Preston Pysh  3:14  

For me, there’s not too much to really add to what he’s saying here other than it’s just crazy to think that this guy was packing books himself from the ground up and from the very beginning. 

We had Ian Siegel on the show, Brian. I don’t know if you heard this interview. He is the guy from Zip Recruiter and the thing that he told us, he says, “If you have something that is going to be big, you’re going to know right away. It’s not something that’s going to just kind of start coming into play three years later. You’ll know right out of the gate if you’ve got something big.”

I’m kind of curious then if you have any piggyback comments on this one.

Brian Rutherford  3:53  

First of all, I think entrepreneurs absolutely believe in themselves. They believe in their ability to find a market and exploit a niche. I think that that’s what Jeff was saying here. 

It goes back to risk. I think about business plans. Yu and I both went through an MBA experience and a lot of times, business plans he laughed at, and are not worth the paper they’re written on, but it’s not about the plan. It’s the planning that goes into it. 

Jeff understood at that point. He had done the market analysis and understood that if you put a bunch of skews in one location and then shipped out from there, that was going to be a whole lot better position, and really able to exploit this new thing called the internet in 1995, versus having distributed points of sale.

The one thing he didn’t know is timing. Was it the right time for that business? And he said yes. He knew within 30 days.

Preston Pysh  4:49  

Hey, I want to check out this question where he was asked, “How has your leadership style changed over the years?” I think this would be kind of interesting to hear too. 

Jeff Bezos  5:00  

It’s changed a lot, mostly just because the company has changed so much. You know, a company of 10 people or 100 people, I can’t be involved in every decision…not just the objectives like what are we going to do, but even the methods, how are we going to do it?

The CEO or the founder, whoever it is leading the company, cannot be involved in all the decisions. They certainly cannot be involved in the methods of how things are going to get done. So you do have to change your leadership approach as the company scales but the principles of the company have not changed. In fact, I probably spend more of my time now on culture and setting high standards for things like customer obsession and inventiveness and things like that. 

For me, I’m kind of a teacher now. It’s changed quite a bit and I have this great luxury. I love my job, I tap dance into work, even I get back. I just got back from an amazing vacation in Norway. I got to go dog sledding and go to a wolf preserve. All this really cool stuff, but I couldn’t wait to get back to work, because it’s so fun. 

The reason why this is fun for me is I get to work in the future. I’m limited, kind of day to day operational needs that I’ve constructed my jobs so that I don’t have to be pulled into the present. I can stay two or three years in the future. 

Actually, I’m always advising my senior team, the people who report to me, that they should organize themselves in the same way. We’re big enough now that they need to be able to look around corners. That can’t be… If something pulls me into the present, it is because something has gone wrong and we need to kind of fear it’s a firefighting exercise. That’s not how you should be running a business of this scale. It’s changed a lot.

Preston Pysh  7:11  

I don’t know. I find that response pretty interesting because it’s so much different than the Buffet style approach that we are constantly studying. I know Buffett, he’s trying to figure out the valuation of a business based off the free cash flows into the future and kind of understanding what the assets are, how durable those assets are, and whether they will be impaired into the future. 

It seems like Bezos is trying to invent the future and it’s where his primary focus is that almost all the time, like he’s totally hired somebody else to take care of the day to day operations because he doesn’t even want to think about it, which I also find fascinating. 

The one thing in there that I really like Brian was he was talking about how much of his time is consumed into the culture and then he made that statement, “customer obsession.” He said “customer obsession” after he was talking about the culture that he’s trying to groom. 

For me, that’s like a slip of his secret sauce and anybody who’s studied Bezos a little bit knows that it’s like he basically has the chair at the conference room that’s empty and supposedly the customers sitting in there and everyone has to ask the customer a question to the empty chair, whatever. Really that’s his secret sauce. He wants customers to be obsessed with his brand and if it doesn’t create that obsession, he doesn’t do it. 

Brian Rutherford  8:40  

You’re exactly right. He focuses on the customer and not the competitor. It’s what Apple did as well. Give the customer what they want, before they know they want it. I think that strategic thinking looking around the corners I think was key. 

I also think about how he focuses on the important but not urgent. There’s this famous quadrant of things where you have urgent and important on one axis, and not important on the other axis. So which quadrant do you want to be in? 

I think about the important, but not urgent, because if you don’t focus there, everything will end up in the important and urgent quadrant. You’ll spend all your time, as he says, putting out fires. It’s really a key thing.

Preston Pysh  9:26  

The next one that I want to talk about here is something that’s a little outdated, but I think that it’s an interesting conversation to listen to this. He was asked, and this was played…Do you remember when this was played?

Brian Rutherford  9:42  

Late in 2014.

Preston Pysh  9:45  

Yes. This was played 2014 and he was asked, “Your company’s not profitable. Does that bother you when people say your company’s not profitable?” This is his response and why this is a little outdated because Amazon is obviously making some net income at this point, but it’s not huge relative to their top line revenue. If you’re looking at it proportionally, it’s not huge. He’s bringing in some earnings but even now, it’s still kind of hit or miss sometimes. 

Well, I think this is an interesting question just to hear his mindset and how he thinks about this stuff. That’s why we’re going to play this one.

Jeff Bezos  10:22  

Warren Buffett has this great quote, he says, “You can hold a rock concert, and that’s okay. You can hold a ballet, and that’s okay. Just don’t hold a rock concert and advertise it as a ballet.” 

Investors come in all shapes and sizes. They have different investment horizons, different approaches, different beliefs about what the right kind of portfolio looks like.  People use Wall Street as a shorthand, but there isn’t one type of investor to come in all shapes and sizes. You have to be super clear about what kind of company you’re trying to build, what your approach is. 

We laid that out in our 1997 annual shareholder letter. We said we were going to take big bets. We said they were going to fail. We said some of them, hopefully, were going to work. We said we were going to invest for the long term and that we were going to try to take advantage of market opportunities as they arose. There’s a certain kind of investor who is aligned with that approach. 

Again, you can hold the ballet or the rock concert, and both can work. Just be clear about which one you are, and then people can self-select. 

I would say, it’s very difficult for a publicly traded company to switch. So if you’ve been holding a rock concert, and then you want to have a ballet, that transition is going to be difficult.

However, if you’ve done it from the very beginning, then I think it’s not that difficult to do. We would all love all of our numbers to be smooth lines up into the right and that would be terrific, but that’s not how it works. Those numbers are our output measures. I guess you could try to manage your quarterly earnings very precisely, but I think personally, that would be a mistake.

Most of the work that we put into any particular quarter happened years ago. There aren’t that many knobs you can turn during a car. I mean, you can, but they’re like eating your seed corn, if you turn those knobs. You don’t want to do that. 

I think if you focus on the controllable inputs to your business instead of the outputs, in the long term, you get better results. The Benjamin Graham quote here then is that, “In the short term, the stock market is a voting machine. In the long term, it’s a weighing machine.” 

I think people are well-advised to build a company that wants to be weighed and not voted upon. That means having a good return on investment capital and having lots of free cash flow. 

However, if you said to me, “Here’s a job I would reject.” If somebody came up to me and said, Jeff, “I want your job to be to drive up the Amazon stock price, and just manage that directly.”

Now, this might sound ridiculous to some of you, but many companies actually do this. They actually go out and they try to sell the stock. That’s kind of the final output. It’s much better to say, “Okay, let’s not do that. That’s not going to be sustainable. It’s kind of a silly approach. What are the inputs to a higher stock price? Nice, okay, well, free cash flow and return on invested capital inputs to higher stock price.” 

Okay. So let’s keep working backwards, what are the inputs to free cash flow and you keep working backwards until you get to something that’s controllable. A controllable input for free cash, that would be something like a lower cost structure, and the backup from there and you say, “Okay, if we can improve our picking efficiency in our fulfillment centers and reduce defects.” 

Defects are very, very costly. It’s a problem. Reducing defects at the root is one of the best ways to lower cost structure. Then that starts to be a job you would accept. You would say, if you’re a reasonable person, you would say, “I have no idea how to drive up the stock price. I can’t manage that directly. It’s not a controllable input, but I can make your picking algorithms more efficient and that will reduce cost structure.” Then, you know, follow that chain all along the way. 

That’s what you do in all of these businesses. If you want customer obsession, you want to invent your way out of boxes. You want to invent your way to the future. You want to be patient, and you want to have operational excellence, so that you are finding defects at the root and fixing them.

Preston Pysh  14:51  

That was some powerful stuff there. I love that last part where he’s talking about what’s your output versus what your inputs. It’s funny how much even in business schools… And Brian, I’m curious if you saw the same thing in MIT, but business schools focusing on the stock price and just looking at things from like the pure numbers on the financial statements, opposed to let’s go and dig deeper. 

Well, what drives free cash flow. What drives this? Then ultimately arriving at you have to be adding value to the customer. That’s what that’s what he was really describing there at the end is he’s lowering his cost structure, which then that’s being carried out to the customers. They get lower prices and they’re more satisfied relative to the competition. 

I love that discussion. I’m curious, what are some of the points you took out of it, Brian?

Brian Rutherford  15:46  

Clearly, he’s listening to your podcast because he’s talking capital as good measures of the health of the business. Also, the lunacy kind of quarterly reports. Nobody *inaudible* their business and quarterly reports and even to some degree annual reports. That’s what I heard at Sloan as well when CEOs would come and talk to us…

You know that it’s there and that they think about stock price, because in a lot of ways, and let’s just be honest, that’s how they’re compensated. A lot of really great points about investing for the future and that sort of thing. 

There was a just a touch of selection bias here, right? We’re listening to an answer of Jeff Bezos here in 2018 and he was saying these grandiose things in 1997. Had none of that worked, we wouldn’t be talking about Jeff Bezos right now. So there’s a little bit of looking backwards in order to look forward. Some really great stuff, though, in terms of being guided by principles of long term investing. 

Preston Pysh  16:50  

The one thing that I think about when I hear that response, the first thing you think is, well, why are so many CEOs being driven by the stock price and not looking at it the same way that Jeff is describing it here? 

The only thing that I can come up with is he has made his money, right? He’s a major shareholder in Amazon so he’s not looking for the bonus. This guy is the wealthiest person on the planet. He’s just trying to create the best business possible. 

I think when you go out there and you look at other businesses that do operate the way he’s describing, oftentimes you find a similar situation where the CEO-slash-founder owns 30% of the stock and is making decisions based on what he thinks is good is going to add the most customer value and what’s best for the business, as opposed to how can I get a $10 million bonus this year?

Brian Rutherford  17:50  

Short versus long term returns. Absolutely. 

Preston Pysh  17:53  

Yeah. I mean, it’s not guaranteed you’re going to see that across similar structures, but I think that you find it more common in similar situations as well, as what we just described as far as the governance of the business.

Brian Rutherford  18:10  

Yeah, you can focus on social impact and being a better citizen. He’ll talk a lot about that kind of stuff.

Preston Pysh  18:17  

Here’s an interesting question, because it’s often brought up about his ownership of the Washington Post. I found this really fascinating to hear his comments on this because the question that was asked was, “Did you buy the Washington Post as a personal toy or just wanted to basically influence or put your political spin on things? Is that why you bought it?” This was his response.

Jeff Bezos  18:43  

You can explain things to people but you can’t understand things to people. All I can do is say what really my thought process was and I was not looking to buy a newspaper. Never even crossed my mind. 

When the opportunity came up, because it only came up because I had known Don Graham at that point for more than 15 years. Any of you who are lucky enough to know Dom knows that he is the most honorable gentleman that you will ever meet. He’s a remarkable guy. He so loved The Post that he believed even though this was a huge personal sacrifice for him, because it has been in his family for so long, that he needed to find a new home for it. I think there were certain purchasers who would hope it would not end up buying The Post because he wanted it to remain independent. 

So when he approached me with this, I said, “I’m the wrong guy, because I don’t know anything about the newspaper business.” He said, “That’s okay, because we have a lot of people at The Post who know a lot about the newspaper business. What we really need is somebody who knows something more about the internet.”

The Post was in a very difficult financial position at that time. For me, I had to decide what was hopeless and I didn’t believe it was hopeless. I thought I was optimistic that The Post could be turned around. 

Then second, I had to decide that I want to put my own time and energy into this. That for me, I just had to ask the simple question, is it an important institution? The answer to that question is yes. It was very obvious to me as soon as I thought about that way, like, “Okay, I think I actually can help. I can help in two ways. I can provide financial resources while this turnaround occurs, and I can also help with my internet knowledge.”

Then is it an institution worth saving? You bet. It’s the most important newspaper in the most important capital city in the Western world. You’re crazy not to save that newspaper. So I’m going to be very happy when I’m 80 and I made that decision. The Post is it for me. I’m not interested in buying other newspapers.

However, I watched that movie and it’s helpful. I love that movie and also reading Katharine Graham’s memoir which won a Pulitzer Prizes. It’s an amazing book because it gets me ready as the owner of The Post. I know that the times The Post is going to write stories, they are going to make very powerful people very unhappy. 

I would be humiliated to interfere, I would be so embarrassed. I would turn bright red and it has nothing to do with… I just don’t want to, for me, it would feel icky. It would feel gross. It would be one of those things when I’m 80 years old, I would be so unhappy with myself, if I interfered. Why would I? I want that paper to be independent. 

We have a fantastic editor, Martin Baron. We have a fantastic publisher, Fred Ryan. The head of our technology team, a guy named Shailesh, who is fantastic. They don’t need my help in the newsroom for sure. 

First of all, that’s also an expert’s job. It would be like me getting on the airplane and going up to the front of the plane and tell the pilots they should move aside, let me do this.

Preston Pysh  22:23  

It’s a pretty interesting discussion to hear how that really unfolded. It’s just kind of a family friend. He was friends with the owners. They wanted to offload it to the right person and he was the guy. 

Now, what I think is admirable, in the way that he looked at this is he asked himself, “Is this something that society should value? Is this something that adds value to society?” When he concluded yes, that weighed heavily in the way that he made his decision. I find that really important and I think that that’s something that a lot of people may not know about the way that Jeff makes decisions on the types of businesses and assets that he purchases. 

Now, was that just because he was giving a presentation? Well, maybe a little bit? I don’t know, but I think that that’s something people should really think about whenever they’re creating a new product or service.

Brian Rutherford  23:28  

Yeah, so perfect point. I mean, he really just highlights his thinking between short and long term value to his customers because he modulated his answer there from market opportunity. This opportunity came up. I looked at it from guiding values, point of view, and then he ended up talking about it as an institution and how he’d feel when he is 80 years old. I think what he’s talking about there is long term value to society.

Preston Pysh  23:58  

Okay, so for this next question. He was asked, “How do you manage disparate businesses?” This was his response.

Jeff Bezos  24:05  

As we do so many different things, so this is a question I always get. How can you do so many different things? Why don’t you stick to the knitting? The kind of traditional advice would be to stay focused and keep the business simple.

The way I think about this is we actually do stick to one thing, it’s just not described. It’s not the business itself. We do web services, which are big enterprises buying computer services from us. We have our retail business and we have Amazon Studios, which is making original content, Amazon Go, the things you listed. 

However, the cultural thread that runs through all these things is the same. We only have a few principles at Amazon, kind of core values that we go back to over and over again, and if you looked at each of the things that we do, you would see those run straight through everything. 

The first one and by far the most important one is customer obsession. We talked about it as customer obsession, as opposed to competitor obsession. I have seen over and over again companies talk about that they’re customer-focused, but really, when I pay close attention to them, I believe they’re competitor-focused. That’s just a completely different mentality. 

By the way, competitor focus can work, but I don’t think it works in the long run, as well as customer focus. For one thing, once you’re the leader, if your whole culture is competitor obsessed, it’s kind of hard to stay energized and motivated if you’re out in front. 

Whereas customers are always unsatisfied. They’re always discontent. They always want more. So no matter how far you get out there in front of your competitors, you’re still behind your customers. They’re always pulling you along. Therefore, customer obsession is a deep principle that underlies everything we do. 

Another one is eagerness to invent. We love to pioneer. When we have done by the way, whenever we have tried to do something in a kind of an *inaudible* fashion, we have failed at it. We need to have something that is differentiated, unique. Something that customers are going to like that we’re kind of leading with. That’s another element that works for us. 

Then another one is long term thinking. We are willing to take some time and be patient with our business initiatives and that runs through everything. A lot of our competitors might have a two to three-year kind of timeframe. We might have more of a five to seven-year sort of timeframe. 

Then the last one, operational excellence So literally, how do you have high standards around identifying defects and fixing defects at the root? All those kinds of things that lead to what I think also can be in a simpler way, just stated as professionalism, that you want to do things right, just for the sake of doing them right.

Preston Pysh  27:12  

I really liked that piece and I liked how he said the part, they’re about every time we’ve tried to compete with something that basically beat us to the punch, or they created something before us. Then we try to bring something to market that competes with that. It’s never really worked out too well, for us. That is a really interesting statement because they’ve got so many different products and so many different things on their assets in their balance sheet. 

For him then to say that with the size of their balance sheet, I think that’s really telling and this really goes to… We’ve never covered this book on the show, but it’s called “Blue Ocean Strategy.” It’s a pretty popular book, but that’s the whole premise of the “Blue Ocean Strategy” is that you create your own stuff, and you’re not in this competition mode. You’re more looking to satisfy the customer. 

Brian, I’m curious, what would be some of the points you pulled out of there?

Brian Rutherford  28:05  

I think just the way he frames it is that we don’t do lots of things. We do one thing and that one thing is comes down to customer obsession, eagerness to invent, having that long term vision. 

At the bottom line, they leverage a platform and that platform is logistics. So you just look at the day when they bought Whole Foods. The day that that was announced, grocery chains were down 8% to 10% in their market cap. 

Think how much money was lost just because Amazon was going to break and take their platform and apply it to this new industry. I guarantee you Jeff wasn’t thinking about “How can I be the best grocer?” He was thinking about “How do I use those guiding principles like customer obsession and really change the grocery experience?”

Preston Pysh  28:51  

Yeah. I’m really excited that he basically broke out the four big rules for people to kind of hear how he analyzes pretty much everything that comes across his desk. Really that’s the culture, that he’s breeding those big four points into his culture. 

For anybody that comes in and *inaudible* something, I think that’s a very keen insight and definitely worth writing down, if you’re creating your own business. Think about that vantage point. 

Hey, this next one, I don’t know if your everyday entrepreneur might gain insights or whatever out of this one, but I just think it’s cool. I want to play this question. It relates to…he was asked what in the world is Blue Origin up to? For people that aren’t familiar with this, Blue Origin is a space company. He’s going to talk about this in the next one.

Jeff Bezos  29:45  

Well, the vision for Blue Origin is millions of people living and working in space. The key thing is we have to dramatically reduce the cost of access to space right now. Space travel is very expensive and the reason it’s expensive is not hard to understand. It is because we throw the hardware away after each use so we need reusable rocket vehicles. That’s what Blue Origin is working on. 

We’re working on making sure that we don’t have to throw the plane away every time after you fly to your vacation destination. That would definitely increase the cost of your vacation. So that’s what we need to do and we can do it. It’s totally possible. 

My view is that it’s incredibly important work that needs to be done [as soon as] possible. I have my own reasons why I believe that they can be explained pretty simply. For me, there’s a very kind of common argument that’s been around for a long time, actually kind of first popularized by Arthur C. Clarke, who said all civilizations become spacefaring or extinct. This is the kind of Plan B argument that when Earth is destroyed, somehow, we better make sure that we don’t have all of our eggs in one basket. 

I hate the plan B argument. I think Plan B, with respect to Earth being destroyed, is make sure Plan A works. So, we have sent robotic probes to every planet in this solar system. Believe me, this is the best one. We know that. It’s not even close.

My friends who say they want to move to Mars or something I said, like why don’t you go live in Antarctica for a year first, because it’s a garden paradise compared to Mars. 

This planet is so amazing. It’s a jewel in our solar system. If you take baseline energy usage on Earth, and just compounded at a few percent a year, for just a few hundred years, you have to cover the entire Earth’s surface in solar cells. So that’s not going to happen. 

We have two choices, we either go out into space, or we switch over to a civilization of stasis. Personally, I do not like the idea of stasis. Our grandchildren and their grandchildren will live in a much better world, if they can continue to advance and develop and use more energy, and all the things that we’ve enjoyed for hundreds of years as a civilization. 

I don’t even really believe in stasis. I think things are either growing or shrinking. I think stasis is highly, highly unusual, and in real life, it doesn’t exist. I don’t even think liberty is consistent with the idea of stasis. 

I mean, if the real estate system is going to have to tell you how many kids you can have, how much energy you can use, there’ll be all kinds of things that just aren’t consistent with liberty and freedom. 

However, in space, we have, for all practical purposes, unlimited resources. We can have a trillion humans in the solar system, and we wouldn’t still wouldn’t be crowded. So then if you had a trillion humans, you’d have thousand Einsteins, 1000 Mozarts, and 1000 Da Vincis, and how cool would that be? But we have to go to space and we have to go to space to save Earth. 

That’s why this work is so important, and we don’t have forever to do it. We’ve now gotten so big as a civilization on Earth that we kind of have to hurry. I believe then that that really is kind of a long timeframe. The most important work I’m doing is Blue Origin and pushing forward to get humanity established in the solar system.

Preston Pysh  33:53  

It wasn’t in this interview, I heard a different interview with him and one of the things that he kind of went into a little bit more depth on this narrative that he was talking there… And a lot of it revolved around the speed at which humans are consuming energy. 

He started spouting off all the numbers and he says in the last 10 years, the amount of energy than an individual human is using went up by this amount. By whatever date, the energy consumption that we’re going to need, we pretty much have the whole planet covered in solar panels and that’s… 

So he kind of cut that piece of the narrative out and it was a really interesting discussion that he said in a different interview. 

That’s what’s really driving his narrative on why he thinks humans need to really kind of push outside the planet. I also find it interesting that I think Elon Musk would tell you almost the exact same narrative with respect to we’ve got to become a multi-planet or outside-of-the-earth-type species in order to continue to exist, if we’re thinking anything outside of a couple hundred years from now. 

Brian, I’m curious to hear your thoughts on this one.

Brian Rutherford  35:08  

Yeah, really two things. First of all, I like to rephrase the question. What’s the thing that’s keeping us from doing this? It’s a logistics problem, right? Are you reusing that aircraft?

 Again, he leveraged his platform to maybe solve that problem. The other thing that I heard as I listened to him talk was, I think he could have been answering the Washington Post question again, right? He says, important work needs to be done. I could have heard him say, “Hey, am I going to wish at 80 years old that I hadn’t done this or that sort of thing?” 

I really think that he is thinking about long term impacts and what he needs to do as being a good member of society.

Preston Pysh  35:50  

Do you think that he got to that point because he’s just worth so much money and it’s kind of like, “Okay, so what do I do with my life at this point?” Or do you think that Jeff Bezos was like this from day one? I know there’s no way to be able to answer that. 

Brian Rutherford  36:03  

It’s Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. He’s like a bop off the charts, as he is taking care of himself and family, roof and food, and everything else. Really, he can look outside and how can he do the greatest good for the greatest number of people? There are odd people that do that sort of thing. Many of the world’s richest people are starting to think about that, how they can create a positive impact on society? 

Preston Pysh  36:32  

It’s pretty interesting. I really like the discussion around this stuff. What I also find interesting, Brian, is that I believe he was the first one to land the rocket upright. I don’t think a lot of people realize that. I think most people would tell you that that was Elon Musk but it wasn’t. In fact, I believe when Musk did land his rocket upright, Jeff Bezos sent him a tweet and said something to the tune of, “Hey man, welcome to the club.”

Brian Rutherford  37:05  

Yeah, I think this just speaks to how those two gentlemen conduct themselves. They’re both doing very important things, but one chooses to do it more in the public eye than the other. Jeff is just maybe a touch more quiet about it.

Preston Pysh  37:17  

Elon, I mean, he’s just shooting his car into space. That’s it.

Brian Rutherford  37:24  

Some of the best marketing ever, right? That thing is worth $80,000 and he got how many millions of dollars’ worth of free advertisement?

Preston Pysh  37:32  

He’s got to do something to keep that stock price propped up.

Brian Rutherford  37:38  

Talk about earning money and going after a loss for as long as possible, right? Probably a whole interview we need to talk about.

Preston Pysh  37:44  

Oh, yeah. I’m sure that people listening to this because you get people that are very polarized on that discussion. You got some diehard Tesla fans, and then you get some people saying it’s going to get crushed. We’re not going to go down that path. We’re just saying maybe it might be a little overvalued.

Okay, Brian, I really enjoyed talking some of these points over with you. I want to tell the audience, Brian, do you remember what episode it was that we talked about your business? I can’t remember what episode number it was. 

Brian Rutherford  38:16  

It’s been a few months. I think it was 174. I was researching it the other day and looking at how long ago it was? It was January, something like that.

Preston Pysh  38:25  

We’ll check it out. You might be right, it’s Episode 174. We had Brian on the show and he talked about his business. He has a business called Claudine Wines, that’s claudinewines.com. It’s the coolest business model. 

He does high-end wines at affordable prices where he buys barrels from Napa Valley and sends them out. We talk about his business model in that episode. If you’re interested about this, go back, listen. It’s near the end of the episode, but he talks about his business. It’s super cool. Check it out. I guarantee it’s going to be some of the best wine you will drink.

Shoot me a message. I’ll forward it off to Brian, if you enjoyed this one. 

Brian, thank you so much for coming on the show and filling in for Stig. He is on his way to Denmark, and it’s always great having you back on the show.

Brian Rutherford  39:20  

Always a pleasure to chat. Let’s do it again some time.

Preston Pysh  39:23  

Yep, absolutely. All right. So that’s all we have for you guys on this week’s episode of The Investor’s podcast. We’ll see you next week.

Outro  39:31  

Thanks for listening to TIP. To access the show notes, courses or forums, go to theinvestorspodcast.com. To get your questions played on the show, go to asktheinvestors.com and win a free subscription to any of our courses on TIP Academy. 

This show is for entertainment purposes only. Before making investment decisions, consult a professional. This show is copyrighted by the TIP Network. Written permission must be granted before syndication or rebroadcasting.