Big Tech Is Fun Again & The Fed Speaks

In this podcast, Motley Fool contributors Travis Hoium and Lou Whiteman and analyst Jason Moser discuss: The Fed's rate cut. Nvidia invests in Intel. Meta can't quit the metaverse. Rule Breaker investing. Google's AI muscle. To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool's free podcasts, check out our podcast center. When you're ready to invest, check out this top 10 list of stocks to buy. A full transcript is below. This podcast was recorded on Sept. 19, 2025. Travis Hoium: Will NVIDIA be Intel's savior? Motley Fool Money starts now. Welcome to Motley Fool Money. I'm Travis Hoium joined this week by Lou Whiteman and Jason Moser. We have a lot to cover today from changes to Chrome, Meta's new AI glasses, but we have to start with the elephant in the room, and that is the Federal Reserve. We got our rate cut, guys. The Fed cut rates, the Fed funds rate, which is a short term interest rate by 25 basis points, which is a quarter of a percentage point. The commentary was interesting because basically they said that there was two bad options. You either let inflation run by cutting rates, but you also have a worsening economy, which isn't good for investors long term. It's not good for employment, things like that. This is getting obviously a lot of attention. But, Lou, is this a big deal for investors, or is this just the noise that normally happens in the market? Lou Whiteman: It is a big deal for investors. We should know, too, that stocks were, near all time highs or celebrated the news. I worry about that part of it, because, Travis, to your point, what's going on here is the Fed is sounding the alarm. I don't want to overstate. I don't want to be chicken little here. I don't think we are headed toward 2008 all over again. But the bottom line here is that we had a very complicated economic situation with tariffs. We were expecting a slowdown last year, it never came. All of this going on, and the Fed is confirming, yes, there's a lot going on here, and it's only getting more complicated. I hope that works out well for us again. I don't think we are just doomed, the plane is going to crash from here, but I also don't know if it's a reason for celebration. Jason Moser: I think it's basically right, I would say. I think most of us expected that 25 point basis cut. I think the bigger headline, maybe, was the commitment to two additional cuts for the rest of the year. They only have two meetings left to begin with. It sounded like they're already saying, listen, you can expect more and getting out there and explicitly stating that. Travis Hoium: To be clear, what is that commitment? Because they don't explicitly say, we're going to cut raise two more times, but they give this hand wavy indication with dot plot. Jason Moser: You see, exactly, the dot plot thing, which basically gives you that's that anonymous graph it shows you where all of the Fed governors stand on the matter. There was some discrepancy there. I know some were thinking maybe a 50 basis point cut made more sense. To me, I always think slow and steady wins the race here. There's no reason to overreact, but it has gone from this battling inflation narrative, which inflation is still higher than the target, but it's somewhat in check to now battling unemployment. I think that's really noteworthy given the recent downward jobs number revisions. That was a big revision at 900+1,000 jobs, we're basically wiped off the books there. It's gone from this battling inflation narrative to now we're potentially going to need to battle unemployment and like you both noted, it's showing signs of a weaker economy. Either way, these are just tools that the Fed can use to try to combat those things. It doesn't necessarily mean it's going to work but I think it's fair to say that we probably will see them continue in this cutting mindset for some time, because it sounded like they wanted to get that down to about a 3% target, which right now, I think it stands at 4-4.25. Travis Hoium: Now, guys, when the Fed cuts rates, the entire idea here is to make it easier for people to buy vehicles, to buy houses, for businesses to borrow money. That's the idea of lowering rates because when you lower them, makes that cost of capital a little bit lower. The interesting thing was the reaction from the market because the Fed sets the short term rate, that Fed funds rate, but they do not set the 10 year, the 20 year, the 30 year. The 10 year is the benchmark that things like mortgages are set on. That was actually up about a tenth of a percentage point this week. Lou, what do we make of that? Because I think the story that the market has been talking about for six months is, we got to cut rates, and the cost of capital is going to help business. But then if the long term rates go up, that's exactly what you don't want. Lou Whiteman: Two big picture thoughts here. For one, I think, the market isn't questioning the Fed, but I believe that we went through a period where there's almost the cult of the Fed, that the Fed can just the masters at a universe that can just cure all ills. This is a relatively new phenomena. If you go back to the '70s, the Fed was being made fun of as the Fed can't do anything. This idea that the Fed can just solve all of our problems is relatively a new phenomena, and I think it's beginning to break because the truth is Jason mentioned it, the Fed doesn't really have a lot of control. They have a couple of blunt instruments, and those instruments don't always work. They don't work immediately, and even when they work, they can work in odd ways. The other thing going on here too, is the market is looking at a lot more than the Fed. These long term rates where is the US debt going? Where is long term inflation rates and tariffs and trying to insure and all of that? They may not offset the Fed, but these are just pulling in different directions than a near term rate cut. I think the market is acting rationally. It speaks to the limits to the Fed. There's still in the markets, there seems to be an impression that if the Fed acts, everything will be fine. I think that explains why we rallied after it. But I don't know if the bond markets really subscribe to that. Jason Moser: The Fed is not the economy. I think you put that very well there. We've seen this going from one extreme to the other where it used to be seen that they couldn't really do much, and now this perspective that whatever the Fed says, that's going to change everything. This isn't The Wizard of Oz here. It wasn't terribly surprising one way or the other in regard to longer term rates to your point, Travis. The Fed cutting rates can have an impact on consumers in the near term, absolutely. It's going to be very modest, but it absolutely can. Now, when you start talking about things like mortgage rates, you're right. They're pegged toward longer term instruments. It doesn't necessarily mean mortgage rates are going to come down. I did think it was interesting to see mortgage activity did pick up a little bit last week. We saw applications to refinance home loans that was up 58% versus the previous week. It was 70% higher than the same week a year ago, and the refinanced share of mortgage activity increased to almost 60% of total applications versus just under 50% from the previous week as well. There is some activity picking up, but purchasers clearly are still on the sidelines. I think that's going to be something that's going to need to pick back up to really boost the housing market right, and that in turn can stoke some growth and maybe take advantage of this lowering interest rate environment. But keep an eye on companies. The one I'm watching, Rocket Companies, a company I recommended recently in one of our services, that's their game, mortgages. They've got this Mr. Cooper acquisition closing at the end of the year, which is essentially going to make Rocket the largest mortgage servicing company in the world. [laughs] That is very attractive from a financial standpoint, a lot of sticky recurring high margin revenue. Travis Hoium: Mortgages are going to be something to watch, but that is a little bit of a longer game. The ebbs and flows are years and decades. The one to maybe look at for more short term is going to be, what does the auto business look like? In the third quarter, and then also what do they think for the fourth quarter and eventually we'll get guidance for 2026. Things have been pretty good, especially selling big trucks and SUVs. As those interest rates eat up a little bit more of your costs, maybe that doesn't continue. But we will see as earning season rolls along. I did want to touch on NVIDIA and Intel. This was really the big story the middle of the week. NVIDIA agreed to invest $5 billion in Intel. This is after the US government basically converted some grants and stuff like that to equity. I don't know if that deal has actually closed, but this agreement really pulls together the power player in the semiconductor space right now, NVIDIA gives Intel maybe a little bit of a lifeline. Lou, is this something that is actually going to help save Intel? Five billion dollars is a lot of money to me and you. [laughs] Maybe not a lot of money if you're building a foundry. Lou Whiteman: Travis, it would really help with my. Five billion would make a dent with me. Look, shout out, Jensen Huang really does have the Midas Touch. He's already up 25% on that investment based on that, so well done. I think it does, and interesting to me when I first saw this, I assumed it was just foundry. It was just going to be NVIDIA with source chips just have Intel. Travis Hoium: Because Intel needs buyers for their foundry. They basically said, we're not going to build out this next generation if we don't actually have customers, which they currently don't. It's a chicken and egg situation they're in right now. Lou Whiteman: Right, but this doesn't involve foundry. It involves just working together to integrate Intel processors with NVIDIA's AI chips and their graphics chips to create a more streamlined solution. I think Intel is a winner here, but I feel for AMD, because AMD has to compete with both of these guys. I don't think they're cooked now, but having your two biggest rivals working together, it feels like you're ganging up on AMD. I think this is definitely a positive step for Intel. I don't know if it saves them, but it's $5 billion and a powerful partner. There's a lot to like there. Jason Moser: It's definitely a bigger win for Intel, I'd say, I think that we would all agree there that NVIDIA, you just look at how the companies have performed over the last five years alone. You've got Intel revenue actually down 7.5% on an annualized basis, while NVIDIA's up a whopping 66%, so we know what the market is telling us there. This deal focusing on specifically PCs and data centers, I think that is encouraging, just given what we know about the growth in data centers and really how darn good NVIDIA is at this stuff. But listen, NVIDIA still has a clear incentive here, too. That $5 billion investment comes at a price of $23.38 per share. You base that on the closing price of Intel today, that's around $30. It's nice little discount, and it could work out well if the partnership flourishes. Travis Hoium: Now, it's not necessarily NVIDIA's job to save Intel, but they do have an interest in having a second source. Lou talked about this doesn't necessarily include the foundry, but I've seen reporting that it could include the foundry in the future, but they're going to need more than $5 billion to actually get that foundry business up to competing with TSMC. Now, this isn't my idea, but one of the things that I've seen floated is now that the government's involved, now that NVIDIA is involved, why don't we just get $100 billion or so from some of the big tech companies; NVIDIA, Google, Apple, Amazon? That's pocket change for them and build this domestic US supplier and second source that should be a win for everybody. There is actually precedent here. ASML was saved by the industry. You have ARM was effectively saved and funded by the industry. This has happened before but we're talking about a lot of money. Lou, is this something that could potentially be in the works? Travis Hoium: Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. When Mark Zuckerberg has an idea, he really sticks to it. Despite burning $50 billion plus on the metaverse and VR, he is pushing forward with AR glasses. You got to give him some respect here for really sticking with it. They announced the Meta Ray-Ban Display glasses. This is going to bring artificial intelligence, tools, basically to your eyes. You can talk to these glasses. It's got a camera on it, so you can ask questions about the real world, silent interactions, like, responding to WhatsApp messages. If we're not distracted enough driving, maybe we'll be distracted while walking now, too. Jason, what was your reaction to this? I have to respect them pushing forward. But is this ultimately a product that's going to matter for Meta as a company? Jason Moser: I do respect them sticking with it. I also agree with you. It does seem like they would be a bit distracting. Having been a part of our immersive technology service here for some time, I continue to root for the technology. But it's still nascent in its development, and you've form factor, the technology. They're coming along, but they're still not fully there yet, but I do see a lot of promise. They're not the only ones in the market, too. We've got Alphabet now with a partnership with Warby Parker. Meta, of course, we're talking about SNAP. Speaking of sticking with it, they're on their sixth generation, ultimately to no real avail there. That's a little concerning. Then to top it off, Amazon now is also vying for share in this market, working on both consumer glasses that are operating under the code name Jayhawk. Then they're also actually working on a delivery driver specific glasses to aid delivery drivers with things like maps and directions. Travis Hoium: Well, that could be interesting. Jason Moser: That's a good use case right there. Language translation, I think is another great use case for things like these. I think a lot of it is really just finding those killer apps, why we need these devices. I think it's happening slowly, but surely. There are things that these devices can do very well, I think, in time. Listen, I understand why Meta's trying, and they're leading the way here at this point. Travis Hoium: Lou, you're an early adopter with a lot of this technology. Lou Whiteman: No. Travis Hoium: $800. Where are you on the waiting list here? Lou Whiteman: Here's the thing. I think I'm much more of a normal. Trying to think as a normie, I'm skeptical here, because, guys, here's the thing. Travis, everything you talked about was cool, but they're all things I can do with my phone. I'm already spending 800 bucks for my phone. I don't know if normies like me are going to spend another 800 bucks to replicate, even if the form factor is cooler. I think you need to have a killer app that differentiates from the phone, and I'm not sure if I've seen that yet. I don't want to be totally dismissive. I think it's a neat idea. But look, even on the directions, if I'm driving and I'm using my directions, it better somehow shut off all the other apps so I can't be watching a YouTube video while I'm driving. There's just a lot of real world practicality out of the this is cool, that I'm skeptical. Look, I hate to say this, but with all due respect to Mark Zuckerberg, since Facebook, what has he come up with that people actually want to use? Jason Moser: It's a fair observation. To your point, I don't know that this is necessarily the new computing paradigm. Now, on the flip side of that, Meta Chief Products Officer, Chris Cox is stating very firm. They believe that smart glasses are the future computing platform. I am skeptical of that. I am truly skeptical of it, because everybody's got a smartphone these days. I don't think the market opportunity is as large as the smartphone. Maybe I'll be proven wrong in time but I look to the younger generation of consumers today to see, is that something they want or need? I look to my kids, their friends, they're not interested in this stuff either. If this is something that's going to happen, it's going to be a generational play, which means it's obviously going to take a while. Lou Whiteman: Here's the question I have for both of you. Can it be a hit if it's just want and not need? It's like the watch market. The watches are a complement to our phone. They haven't replaced our phones. We're not tick tracing everywhere talking to it. It's still a hit. I don't know. Maybe I'm setting the bar wrong. Travis Hoium: The challenge is at this level of spending, they've got to cover that operating cost with revenue and gross margin and profit. I think that's really the challenge. It's hard to understand how successful the iPhone is because they have such incredible scale in making a piece of hardware. Quickly, I want to just touch on Mark Zuckerberg has been talking about wanting to have a platform business. This is part of the reason he named the company Meta Platforms, even though none of the businesses are really platforms, they're more applications. Lou is this him sticking with this because he needs this product just because that's what he wants to be. He wants to be Microsoft, he wants to be Alphabet or he wants to be Apple, but that's not actually what Meta's business is and that could make them throw good money off the bat. Lou Whiteman: I think you said it well. You said at the top. He sticks with something. Look, there are better ecosystems out there, period. What Meta is, Meta is an amazing ad revenue generation machine, and I will not take that from them. But I see nothing to suggest they're anything other than that. Jason Moser: Glasses notwithstanding. How much do you pay Meta on a daily, monthly or yearly basis? My guess is we're all going to answer zero. Travis Hoium: Not directly anyways. Jason Moser: Exactly. It's an ad business. Making up the investments that they made into this hardware is going to be a high hurdle. Travis Hoium: The other competitor in this space that we should acknowledge is Alphabet. They do have a platform in Android. That's what they seem to be leaning on and moving into things like classes and other wearables, even robotics. They have AI tools. Interesting to see where Meta stands next. When we come back, we're going to talk about Rule Breaker Investing. You're listening to Motley Fool Money. Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. This week, Motley Fool co-founder David Gardner released his newest book, Rule Breaker Investing. I thought it was a good opportunity to talk about some of the lessons that we've learned through Rule Breakers service from David. I think one of the things as I look back, I've got 15 years now writing for the Motley Fool. I remember early on, looking at the Rule Breaker service, and you could see these huge outliers. But if you took those out, I remember downloading every single one of the stocks in all the returns. I took out, I think it was Priceline, Disney, and it was actually Marvel, that was the stock pick, and then Netflix. Those were the big outliers. But if you took those out, the performance was market average. I thought, you know what? They just got lucky. You picked a couple of good stocks, you just got lucky. Since I did that exercise, Rule Breakers has picked Tesla, which is actually the best performing stock in the entire portfolio, and just continues to have these massive winners. As we think about Rule Breaker Investing, and I was going through the book, listening to the book on Spotify, another favorite Motley Fool stock, thinking about investing as you have only so much you could possibly lose on a stock, but the upside is so enormous. I think that's the one thing that I have taken away from listening to David, reading David. Everything that the Motley Fool does is those winners are the point. That is the point. The Netflixs, the Teslas, the Marvel becoming Disney, those aren't getting lucky. That is the entire goal is to have the mindset to be able to find those stocks and then hang onto them for decades. I think he said at the beginning of the book, David now has 7,100 baggers. [laughs] That is just a crazy number. Jason, as you think about, I think we started with the Motley Fool at about the same time, what are the lessons that you think about Rule Breaker Investing that have really changed the way that you think about investing in the market? Jason Moser: You make a lot of good points there. Rule Breaker Investing, it's a unique approach. You have to take the good with the bad. They're not all going to be home runs, but a lot of them will be. You want to get to that 100 bagger, well, you got to get to a two bagger and a three bagger and a four bag at first. It is the value comes in the holding of those tremendous companies. Travis Hoium: That's the hardest part. Jason Moser: It is. Travis Hoium: You see 100% gain, and you go, man, I did. Jason Moser: I think it's human nature to say that. I think that the longer that you invest and the more that you hang on to those winning companies, the easier it gets. I can look back and say, well, I'm sure glad I've held on to Amazon since 2010 because that's worked out pretty well. I've had the good fortune to work with David off and on since getting here, as part of the Stock Advisor team and I enjoyed meeting with him and going through his process and learning about how he approaches investing and views the world. He's just a tremendously optimistic guy. You just can't help but leave a room, leave a meeting with him just feeling inspired and optimistic. That really is part of Rule Breaker Investing as well, is being optimistic about the future. I think that one of the lessons that's always stood out to me, I've said this, I think since pretty much I've been here, I've learned so much about investing from everybody with whom I work. But for me, David Gardner is the individual who's had the most profound impact on me as an investor because he taught me how to look at things differently beyond the conventional thinking. One of those lessons that I continue to really appreciate is that concept of adding to your winners. Looking at these companies that are performing well in your portfolio and saying, well, why is that stock performing well? Well, chances are it's because the business is performing well. Isn't that the goal to own good businesses for as long as we possibly can? There was this value bent, I think, on the investing team when I first got here that was always looking for stuff on sale. I just think it's really important for investors to realize that adding to your winners can be a very powerful strategy, particularly over long periods of time. That's something I took away from working with David. Lou Whiteman: Much good stuff here. I echo everything you say. I'm the relative newbie here. I think I only got here in 2016. I came from very different places that don't follow all of these philosophies. The thing that's always struck me about Motley Fool, and I think this is the founder's DNA running through it is just this mindset to form a long term relationship with a company instead of it just being transactional. The old expression, make your investing the vision of the future you want and just to climb on board. It's all these things you're talking about with long term adding to it. But just to not think of a stock as, this can run this week or this is going to be under near term pressure. But to actually say, to become a part owner, to be part of a business and to just make that business part of just who you are and to run with it, just that mentality. I do think that that helps you find winners because when you're thinking in those terms, you are actually judging something. It's not just, I think I can get momentum here for a week. It's I looked at what they're doing, I looked at management, and I'm aligned here. I think that actually is almost a cheat code to finding good businesses because you're actually taking the time to get to know them, to learn them, if that makes sense. Travis Hoium: It seems like those intangibles, too, are something that a lot of times with these companies, if you look back on Tesla in 2011, very different from the company that we know today. They had the Roadster. They were not into robotics. They were not into artificial intelligence. Axon in 2015, that was a Taser. It was not even called Axon. It was called Taser International. That was their biggest business. They were getting into body cameras, but they were not a cloud business. They were not a services business, a subscription business that they are today. Even a stock like Netflix, which is well known in the Motley Fool universe, when that stock was first recommended, they were mailing DVDs all over the place. It was not a streaming company. Travis Hoium: There's something too about buying a culture. A lot of these are founder stories, and understanding that there is uncertainty, and that's the upside. You don't get that upside by having all the answers. Jason Hall: I like that. Travis Hoium: If I know the next product that's coming, then it's already priced in. There just seems to be something to that, that you are investing in the unknown, if you're going to hold NVIDIA for 20 years. That wasn't bought because it was an AI story. Lou Whiteman: No, not at all. Jason Hall: No, I think that's it. We, as investors, always have to recognize there's so much that we don't know. That is a superpower if you can embrace it. Another example, Amazon, 2010. We weren't talking about that as a Cloud services company. We're talking about it as this massively unprofitable e-commerce business that was just on borrowed time because it wasn't making any money at the time. I think if you can find those companies buying into a culture of innovation, it can be very powerful. Travis Hoium: Then the other thing I think I always go back to is just not selling. Because if you own one of these, great companies, I have made the case that Tesla has been overvalued for years. I made the case. I'm sure you could go back to 2010, 2011, making the case that Amazon was overvalued. I do have that analytical mindset and engineering background that I think you were talking about, both Jason and Lou, where there should be in the numbers, but I think what David talks about so much is the story. He doesn't have an engineering background. He has an English background, because that is ultimately what we're all investing in. Morgan Housel has written about this, too. The stock price is the earnings today times a story about the future. Sometimes, that story is a lot bigger than we really give it credit. Lou Whiteman: Absolutely. Travis Hoium: Well, when we get back, we're going to get back to stocks. We are going to talk about the latest from Google and Alphabet, maybe some big changes in their AI business. You're listening to Motley Fool Money. Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about in the Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against. Don't buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows Motley Fool editorial standards and is not approved by advertisers. Advertisements are sponsored content and provided for informational purposes only. See our full advertising disclosure. Please, check out our show notes. The big story from the week in the world of Artificial Intelligence. Last week, we had this huge Oracle deal with Open AI, but Google is really starting to flex their AI muscles, and the big partnership, early in the week, we've got to talk about Chrome a little bit, but Google and PayPal announced a deal for agentic shopping. Jason, what did we find out from those two companies? Jason Moser: This is an interesting relationship. It's going to, ultimately, allow the two companies together. They're going to work on agentic commerce experiences. You're going to be embedding PayPal solutions across Google's platforms, expanded payment processing. This is something that PayPal enterprise payments will be a key provider to processing card payments across Google products like Cloud Ads and play. Then, ultimately, working with Google on Cloud expansion. I think all of that together? this certainly isn't bad news. it could indeed have a material impact on the dollars flowing through PayPal's networks, as well as maybe boosting its user base in the process, and those are very good things. I wouldn't make the immediate leap that this is game changer for either company to the extent that we just don't know how it's all going to shake out. I'm particularly not so sole on the agentic commerce opportunity. Travis Hoium: Well, that's what I was going to ask about is what is agentic commerce? As I look through these announcements, it sounds great. The thing that I always keep going back to is, could this just do my grocery shopping? Can I take a picture of my fridge and say I need to make dinner tonight. What do I need to get from the grocery store? Can you just get it shipped, Tim, through DoorDash or whatever? Is that the best use case? Then we'll figure it out? Maybe there's a couple of use cases like that. There's another one that I saw that was, Hey, I'm looking for this product. Can you tell me when the price comes down a little bit, cause maybe not worth paying $50, but maybe I pay $40 for it? It just seems we're in a world of great headline, but we don't quite know what the there is there? Jason Moser: It's like defining what sales force does. It's a big business, but what in the world does it do? In its simplest terms, agentic Commerce is a new form of commerce where autonomous AI agents act on behalf of consumers to search for, purchase, and receive goods and services. It sounds a big deal when you look at it from that perspective. I do think there are a lot of challenges there. The process of agentic commerce on its own, there are a lot of things that have to go right for it to, actually, be successful. That starts at the very beginning with consumer adoption. That's going to be challenging, I think, on its own. Then when you look back historically, the e-commerce hype cycles are just notoriously over hyped. Metaverse commerce. What happened to that, Travis? Live streaming commerce, voice commerce. Even the Internet of things commerce, you're talking about your fridge ordering stuff for you. It sounds great. It's a little bit more difficult to, actually, execute. I'm not saying it won't be a thing, and I do believe AI is going to offer opportunities for merchants and consumers alike in the retail space. I think it's just this agentic commerce experience that's still a little squishy and firmly unproven to this point. Travis Hoium: Lou, I want to bring in that maybe the better use case here is these massive supply chain operations. You think about like a Chipotle, for example, somebody's got to order the beef. Somebody's got to order the tortillas. If AI can figure that out and do it automatically, that would be a huge value add. That's not really what we're seeing in this, but we're also trying to squint and see where this is going. Lou Whiteman: But that's it exactly. It makes so much more sense for a corporation than it does for it. Because, Travis, even you say the reorder your groceries. I don't know about you, but I don't want to eat the same thing every day. I like being a human being, getting to figure that out. I don't think it's that practical. I think for a consumer, just stuck the price and tell me when it's lower. I don't know if that's great for retailers, but I see it there, but I don't want a robot deciding what jeans I wear or something like that. I don't get it, on the institutional side, that McDonald's knows that they have 37 ingredients, and when this ingredient gets down to this level, it's time to get more. Stuff like that, I don't know how complicated that is. I don't know how much of a game changer it is. It makes sense to automate it. A lot of this, I think, like Jason said, there's definitely something there. It's neat, but I'm going to take the under on it being on whatever revolutionary scale as far as hype is right now. Travis Hoium: Not buying meta display glasses, not buying stuff with agents. Lou Whiteman: Just a grumpy old man. Travis Hoium: I want to bring Chrome into this, because Open AI and ChatGPT are the biggest names in artificial intelligence. But the other announcement that Google, had this week, is that they're including more of their AI products, Gemini more deeply in Chrome. At the end of the day, Chrome is the biggest browser in the world has far more users than ChatGPT does. It seems like, Jason, that they're really leaning into this point of distribution. You had Chrome, you've also got Android. That could be the way that Alphabet Google takes a lead in the AI race, which the market seems to be buying into a little bit. Jason Moser: I agree. I think we're starting to see the sentiment shift on Alphabet and Google's position in the AI arms race. I think that makes a lot of sense. It ties back to what you were talking about earlier in regard to Meta. Alphabet having this advantage, Google having this advantage with all of these different platforms and ways to distribute this technology, basically, at the snap of a finger. It's about changing consumer behavior, which as we know, it's obviously doable, but it's difficult to and a lot of us are just used to using our browser, whether it's the app on the phone or the browser on your laptop or, however, you may do it. If Google can just roll out all of these features and all of this technology that makes that experience better and more seamless. Travis Hoium: By the way, for free. We also need to bring that up is that ChatGPT runs on subscriptions. Google has an ad business. Jason Moser: I think that's one of the big challenges with AI from that ChatGPT perspective, how are they going to monetize it? Right now, it's firmly on the subscription side. They're going to have to figure out a way to evolve and iterate on that. Travis Hoium: We do need to get to stocks on our radar, which is what we like to end with here on the show. Lou, you're going to be up, and we'll bring Dan Boyd in to ask you a question, but what is your stock on your radar this week? Lou Whiteman: Dan, I'm looking at FedEx. The entire transportation sector has been beaten down first due to slowdown fears last year, and now tariffs. That has been a big deal this year. This is a notoriously cyclical business, and the question has become, when do we get the bounce back? FedEx did earnings this week. They weren't really wow, but expectations were really low. They beat them. But there's at least green shoots. They beat and they are actually forecasting modest growth, which is a lot better Neiman UPS said just a few months ago. Dan, this is a market where it's hard to love it long term, but with the transports it pays to get in ahead of them, sounding the all clear, I'm not ready to call a bottom, but FedEx has gotten my attention. I think we might be nearing time where this works again. Travis Hoium: Dan, are you a FedEx guy? Dan Boyd: I am so much that sometimes FedEx delivers things to my house. I don't think I have a preference as to which carrier. Travis Hoium: You don't visit the FedEx Kinkos near you? Dan Boyd: No, I don't, FedEx. Hey, Lou, you ever noticed the arrow in the FedEx logo? Lou Whiteman: It's a great logo, isn't it? Travis Hoium: It's beautiful. Jason, what's on your radar this week? Jason Moser: we talked a lot of Tech today. let's go to one of those boring businesses. I'm talking about Costco here, taro-cost. Costco earnings are out next Thursday, and wow, talk about boring, but bringing the business. shares are up 180% of the last five years alone outpacing the market nicely. We know there's tremendous value in the private Kirkland's brand. Last quarter, they ended the quarter with 79.6 million paid, household members and 142.8 million cardholders. This has always been a renewal story. Renewals just continue to impress. When we saw renewals at this past quarter, US and Canada renewal was 92.7%. Worldwide rate came in at 92.7 and 90.2. That is just consistent. It's amazing. It tells you why this is such a good business. I can't believe it, but, Dan, I'm not even a Costco member. Travis Hoium: Dan, what are thoughts on Costco? Dan Boyd: I'm not a Costco member, either, Jason. There isn't one close enough to me to warrant going to Costco, which is strange because I live in a pretty big area here. But Costco, did you get any gold bars, by any chance when they were so? Dan Boyd: No, I didn't that's just goes to show you, they have a tremendous and diverse supply for all consumers. Travis Hoium: The biggest problem with Costco is they're so busy, it's hard to get parking. It's like an airport. But, Dan, which one of these stocks is going on your watch? Travis Hoium: The logo carries it. Let's go FedEx. Lou Whiteman: There we go. Travis Hoium: Lou wins this one. For Lou Whiteman, Jason Moser, Dan Boyd behind the glass, and the entire Motley Fool team, I'm Travis Hoium. Thanks for listening to Motley Fool Money. We'll see you here tomorrow. Lou Whiteman: Okay.