. It was the time, frankly, to be saying, okay, we’ve got some things to fix, and let’s really focus on that. So first — call it thirty, sixty, ninety days — it’s fixing some basics, but also reorienting the company back towards its customer-obsessed roots. And I’m still very — I guess I’d say proud of this: the first meeting I had of the day was literally getting my computer and my laptop, and the second meeting, 10 o’clock in the morning, Monday morning, I said, let’s start talking about a product that’s now called Women+ Connect — trying to get women drivers and women riders —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:19:02):  Such a great idea, especially given the mayhem across the street from you.

DAVID RISHER (00:19:06):  I appreciate you saying that. And it really matters. And this is something the company —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:19:11):  And I’m sorry to interrupt, please — it’s very visible on the app, that choice, which shows some thoughtfulness. And, oh, there’s this problem — how about we send a woman driver for you, and you don’t have to worry about what you’re hearing about elsewhere. Exactly. It just makes so much sense.

DAVID RISHER (00:19:28):  I really appreciate you saying that. It was an easy decision in that sense. All you have to do is talk to 10 women and say, well, what are you thinking? And they say, well, gosh, particularly late at night, maybe in a new city, maybe I’ve had a long day — it’s just not my jam to be talking to a dude. Right? It’s all right, dudes, you know — like that. But sometimes the easiest ideas are also the most complicated. There are all sorts of potential legal issues, all sorts of operational issues. There are even, to a certain extent, cultural issues of, like, is this gonna be okay? But I was like, you know what? I think it’s gonna be okay. I think it’s gonna be okay. So that was an early decision we made. It came out — that was in April of 2023 — we launched that later that year. And it was really exciting for the company to say, you know what, we can do big things again, and we can start to innovate again on behalf of customers.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:20:09):  Huh — kind of fascinating. Coming up: we continue our conversation with David Risher, CEO of Lyft, discussing the future of rideshare technology. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:20:21):  I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My special guest this week is David Risher. He is the CEO of Lyft, one of North America’s largest and fastest-growing ride-sharing networks. So over the next year or so, you return Lyft to profitability. In the most recent reported quarter — first quarter 2026 — over 28 million active riders, nearly $5 billion in gross bookings, $1.7 billion in revenues, just about $133 million in EBITDA profits. So the combination of restructuring the company, attracting — paying more — drivers, and discounting prices for riders puts you on the right foot. How do you build on that? What’s the next step to maintain that momentum?

DAVID RISHER (00:21:25):  Well, so in some sense, nothing changes, and in some sense, everything changes, okay? So what doesn’t change: customer obsession is still driving profitable growth. That’s just gonna be a theme I go with forever. You know, maybe I’ve drunk a lot of the Jeff Bezos Kool-Aid, but it seems to be working out pretty well. So one other financial metric that has been interesting to watch: when I joined, we were losing about $300 million — consuming about $300 million in cash — over 12 months. We’re now generating about $1.1 billion in cash over 12 months.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:21:53):  Okay. So what that allows you to do is invest in the future. What does that look like?

DAVID RISHER (00:21:58):  Certainly it looks like international expansion. So that’s been one thing we’ve been at for about the last year. Lyft was sort of — I almost say caught a little bit in a US-centric view of the world. And it just doesn’t make sense: once you have a product that scales really well, and is sort of a fixed-cost-based type of thing, you really want it to be around as much of the world as possible, so you can run as much volume through that platform as possible. So we bought a company called FREENOW last year. It’s a European taxi aggregator —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:22:28):  FREENOW?

DAVID RISHER (00:22:29):  FREENOW. Yeah. It is Europe’s biggest taxi aggregator, which means that if you want a taxi and you’re in a place like Barcelona or London — pick your favorite city; they operate in nine countries — the FREENOW app is gonna be your best way to get it. That gives us a great platform for expansion, even when it comes to autonomous vehicles — we’ll come back to that, I’m sure, in a couple seconds. So that’s one direction of expansion. You think of that as out — overseas. Another dimension is up — upmarket. You just kind of referred to this. So Lyft, again — it sort of started, its tradition was, as kind of a relatively inexpensive, very available rideshare option, but it wasn’t as strong in kind of the black, you know, kind of luxury segment. We bought a company called TBR last year. TBR is a high-end chauffeur company. We also have a very, very good Lyft Black product. In fact, if you’re listening to this, I promise: if you haven’t tried it, give it a try. I think you’ll like it. It’s actually our highest-rated product. You know, a nice black car comes and picks you up. So that’s another area of expansion for us, because that gives us, frankly, more margin to play with, but it also allows us to talk to a segment that we haven’t talked to very much. And then, of course, autonomous vehicles. So these are all nice uses of cash. Once you’re generating cash, you can start to either acquire companies, or you can invest in things that then grow — build sort of the next chapter of growth.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:23:44):  So I appreciate you mentioning the various tiers. There’s this tendency to think of the consumer — especially the American consumer — as one thing, but we both know that’s not true. You get to crunch a whole lot of data. What are you seeing in terms of income, geography, various times of day? Like, what do the metrics tell you about the different flavors of consumers using Lyft?

DAVID RISHER (00:24:11):  Yeah, this is such an interesting issue, and it’s not something I really appreciated. You know, we are gonna do about a billion rides this year, and so, to your point, with a billion rides, you kind of get a sense of how people are spending their time during the day. So I’ll tell you two things that are growing quite quickly. One is party time. And it might be funny to start there, but party time — I should say what that means. What that means is a Thursday night, really Friday night and Saturday night, call it nine and midnight. And it is really interesting — I think this is not just post-COVID, but I think, frankly, a little bit of app fatigue is driving people to say, you know what? Let’s actually get out and spend our lives out in the real world, instead of spending all of our lives on apps. So I think that’s — actually, I’m quite comforted by that. And it’s actually a big part of our sort of overall purpose, which is to serve and connect people. I’m a lot passionate about that. At the same time, commute as well. And I do think this is a certain post-COVID thing, where people were sort of thinking, maybe we’ll just be in our houses the rest of our life, working remotely. It turns out a lot of companies and a lot of people are saying, I wanna get back to work. And I think these things are somewhat connected — and sorry for sounding a little bit like a social psychologist a little bit, but I mean, gosh, I met my wife at Microsoft. A lot of people have really significant life events that happen at work that are not just work, right? And so I think there’s a little bit of that. So anyway, when I look at things like commute hours — and then travel continues to be really strong as well. And this is — look, I’m a million years old now. When I was a kid, the idea of getting on a plane and going overseas — I mean, you might as well say go to the moon. Now, 20- and 30-year-olds are like, yeah, I’ll sort of take a trip overseas, or I’ll go to, you know, whatever — Nashville for the weekend, or something. So anyway, I think these are pretty big, real societal shifts, as people want to kind of be out in the real world.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:25:51):  I’m kind of fascinated by the idea of party time, ’cause pre ride apps, there was always the question: all right, I’ve had two, I guess I’m driving tonight, so I gotta stop here. But if you’re out on party night and you know you’re taking a car home, you are not afraid about having a second or third drink. You can kind of relax a little bit. Getting pulled over is not a problem if you’re in somebody else’s Lyft.

DAVID RISHER (00:26:19):  It’s exactly right. So again, if you zoom out — you know, Wall Street looks at companies like ours quarter by quarter, and it sort of drives you crazy. But if you zoom way, way out, let’s look at that from a different dimension. Now, average car right now: 50,000 bucks. Okay? Average monthly payment: 800 bucks. Insurance will cost you another couple hundred bucks. Gas might cost you another hundred bucks or so, at least now. And then service will cost a little bit more than that. Okay? So that’s plan A. And by the way, if you take on all that responsibility, there’s no texting and there’s no drinking. You know what I mean? Now, plan B: pay 20 bucks getting a Lyft. Someone else does the driving. Text to your heart’s content, drink as much as you want — if that’s your jam. And it’s 20 bucks, not 800 bucks times, you know, plus, plus, plus. So just looking out — again, you’re sort of asking about kind of segments, and sort of, maybe, a little bit, the role of technology in society. I still think we’re actually at the beginning stages of a lot of these changes. And sometimes, again, people who have been around for a while don’t even realize how much the world has changed in that way.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:27:21):  Yeah. Fascinating data point I saw — it was actually a couple of years ago — the number of kids under 19 that haven’t gotten a driver’s license. When I was growing up, you couldn’t wait to get your driver’s license, ’cause that meant freedom. There wasn’t an internet. There were three channels, plus some people started getting cable. Like, it was a very different world back then. That’s right. And now it’s like, yeah, maybe I’ll get a license, maybe I won’t. How do you think about marketing to that demographic?

DAVID RISHER (00:27:51):  Well, so one of the things I learned from Jeff — again, who’s, as you can imagine, quite an influential boss for me — is: build your businesses on things that don’t tend to change. Not things that are sort of ephemeral. So what are some things that aren’t gonna change? Okay — again, people are gonna want to get out, either to the doctor or to go to a bar. So that’s a good bet. People are also gonna want to save money. And so a lot of our focus right now — and you’re gonna start to see a lot of marketing around this — is: save money, check Lyft. Now, I wanna be super clear here. It’s not — if I look at the competitor — that we always have a better price. Of course we try to, but we don’t always; sometimes, you know, all sorts of things happen. But over time, if you check both apps, you’re gonna save some money. And certainly, compared to buying a car of your own and dealing with all the maintenance, you’re gonna save some money. So it’s not the only thing I wanna say, but I actually think it’s an important thing to say — particularly in a world of sort of some economic instability — this is a good way for you to save some money. And frankly, I’m proud of our cost position, and I’m proud of our ability to offer a great price every single day, you know, a billion times a year.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:28:54):  So let’s talk about you versus your competitor. Lyft has always been framed as sort of the underdog to Uber. Is this kind of a Coke and Pepsi story? What are the advantages of being number two? Remember the old — was it Avis? We’re number two, we have to try harder.

DAVID RISHER (00:29:13):  Absolutely. So I like being number two, and it’s maybe a funny thing to say, but I do think it means you try harder. You wake up every single morning and you say, I got one job, which is to, frankly, do a great job for my riders and my drivers, such that maybe over time I can overtake the other guys. I guess the way to think about that is: I think the right number of rideshare companies in most markets is probably two. It’s a capital-intensive business — not because you own the cars, but because you own a lot of server capacity, and it’s quite complicated to figure out pickup and drop-off locations, and customer service — people leave their phones in the car about 8,000 times a week. It’s just all sorts of —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:29:56):  Especially Friday party night.

DAVID RISHER (00:29:58):  Right — and there you go. It all kind of comes together. There is something to that. And by the way, we have really cool innovation coming out there — we’ll bring your phone back to you automatically. But that’s a separate story. But anyway, so in a funny way, it’s not a bad thing to be in sort of a two-player position, ’cause you really only have one competitor. And frankly, if you spend too much of your time thinking about that one competitor, you’re probably losing the script. Because guess what? There are a lot of rides that people aren’t even taking on rideshare at all. Okay? So, you know, back to this question — we’re a customer-obsessed company, and this is gonna be the thing. This is why we’re growing, you know, mid double digits — 15 to 20% year on year. It’s why we’ve become profitable. It’s why we’re spinning off cash. And I think that is a good place to be. Particularly when I look at the other guys, who I tend to think of, frankly, as more — I’ll call them sort of financially and maybe technologically driven. Maybe — I don’t know exactly how they describe themselves — but I don’t get the customer-obsessed vibe.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:30:52):  Huh — so that’s kind of interesting. Let’s talk about an example where there’s no customer-obsessed vibe. So I use Lyft, I use Uber. It feels like on Uber, the way it measures time is sort of an alternative reality. Hey, we’ll find a driver in three minutes — it takes nine minutes. Hey, the car will be here in 11 minutes — it’s there in 23 minutes. Like, the app is very full of BS. It consistently lies. I’m curious: is it just a logistical issue that everybody has to deal with? Or — and we know a lot about the history and culture of your biggest competitor — is this a culture problem? You know, their history has a lot of bad behavior, a lot of, let’s just call it questionable legality. I wouldn’t go so far as to say fraud, but they did a lot of bad things. Does that show up in how the app behaves? Or is this just, no, Google Maps is tough to work with, this is a logistical challenge?

DAVID RISHER (00:32:00):  No, it is a logistical challenge. But — look, I’m not gonna characterize you; you did a marvelous job characterizing them. Skirting —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:32:09):  I got nothing — no liability for slander there.

DAVID RISHER (00:32:12):  There we go. Fantastic. Exactly. So Barry’s got a whole second — hold on, well, you were a lawyer, right?

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:32:16):  Yes, that’s correct.

DAVID RISHER (00:32:17):  Oh, there we go.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:32:18):  Okay, but I’m recovered, so —

DAVID RISHER (00:32:20):  It’s not the same. I understand — recovered lawyer — but you did just hear a lawyer very carefully parse his words. Okay, listen, I won’t comment on that. What I will say is: we are very focused — for example, you’re talking about reliability. Oh my goodness. You talk to my team, and they will — they roll their eyes, maybe, would be one way to say it. But the number of times I talk about reliability internally is high, because I am obsessed by saying: if we’re gonna make a promise, we’re gonna meet the promise. And starting in a couple weeks, we’re actually starting to do some more work to actually surface that promise, even a little bit more visibly. We do it today for airport pickups. If we’re more than 10 minutes late for an airport pickup, we pay you up to a hundred bucks, no questions asked.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:32:54):  Really?

DAVID RISHER (00:32:55):  Yep. And we rarely have to do that. Our reliability rate is above 99% for scheduled airport pickups.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:32:58):  Wow.

DAVID RISHER (00:33:00):  So we’re very, very focused on that. You know, I will say — look, at business school, there’s a very famous class which has a weird technical name, but it’s basically about incentives and behavior —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:33:13):  What’s the name of the class?

DAVID RISHER (00:33:15):  So I was in school a long time ago — I think it’s called CCMO, and I don’t even remember what it stands for anymore. It’s probably called something different today. But it really is about how incentives drive behavior — financial incentives and other incentives, and incentive alignment, and so forth and so on. There is an incentive in the sort of on-demand app world not always to be truthful. Because if you overpromise something, and then you kind of hook a person in — what are they gonna do? If they cancel or whatever, it’s just gonna take them more time. And that is an evil and pernicious problem that is kind of baked into the model. And we just reject it wholeheartedly. Doesn’t mean we never make a mistake. But if your car shows up later than we estimated, it’s because we made a mistake, and we are trying over and over and over and over again to eliminate those — they’re defects — and then start to guarantee it over time.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:34:13):  So you are crunching a lot of numbers; you’re seeing a lot of data in real time. I’m kind of fascinated by the concept of what, at Lyft HQ, the dashboard looks like. What sort of data are you watching constantly? What’s the most surprising set of numbers or charts that come across that?

DAVID RISHER (00:34:34):  Yeah, this is a great question. I mean, so the answer, first — just to validate the premise — is: absolutely, an enormous amount of real-time data. You know, two to three million rides every single day, and now worldwide. So we’re very active, and in fact, we have whole cool maps that show simulations of behavior, particularly around storms and all sorts of crazy times. Anyway, back to your question. Look, there are a couple of metrics that I think might surprise you that we pay as much attention to as we do. And I’ll give you a very specific one, ’cause it kind of helps tell the story. When I joined, about 15% of the time, drivers would cancel on you. Now, this is infuriating.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:35:08):  Really? That high? I mean, every now and then on your competitor I’ll see a cancellation, but typically it’s rush hour. Someone’s stuck on the other side of the city; they’re not gonna make it. So rather than get that ding, they just cancel and find someone by them.

DAVID RISHER (00:35:24):  So in today’s world, it is less than 4.5% on our app. So we’ve brought it down by a factor of —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:35:31):  Three.

DAVID RISHER (00:35:31):  Yeah, exactly — slightly less than that, actually, but around that. So how have we done that? Well, it’s not just that they’re on the other side of town. It’s maybe we didn’t give them enough information right up front — so, for example, how much they’re gonna make, or what neighborhood they’re gonna drop you off in, maybe. And by “not enough information” — maybe we gave it to ’em, but the font was a little bit too small for them to see it. Right? Or maybe it wasn’t on the screen quite long enough. Or maybe we gave you a ride that we didn’t know was very, very unlikely for you to want, because of your past history or whatever. So now we spend a lot of energy — and we’ve just been grinding away this year, after year, after year, because it’s so infuriating to riders. That’s an example of a sort of specific metric that we’re looking at, you know, by the day.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:36:23):  Huh — really, really interesting. Two kind of related questions to the growth of Lyft. Your last quarter’s earnings call, you said — or maybe it was a previous one — 27% of North American rides are linked to a corporate partnership. Chase, DoorDash, United, Hilton, et cetera. What is that strategy? Is that about customer acquisition? Margin? Like, what goes into those sort of big partnerships?

DAVID RISHER (00:36:51):  Sure. So, you know, as you say, we have tens of millions of people who use our service every quarter — it’s about 50 million a year. And again, this is back to sort of the Amazon philosophy: you gotta compete for those customers, right? You gotta compete because, you know, they have alternatives. And in fact, there’s another company out there that some people know. Okay? So one of the ways you compete is you say, gosh, it’s not just about the ride — it’s about the relationship. And maybe it’s a relationship you already have with another company. So you mentioned United Airlines. United Airlines has now been a partner of ours for about the last six months. It’s been a wonderful partnership already, because the United Airlines MileagePlus program is incredibly well built out. People are very, very loyal to it. What can you do on Lyft? You can now earn miles so that you can take a vacation —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:37:38):  Same with Hilton Honors.

DAVID RISHER (00:37:39):  And same with Hilton Honors — exactly right there. We’ve been a partner for many, many years. The big innovation on the MileagePlus side is you can actually spend your miles on Lyft as well, which almost feels like free rides, right? That’s right — it’s just like, you get, you know, 200 miles or 500 miles, whatever, for taking an airline trip, and you spend a small segment of those on a Lyft ride. So these partnerships — you sort of asked what the method behind it is — it’s about customer acquisition, for sure, but it’s also about customer retention, you know? ‘Cause if you’re in the United ecosystem, or on the DoorDash side, or Hilton, or Alaska Airlines, or Chase — built primarily here in New York City and other cities where they’re active — and you want to either earn or burn miles or points, we’re a great place to do that.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:38:22):  Really, really kind of interesting. I read an article from Reuters: smaller US markets and college towns have been meaningful growth drivers. Curious why those markets were underpenetrated. What did you guys figure out there?

DAVID RISHER (00:38:37):  So part of it — there has been just a little bit of, you might say, neglect from the rideshare business for a while. And we realized about 18 months ago that a large part of the TAM — just to frame this again, total —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:38:51):  Addressable market.

DAVID RISHER (00:38:52):  Exactly — is more market. About 160 billion rides a year that people take in their private cars across the United States. 160 billion. And remember, we do a billion; the other guys might do three or four billion — maybe two or three billion. So four billion outta 160 billion. Okay? So there’s a lot of addressable market left for us to go to. And we’ve been in places like New York and San Francisco and Chicago for over a decade right now. But some of these smaller towns — the Indianapolises of the world, the St. Louises of the world — as well as college towns, where basically nobody has a car compared to the population, they just look like good opportunities for us. They’re complicated from a marketplace-management perspective, because anytime you go to a newer geography, you’ve got to first make sure you’ve got enough drivers, ’cause otherwise it takes too long to get picked up. And you’ve gotta make sure you’ve got enough riders, because if not, then drivers won’t make enough money. So it’s quite complex to —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:39:41):  Invest. There’s a chicken-and-egg problem there.

DAVID RISHER (00:39:43):  It is a chicken-and-egg problem, over and over again. Which, again, is why — back to the earlier part of the conversation — it’s really quite hard at this point to come into the market fresh. You know, you’re not gonna find a lot of folks who want to come into a well-served market. But anyway, so we just started to focus on it, and our data scientists and our marketers really kind of went to town, and it’s been a big source of growth.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:40:03):  Huh. Really, really interesting. Coming up: we continue our conversation with David Risher, CEO of Lyft, discussing the future of transportation technology. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:40:31):  You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special, fascinating guest is David Risher. He is the CEO of Lyft, and we have been discussing the future of transportation technology. We have to talk about AI; we have to talk about autonomous vehicles. But before we do, I have to ask you two really interesting questions. One is: how do you solve the problem of even sober people leaving their phones in the car when they get out? And suddenly it’s a big pain in the ass — somebody has to come either drop off the phone or whatever. How do you, as a customer-obsessed company, how do you solve that problem?

DAVID RISHER (00:41:16):  I so love this question, because it is an experience every single one of us has had, and it is both infuriating and incredibly stressful. Because all of a sudden you realize, oh my God, my entire life is driving in the wrong direction, and I don’t even know how to contact the company at this point.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:41:30):  Because the number is on your phone —

DAVID RISHER (00:41:33):  And the phone is in the car, and you’re like, I wanna hold my phone to call the phone — but I can’t do that. It’s very, very stressful. So here’s what we’ve done. We’re doing a huge amount of work on this, just to be really customer obsessed. The first thing is automatic detection. So if the phone starts to travel away with a driver after you’ve been dropped off, that immediately, automatically alerts the driver: there’s probably a phone in your backseat. It requires a little bit of work on the rider’s side — we’re still trying to figure out how to get riders to opt into this, because they have to share a little bit more information. But we’re still working on that. But regardless of whether it happens automatically or manually, the second thing is: we’ve got a whole web portal, so you don’t actually have to use your phone. You can — and you don’t have to log in. But really, the big innovation is this — we wanted to have it sort of out of band — so the whole “return the phone” thing becomes almost a separate process. And frankly, in the past, it’s almost felt like a bit of a negotiation with the driver, and nobody liked it. The drivers didn’t like it, ’cause it felt like it was sort of an annoyance. The riders didn’t like it, because they’re like, oh my God, I sort of feel like I’m being held hostage here. A terrible thing. Now it’s a whole automated process. And basically, what we realized is: we should just treat it like any other ride. So it’s basically — the phone is getting a ride back. So what you get to say as a rider is: yes, please bring my phone back. I know exactly how much it’s gonna cost — it’s gonna cost just the exact same amount as if I’d taken a ride to that exact place where the phone is. And the driver gets it in their queue just like they would get any other ride request. And it gets returned to you. Typically — I was just looking at this data, and it changes every single week — but we’re now getting to the point where a large percentage of riders’ phones are being delivered back within an hour, which is the absolute gold standard.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:43:09):  So let’s use technology and cut that: on the app, opt in to avoid leaving your phone in the car, via Bluetooth. Not on each ride — just once, on the app. And then when the ride is over — you’ve arrived and the person gets out — if the phone doesn’t leave the car, right there and then, the driver should lower the window and say, hey, you left your phone in the backseat. And that doesn’t seem like you’re changing or creating new technology. That’s right — you’re just applying existing technology. Why take an hour? Why not take 30 seconds?

DAVID RISHER (00:43:48):  A hundred percent. And this is now where you realize that all technology problems are ultimately human problems. Because in order for that to happen, a person has to have opted in — they’ve gotta click a button. Most people are either skeptical of that, or they’re not paying attention. So now our trick is to try to figure out a way to really encourage people to do that. As you say, you only have to do it once. But that’s gonna be the next big focus.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:44:09):  So let’s stay with that theme before we really move too far away from people and towards technology. You drive for Lyft every six weeks or so, which seems kind of bonkers. What have you learned sitting in that seat that you can’t learn from the executive suite or the boardroom?

DAVID RISHER (00:44:28):  So much. So much. And, you know, I know we’re all busy people — here I am, busy senior executive, CEO of a company. My God, you know what? I got time, right? I got time — I can jump in the car. And here’s why: I learned stuff about being a driver, and I learned something about being a rider, every single time. So I’ll give you an example of each. Very quickly, on the driver’s side, I learned how important a feature is that we’ve developed over years and refined, called Stay Within Area. And there are actually two features next to each other — one’s Stay Within Area, one’s Arrive On Time. Lemme actually focus on Arrive On Time. What that means is: I’ve got a kid to pick up at the end of the day, or I’ve got a date with my wife tonight, or I’ve got a doctor’s appointment at three o’clock in the afternoon. And so I need to figure out a way to organize my life such that my last ride is gonna put me, you know, right where I need to be by a certain time. If I look at the gig economy, one of the real gifts of the gig economy is it allows you to integrate your work into your life in new ways. Again, I don’t have to call my boss and tell ’em I’m gonna be late today. I don’t have to do anything like that. But sometimes I do have other things in my life. Maybe it’s another job; maybe it’s an obligation with my parents — or whatever it might be. So anyway, that’s a feature. It worked pretty well when I started. It works very well now — and in part, it’s because I give a lot of feedback to the team on how to make that better and how important it is to get that exactly right. And then on the rider’s side — I mean, every time I take a rider in the car, of course I ask them why they chose us versus the other guys. Sometimes it’s because they say, oh, Chase Sapphire Reserve — I’m a Chase Sapphire Reserve cardholder, and you guys have a relationship with them. That’s great. That gives me a little bit of data of how important that is.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:46:03):  That’s a points relationship.

DAVID RISHER (00:46:05):  It’s a points relationship — and you get all sorts of — you get $10 every single month to use as Lyft credit. And look, I can look at the data just like anyone else and realize the number of people who are using that. But there’s just no substitute for hearing somebody, you know, go off about how much they love that card, and how important that partnership is to them. That’s a generic example. And then a specific example involved a woman that I gave a ride to — this is now about almost two years ago, but it’s still really, you know, kind of resonates with me — where she would wake up every single morning, and depending on what the price was of getting from her home to her job — because the prices would bounce around a lot — she would either take a Lyft, or maybe take the other guys, or drive herself, or stay home. And it was a source of stress and concern to her every single day. She would literally wake up an hour, you know, before she had to leave, just to sort of check prices. And it just made me realize how much surge pricing is customer hostile.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:46:59):  Nobody likes it. Nobody likes it. It starts to drizzle a little bit, and suddenly it’s a $30 surcharge. And I know people are infuriated by it.

DAVID RISHER (00:47:07):  And they should be. And here’s the problem. This is the difference between — you know, if you’re an economist, you love this, right? It’s, oh, supply-demand balancing in real time — it’s just unbelievable. Like a perfect science experiment. And if you’re a real person, it just bugs the crap outta you. So it really drove home to me how frustrating this was. And it was literally a Friday morning where this woman had donuts, and she was bringing them in to see a coworker for his birthday. And she’s like, I can’t work from home today — I’m so glad that Lyft was reasonably priced. So that’s what’s led us to take about $50 million a year out of surge pricing. We’ve really tried to get rid of it as much as we can — can’t completely eliminate it — and also introduce a product called Price Lock that allows you to lock in a price on a route.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:47:47):  So tell us a little bit about Price Lock. What does that do? I’m not familiar with that aspect of the app.

DAVID RISHER (00:47:54):  Yep. So it’s really meant for people who commute the same route every day, and they don’t want the route to go from 20 to 30 to 40 bucks ’cause, you know, say it rained. And by the way, to be very clear, there are good reasons for surge pricing, right? It’s a very good way for us to encourage drivers to drive when there’s more demand than their supply. But because it’s very frustrating for riders, we wanna give people a way to kind of opt out of it. So for a given route — you know, from point A to point B — if you wanna lock in a price, we basically say, here’s the average price over the course of a month. If you wanna lock in, I think it costs $4.99 a month per route. That’s all it takes. And it’s been super popular for people who just want to get that outta their lives.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:48:28):  Huh. Really, really kind of interesting. So let’s talk a little bit about autonomous driving. I was in San Francisco last month — Waymos everywhere. Tell us a little bit about what Lyft wants to do with autonomous vehicles. Are these just shiny objects, or are these the future?

DAVID RISHER (00:48:48):  They’re the future. They’re the future. It will take a long time for this future to come; it will be very unevenly distributed. But they are the future. And the basic reason why is: they are a reliable product, and they’re a safe product —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:49:01):  Safer than human drivers.

DAVID RISHER (00:49:04):  They are, substantially. And it’s because they not only know the policies, but they follow the policies. You know, they tend to follow the rules, and they don’t get distracted. So, not to say some crazy thing won’t happen one time out of a million, but 99.999% of the time, they’ll do the thing that you expect a car to do — which is keep its rider safe. So, okay — so that is coming. So now, as a business person, you have a choice to make, right? You can either embrace this, or you can sort of not. And the thing is, in a sense it’s a choice, but in another sense it’s not, because you’ve seen Kodak and, whatever, Polaroid —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:49:40):  Who, by the way — Kodak invented the digital camera, but didn’t want to cannibalize their own film business. And how did that work out?

DAVID RISHER (00:49:46):  Not exactly — not so well. And then, on the other hand, you look at maybe a company like Netflix, that invented the DVD-by-mail business to sort of set Blockbuster aside, but did such a good job surfing from that to streaming, and now to original content, right? They’re a great company in so many ways, but they were relentless, fearless about cannibalizing their own business to get to the next thing. So that’s the shift that we’re right in the early, early, early days of. It will be another platform shift. But we’re in a very fortunate position, and here’s why. You know, we have millions of riders. We have millions of — billions, billions of data points about pickup and drop-off location and pricing and so forth and so on. And we have a whole subsidiary called Flexdrive that does fleet management, which I can come back to in a couple of seconds. But these are gonna be some of the building blocks of the self-driving — or, I really should say, hybrid — network of the future. ‘Cause that’s the last thing I’ll say, just as sort of intro: self-driving cars are gonna come little by little by little. Human drivers are gonna be around for a long, long, long time. There are not enough self-driving cars in any given market to satisfy peak demand on, you know, Friday afternoon at five o’clock rush hour, or what have you.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:51:01):  So this is not a three-, four-, five-year transition. This is a 10-to-20-year transition. Is that about right?

DAVID RISHER (00:51:07):  Think about it as a decade transition. Yeah. And even, again, the word “transition,” I think, is maybe not quite right, because the economics of an expensive car don’t really lend themselves to having a whole bunch of them sitting around at two in the morning, empty. You really, I think, want a hybrid network for a long, long time — for human reasons, too, right? You might want someone to help you with your luggage, or maybe even someone to ask you how your day was. But the economics of it make it such that it’s much more likely this will be a hybrid network for at least a decade or, you know, more.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:51:37):  So that kind of raises an interesting question: what exactly is Lyft? We know it’s a ride-hailing company; it’s also a transportation market-clearing mechanism. It’s a consumer brand, and it’s also a logistics platform. Like, where is the future growth coming from?

DAVID RISHER (00:51:56):  I mean, you know, a little — all of the above, right? So, as you say, the thing people know Lyft the most for are, you know, human-driven cars picking you up and dropping you off. And as we were just saying, that will become a mix of human-driven and, you know, frankly, robot-driven cars. What you may not know is Lyft also runs the bike share system here in New York City.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:52:15):  Citi Bikes are run by Lyft? I did not know that.

DAVID RISHER (00:52:18):  That’s exactly right. So we run Citi Bike, we run the program in San Francisco, we run the program in Chicago, we run the program in Boston, we’re in Portland, Oregon. And then we also supply the technology and the bikes in London, in Barcelona, in Madrid — you know, many, many countries around the world. This may seem like sort of a small thing, but if you’ve been to a city like New York or London, you’ll know that cities are very, very aware that they want sort of multimodal transportation. So that’s gonna be, you know, a big part of our future as well. And then, look — someday, who knows, maybe boats, maybe vertical-takeoff aircraft. Who knows? But I will tell you that our real focus right now — and we will always be — this is our sort of purpose: serving and connecting. I want people to be out and about, and connect with each other in any possible way we can. That’s really what I want.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:53:05):  So you mentioned London. What are the plans for Baidu robotaxis in London? Is this gonna be a pilot program that could potentially scale up dramatically, like the Waymos in San Francisco?

DAVID RISHER (00:53:21):  That’s right. So again, let’s think about the self-driving car world for a couple of minutes. The technology is being developed worldwide. It’s being developed in the United States — Waymo, of course, is the leader, really the worldwide leader. Zoox, which is owned by Amazon, is much, much smaller, but, you know, trying very hard to come up behind Waymo. And then there’ll be, you know, many others, including maybe Nvidia, and companies that aren’t even really in the space now but will wanna sell their technology to different OEMs — to different, you know, car manufacturers. There’s also technology coming out of China. Baidu is sort of the Google — you think of it as kind of the Alphabet — of China. And there are many, many others. There’s a company called WeRide, there’s a company called Pony, there’s a company called Momenta, there’s a company called Geely. I was just in China a couple of weeks ago, looking at the incredible just growth of technology there — both, again, kind of hardware and software type technology. Okay? So that’s all background. It’s gonna be deployed worldwide. And in the United States, Chinese technology is not super welcome, for obvious reasons. But Europe is taking maybe a little bit of a more sort of economical approach, where they’re kind of looking at different technology providers and saying, let’s experiment. So in London, we’re partners with Baidu. Baidu has a very, very highly regarded self-driving platform, and we’re just in the early days of rolling it out there. It’s called an RT6 car. This is sort of behind-the-scenes stuff — it literally is just rolling off boats right now, and it’ll be commercialized next year.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:54:48):  So I’m looking at the current crop of autonomous vehicles, which are essentially converted traditional cars. But do you really need that front driver’s seat? Can you change up the internal layout? Like, what are autonomous vehicles gonna look like — not in 2060, but in a couple of years?

DAVID RISHER (00:55:11):  So again, it’s such an interesting time to be in this industry, and it’s exactly as you’re saying — like, do you really need a steering wheel? Do you really need, you know, an accelerator and brakes? Zoox, as I say — they’re an Amazon subsidiary — they would say you absolutely don’t. And they have a purpose-built vehicle that doesn’t have either one of those things. Now, for regulatory reasons, for human-acceptance reasons and so forth, for manufacturing reasons, that’s gonna be slower to roll out, because you can’t rely on, you know, the big OEMs to produce a car like that. That’s — it’s its own vehicle. So I think what you’re gonna see over the next three to five years is an enormous amount of new innovation in the car space. It won’t just be, you know, there won’t be a driver. It’ll be — you’ll have seats that face each other. You know, you’ll have seats that completely recline, ’cause you’ve got more space in there. You’ll have different luggage configurations. You’ll have — you know, some of them will feel more like, you know, party buses. Some of them may be, you know, corporate shuttles that just don’t have drivers. A lot of new stuff is gonna come in the next couple of years, step by step, because, again, you know, hardware is hard. It takes a long time to build it out. But, you know, you look five years out, and I think you’re gonna see a lot of cars that look pretty different from what you see today.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:56:16):  I’m unfamiliar with Zoox and Amazon’s relationship with them. But if I recall correctly, Amazon was an early investor — took a big chunk of Rivian. That’s right. And all of the electric Amazon delivery vehicles you see are essentially the Rivian platform repurposed for commercial use. Is Zoox plus Rivian the direction Amazon is going? And do you guys — does Lyft, whose CEO has a relationship with Jeff, have a relationship with Amazon?

DAVID RISHER (00:56:49):  We do have a relationship with Amazon. Of course, we’re huge consumers of AWS, which is Andy’s — the current CEO’s — kind of pride and joy. And for sure we’ll end up using — look, everyone is gonna end up partnering with everyone. That’s the interesting space we’re in right now: if you’re in the business of developing a self-driving car, it’s billions of dollars of R&D — billions of dollars. And so you want as many customers as possible. And then, if you’re in our business — in the business of moving people around and connecting people — you wanna have multiple suppliers of that technology, so you’re not beholden to anyone. Some of that is just being, you know, a smart business person. But some of it also is: technology goes through its own, you know, fits and starts. Look at what happens with the airline business when, all of a sudden, you know, Boeing has a problem with one of its units. You know, they stop manufacturing those for a time, or they’re grounded. So I don’t wanna overdramatize, but, you know, anytime new technology comes out, you’re gonna find some of that happens as well. So all of us are kind of in multiple — you know, let’s say maybe polyamorous relationships might be one way to —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:57:53):  Well, don’t you have to be? You can’t lock into platform dependency too early — otherwise you end up owning Betamax, and what good is that? And I know half our audience has no idea what the hell that —

DAVID RISHER (00:58:05):  Is. There we go. An old —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:58:06):  School reference, yeah, right. But I mean, when you commit one way — so let’s talk a little more about the autonomous ride hailing. What are the big concerns? Is it safety? Is it regulation? Is it winning the consumer’s trust? What are the economics of managing a fleet like that?

DAVID RISHER (00:58:25):  Again, so many interesting questions here. Let’s start with the customer side of things, right? So the first order of business has to be building customer trust and adoption for this new technology. Because, you know, it’s a car that drives itself, which is magical, but also can be a bit intimidating or, you know, even scary for people who haven’t seen the technology. Lyft obviously has a lot of value to add right there, because it’s a brand that people already trust; they understand you’ll be able to opt in or opt out of getting it. I was just in Atlanta a couple of weeks ago, where we have an experiment — a small deployment — with a company called May Mobility, which is also in the self-driving car space. They’re Toyota Siennas. They pull up to you, and all of a sudden you get in — it’s kind of a whole different type of experience from what you’ve probably experienced in the past. But because it’s got Lyft behind it, right on the door already, people sort of say, okay, great — I kind of understand this company and know something about it. Okay, that’s great. So then you kind of have to work yourself down the stack. There are all sorts of technology problems that you have to solve as you integrate, you know, their platform and us. And then someone’s gotta manage these cars. And this is worth talking about for a couple seconds. In traditional rideshare, the driver is responsible for their own car, right? They put gas in it, or they charge it up if it’s electric; they keep it clean; hopefully they keep it maintained, and so forth. But in the self-driving space, at least for the next three to five years, most of the car owners are gonna be professional fleet owners. You know, they’re gonna buy 20, 50, a hundred, 500, and are gonna kind of manage these as a fleet. And that means that they’ve gotta be, again, charged and maintained and cleaned — but they have to be done kind of at a professional level. That’s the sort of stage we’re in. We’ve had a subsidiary for many years called Flexdrive. We actually own about 10,000 cars on the Lyft platform for drivers who don’t wanna drive their own car. And we are responsible for maintenance and keeping them cleaned and so forth and so on. So we actually bring a lot to that as well. And I think that’s one of the reasons why we like the economic profile of self-driving cars. They don’t have insurance as high, for example, as personally driven cars. But also, we like the economics of our fleet-management subsidiary, and think we can service these at an industry-leading rate, and therefore, hopefully, make more money on the asset than anybody else.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:00:32):  Is there still gonna be a future for people who — today, you would think of owner-drivers — who just wanna own autonomous vehicles and lease ’em out, or send them out into the Lyft network? Like, I’m crunching the numbers in my head as we’re speaking, and I’m like, oh, that could be a 10, 12% return on investment. Not bad when bond yields are 4%, three and a half percent.

DAVID RISHER (01:00:56):  A hundred percent. I mean, there will be a time where, you know, if you fast-forward, you know, five years or whatever, maybe more, many people — individual owners — have cars that can drive themselves. And then there’s a question, to your point, of, you know, can  you put that on the network? The answer is: absolutely, you’ll be able to put it on the Lyft network, and it’ll come back again cleaned and charged, because of the fleet-management side of things.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:01:14):  Huh — that sounds really, really interesting. You know, it’s funny, ’cause when the ride apps first came out, there was a little bit of a lag before people got comfortable. What do you mean, I’m getting into a stranger’s car? I imagine we’re gonna go through the same thing — what do you mean, I’m getting into a car with no driver? It feels like the transitions are happening faster and faster. Same sort of question: this isn’t a 10-, 20-year thing; this is a couple of years before people — forget people under 30, who adapt so rapidly — the middle part of that age bell curve, the 30-to-60s, they’re gonna adapt to this pretty quickly over the next couple of years. How do you think about the different segments of consumer when it comes to autonomous driving?

DAVID RISHER (01:02:04):  Yeah. You know, I think, as you’re suggesting, younger people do tend to take up new technology, you know, pretty quickly. But in this case, I do believe that many people, after they’ve had a couple of rides and realize that it feels very safe and reliable, I think they’ll flip from skeptic to kind of fans, you know, pretty quickly. Now, I will say policymakers, you know, they have their own, you know, issues — and some of that can be very local. So you may find some cities that just say, we just don’t want ’em on our streets for a period of time. You may find, conversely, other cities that say, bring them, ’cause we wanna feel like a city of the future. So I think there are gonna be some policy issues. There are also some infrastructure issues. Remember that, you know, AVs also tend to be EVs. EVs require charging; charging requires infrastructure. And not every city’s gonna have the amount of, you know, electrical power. I mean, this is kind of a side issue, but if you listen to, you know, Jensen, for example, at Nvidia, talk about what could end up holding the United States back from its next big leap — a lot of it comes down to power infrastructure in this country, right? So anyway, there are many different kind of bits and pieces, all the way from consumer adoption to physical infrastructure to policy and so forth. But I think, again, over the next three to five years, I think you’re gonna see a real shift — mostly because consumers are gonna try them and like them, and then they’re gonna be saying, hey, you know, faster, please.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:03:17):  So here’s the crazy thing about AVs that I’m still kind of shocked about: it relies on visual, on lidar, on radar, and all these other technologies, but there isn’t a whole lot of infrastructure built into the roadway grid. Wouldn’t be that difficult to create a series of RF devices that are specifically geared for autonomous vehicles — that, like, every now and then, if you’re letting the car drive yourself and there’s an exit or a merge — like, it’s not great with those sort of things today, because there’s no real infrastructure. It’s relying on a technology not built for autonomous driving. Is there any sort of motion towards, hey, let’s everybody that’s doing autonomous come up with a set of standards and have the government implement this into the highway system?

DAVID RISHER (01:04:16):  I mean, the short answer is no today — and long-term, for sure. And the reason no today, frankly, is, again, you know, anytime you see these platform shifts, you always have competition for sort of who gets to own the platform, right? And individual companies all have a huge incentive to say, you know, I wanna do it my way. ‘Cause if my way becomes the standard, then everyone else kind of follows along me, and I get to sort of set the standard. Over time, though, you tend to see that those things — that doesn’t become a long-term competitive advantage, typically — particularly for this sort of infrastructure. And so I would fully expect, over time, just in the same way that you can start to see charging networks kind of harmonize, that you’ll see some sort of, you know, kind of federal level. But we’re years before that.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:04:59):  Right. We did see that sort of standardization take place in a lot of other technologies. And suddenly you’re not competing on a standard; you’re competing on highest quality, lowest price, et cetera.

DAVID RISHER (01:05:08):  That’s exactly right.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:05:10):  But you would think that if the cars literally knew exactly where the road was, it would be even that much safer.

DAVID RISHER (01:05:19):  You would think. But I would say, right now, the technology is evolving so quickly at the car level, and really, the safety is very, very, very impressive. And of course, look — I know, you know, tomorrow morning you’re gonna open up, you know, a newspaper or an app, and you’re gonna read about some strange thing that happened, you know, in some strange part of the world, with a self-driving car. And I’m gonna tell you that that is gonna happen — and that’s, you know, one in a million, as opposed to, you know, one in hundreds, which happen every single day with human drivers.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:05:49):  Yeah — those are the clickbait headlines, not the statistically significant practice. All right, so last question before I get to my favorite questions I ask all my guests. When it comes to transportation technology, what are we not discussing as a society, as a government, as consumers, that we really should be? What is kind of getting overlooked in this rush to new technology? It could even be something that you guys are focused on, but a lot of people don’t realize — oh no, this is really significant, and the public hasn’t quite grokked this yet.

DAVID RISHER (01:06:24):  You know, I’m gonna come back to the basic role that technology plays in people’s lives, to help them live their absolute best lives. I’ll tell you something that I’m a lot passionate about personally. And that is: as people live longer lives, one of the things that is very predictive of their quality of life is how much time they’re spending with other people, out and about, socializing.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:06:44):  Socializing.

DAVID RISHER (01:06:45):  Exactly. Very, very highly predictive of a healthy, long life. And as we as a country are getting older — which we are, demographically — that is gonna be an enormous shift, where you have so many more people in their sixties, seventies, even eighties, who wanna live healthy, vibrant lives. And so one of the things I’m really quite proud of with Lyft is, you know, Lyft Silver — a particular product line that we’ve developed over the last year that’s really focused on, you know, helping older folks get out. The apps are easier to use, the cars are easier to get into, the driver’s a little bit more experienced. I think that sort of intersection between societal trend and the type of work we do in transportation is really quite deep. And, you know, maybe just as important, ultimately, is, you know, all of our conversation around medicine and so forth and so on is: keeping people out and about. And I know — here in Oura Ring world, where I am as well — or maybe you’re not, I don’t know.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:07:37):  I am — my wife wanted to get one, so we got a pair. And she got bored being told she’s stressed all the time and stopped wearing it. So now I’m wearing it. So we both — we each have one, and I’m the only one who still wears it. How funny.

DAVID RISHER (01:07:48):  Okay — actually, my wife and I did the same. She said, I get a little tired of seeing, you know, that it’s telling me exactly I’m stressed or I’m not sleeping well. But at least for me, it’s a sort of nice nudge to get good sleep, and, frankly, to kind of keep an active life. And so I see this space — the transportation piece — as somewhat similar. Like, I want technology that kind of helps me live my best life. And I think transportation plays a big role there.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:08:07):  All right, so let’s jump to our speed round — our favorite questions. Starting with: tell us about your mentors who helped shape your career.

DAVID RISHER (01:08:16):  Oh gosh, I love this question, ’cause I think it’s so important for us to remember that we all stand on other people’s shoulders. I’ll list a few. Of course, I worked for Jeff Bezos a lot — I’ve mentioned him. But I wanna mention other people. First big boss: a guy named Todd Nielsen. Todd really taught me the power of a great story, and also the importance of really listening to and watching customers closely. So he taught me two big things there. And then a guy named Peter Spiro — he was the board chair at Worldreader for many years. He and I sort of knew each other back in the Microsoft days, but he was the board chair for the nonprofit I ran. So focused on the team, so focused on the team — you’re only as good as your team. Really learned a ton about management and leadership from Peter.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:08:57):  Huh — really interesting. Let’s talk about books. What are some of your favorites, and what are you reading currently?

DAVID RISHER (01:09:02):  Oh man. I just finished a book called Good People. So I tend to read some fiction and some nonfiction. I’m currently reading a book called Apple in China — all about Apple’s entrance into China, and ultimately the importance that China has, and, frankly, the power that China now has, over Apple. And then Good People is a fictional book about an Afghan family from Afghanistan that moves to the United States, and is either a model family or terrible people. And it’s very, very hard to know which — the book sort of flips back and forth. Remember when I said that books kind of teach empathy and sort of different perspectives? This one does a good job of that.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:09:42):  Huh, really interesting. What about streaming? You listen to any podcasts, or Netflix, Amazon, whatever? What keeps you entertained?

DAVID RISHER (01:09:50):  I do. I am a podcast guy. I have to say, though, I’m kind of traditional when it comes to podcasts. I listen to The Daily from The New York Times pretty regularly. And I think most of it is because I have so many things in my life that are sort of — there’s so much content that comes at you that’s sort of superficial. And at least with The Daily, I feel like I get to go a little deeper on a subject. You know, it tends to be a kind of half-an-hour deep dive on a particular thing. And I do feel — particularly, I also read The New York Times; I know it’s sort of traditional in that way. So if I’ve read an article, and then I kind of hear a podcast on the same topic, I do feel like I’ve actually gotten maybe a little bit smarter about something, you know, beyond the surface.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:10:28):  Let me just push back ever so slightly, please, on how The Daily has evolved. Because when it first came out — and I was a regular listener — I don’t want anybody telling me about the story that’s in the paper that I can read. They used to kind of do the background: hey, how did you start investigating this? What led to this? Tell us some interesting stuff that didn’t make it into the article. It was really inside baseball, and that stuff is kind of fascinating. Now, whenever I check it out, it’s the person — I don’t wanna say reading the story, but it feels like they’ve left a lot of that, you know, behind-the-scenes stuff back three years ago. It’s still — it’s become one of the biggest podcasts in the world. It’s giant.

DAVID RISHER (01:11:13):  Yeah. Yeah. That’s interesting.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:11:15):  Anything else? Anything else you listen to or watch?

DAVID RISHER (01:11:19):  I mean, you know — mindless TV I love, but I’m not gonna embarrass myself and tell you all that sort of stuff. Yeah, we’ll stick with The Daily on this one.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:11:27):  We are in the golden age of mindless TV, for sure. And it’s not — you know, if you are watching The Crown, or Landman, or 3 Body Problem — there’s so many fascinating shows out there. It’s not like garbage time like it was when I was a kid.

DAVID RISHER (01:11:43):  You are right about that. And I will say that my wife and I became obsessed with The Pitt, as many people are. It is funny — and it almost makes you feel like, you know, I’m, like, halfway to being an ER doc myself. By the way, you are not — so don’t think that that’s true. But what is hilarious is my wife’s tolerance for some of the gory stuff is a little lower than mine. So she watches The Pitt with her hand kind of half in front of her face the whole time.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:12:04):  My wife — we watched the first couple episodes. She’s like, this is just too much. It’s like — you wanna relax? And it’s very serious. I just kind of tense out.

DAVID RISHER (01:12:11):  Yeah. But it’s a great cast, and it’s a great set of stories, for sure.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:12:16):  Final two questions. What sort of advice would you give to a recent college grad interested in a career in either technology or business?

DAVID RISHER (01:12:25):  So my advice here tends to be — it’s always sort of the same. And here’s how it goes. There’s so much temptation when you’re picking your job early on to pick something that sort of seems like it’s gonna be good on your resume, or maybe it’s gonna make you a lot of money — whatever it is. This is sort of the temptation, ’cause it’s so sort of in the air, maybe now more than ever, because of social media. And, oh man — the people that I see succeed are really the ones that say: yes, I have an economic reality; I have to sort of do better than that. But once the economic reality has been met, it is all about: pick something you think you’re really gonna love and are gonna be good at. And I say that like — you have to be a bit introspective of this. You know, maybe you love, you know, selling. Okay, great — so take a sales job. Maybe you love listening to customers — great, take maybe a marketing job. Maybe — but I’m trying to make this sound maybe a little bit more interesting than “follow your passions,” ’cause that’s so trite. But there is something to it: really kind of being introspective about what you think you’re gonna just jump outta bed every morning and love doing tends to be a much more powerful predictor of long-term success than people who try to optimize for that short-term, sort of get-rich-quick type of thing — and then find themselves later realizing, shoot, this isn’t really my thing. It’s somebody else’s thing.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:13:39):  Really, really good answer. And our final question: what do you know about the world of consumer-facing technology and apps today that would’ve been useful to know 25, 30 years ago, when you were first getting started?

DAVID RISHER (01:13:53):  Wow. Okay. That’s also a really interesting question. You know, I think I’ve probably gone through a similar arc to other people, where in the nineties — maybe even early two-thousands — I was sort of a universal techno-optimist. I probably was in the camp that said technology is such a powerful force for the good. And you see me try to, you know, harness it with Worldreader, specifically — of course, trying to take technology and get people reading. In that case, it did work. We’ve gotten, you know, over 22 million people reading. So that’s awesome. But, oh man, it is hard not to see some of the just terrible costs we’ve paid as a society. And so I think — maybe more of a mindset than a particular thing — of just: be really aware that technology is so powerful, and, man, with great power comes great responsibility. And I’m just a big believer that our best leaders now — and I’m not necessarily putting myself in the category — are being really thoughtful about, you know, the good of technology, but also really trying to avoid some of the problems.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:14:53):  Good, good answer. David, thank you for being so generous with your time. This has been absolutely fascinating. We have been speaking with David Risher. He is the CEO of Lyft, one of North America’s largest ride-sharing networks. If you enjoy this conversation, well, be sure and check out any of the 639 we’ve done over the past 12 years. You can find those at iTunes, Spotify, YouTube, Bloomberg — wherever you find your favorite podcasts. I would be remiss if I did not thank the crack team that helps me put these conversations together each week: Alexis Noriega is my video and podcast producer, Sean Russo is my researcher, Anna Luke is my producer. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’ve been listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

 

 

~~~

 

 

 

The post MiB: Lyft CEO David Risher appeared first on The Big Picture.