Home Blog

AI : Threat Or Opportunity ? Bajaj Finance का Example देखिए… #shorts #anujsinghal N18S



Bajaj Finance is embedding artificial intelligence across its operations to drive cross-selling, improve productivity, and lower operating costs, with management indicating that technology-led execution will define the lender’s next phase of growth.
Speaking during the company’s Q3 FY26 earnings call, Managing Director Rajeev Jain said the firm has begun integrating AI into its customer engagement, underwriting, and servicing framework as part of a broader digital transformation.
The company has already deployed AI tools to analyse customer interactions at scale. AI systems have processed roughly 2 crore customer calls, converting voice interactions into usable data and generating new sales opportunities that were previously not captured, Jain said.

Budget 2026 | Union Budget | Business News | CNBC Awaaz brings to you latest business news, live share market updates, stock market updates, top business news in india, stock market updates, IPO latest updates, news updates on banking and financials, realty sector and it sector. Watch business news live, business news and share market live updates on CNBC Awaaz. Stay tune to get all the news of pre-opening trades, opening trades, and top calls in pehla sauda. Know what market veterans have to say on the current market trends in Big Market Voices.

CNBC Awaaz is one of India’s leading business channels and has been a trusted source for business news and information for over 21 years. Our channel is dedicated to educating, informing, and inspiring viewers to overcome limitations by providing practical advice on personal finance, investing, technology, consumer goods, and capital markets. Policymakers and business owners alike rely on CNBC Awaaz for its accurate and insightful coverage of India’s business environment. Our programming empowers consumers with the knowledge they need to make confident decisions. Stay informed with detailed insights on real estate, stocks, mutual funds, and more.

Main URL:

Subscribe to the CNBC Awaaz channel and press the bell icon to get notified when we go live:
Twitter:
Facebook page:
Website:
Whatsapp Link:
Instagram:

source

The Iran war is either concluding with the world worse off, or escalation is just delayed again


A fragile ceasefire agreement in the war began with bombs continuing to explode in Lebanon and contradictory statements about whether Iran will continue to control the critical Strait of Hormuz energy choke point.

But the most likely scenarios moving forward involve either Iran exerting more control over global energy markets than it did before the fighting started in March, or the current tenuous agreement merely delaying another military escalation by days or weeks, geopolitical and energy experts said.

There is a less likely “happy scenario” where global energy trade returns to normalcy—but even that will take until the end of this year because of supply-chain challenges—and where Iran is left weakened and militarily degraded for the long term, said Bob McNally, former White House energy advisor under President George W. Bush and founder of Rapidan Energy Group.

“We think the odds favor this ceasefire either not ever sticking or unraveling if it does,” McNally told Fortune, arguing the April 7 announcement of a two-week ceasefire was vague, fragile, and contradicted by Iran—not exactly justifying oil prices falling by almost $20 per barrel overnight.

“The only thing we know for sure is the president called off a larger attack,” McNally said. “I am amazed at the market’s willingness to price in relief so willingly. While we do see a ceasefire as an ultimate end state, we don’t think we’re there yet, and we think this is going to get worse before it gets better.”

Hours after President Donald Trump issued profanity-laden messages threatening that Iran’s “whole civilization will die” in one night on April 7, he announced a two-week ceasefire in exchange for opening the narrow Hormuz waterway through which about 20% of global energy supplies transit. Iran agreed to open the strait but only “via coordination with Iran’s Armed Forces and with due consideration of technical limitations.”

Iran said it could continue to charge tolls per vessel, while Oman, which is situated on the other side of the strait, said, “No fees will be imposed”—yet another contradiction.

Regardless, Israel, which was unhappy about the ceasefire, continued to attack Lebanon on April 8, and Iran kept the strait closed and threatened to withdraw from the ceasefire.

If the ceasefire does hold, Vice President JD Vance, special envoy Steve Witkoff, and Jared Kushner are scheduled to travel to Islamabad for in-person negotiations with Iran on April 11, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.

What happens next

Rystad Energy chief economist Claudio Galimberti sees an enduring ceasefire as the most likely scenario, but it won’t be pretty. Iran is likely to assert its control over the strait for at least a few months before any broader, long-term deal is reached with the U.S. and neighboring, oil-producing Gulf states.

“The normalization of the Strait of Hormuz is still far, far away,” Galimberti told Fortune. “It’s a very fragile situation.”

He agreed that regular flows through the strait are unlikely at least until late 2026. In the meantime, a stronger ceasefire could mean the resumption of about one-third of vessel traffic through the strait.

Traffic for oil, liquefied natural gas, fertilizer for agriculture, hydrogen for semiconductors, and petrochemicals plunged to 5% of typical flows in March and only grew to nearly 10% for a few days in early April before ceasing again on April 8.

Only a single Iranian-linked oil tanker passed through the strait on April 8, said Rohit Rathod, senior analyst with the Vortexa cargo tracking firm.

A lot of work remains. First, the strait would have to be cleared of mines and emptied of the hundreds of ships that have remained trapped for over a month. Then, vessels would need to resume their complicated, global logistical dance. And eventually, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and other Gulf states would restart their oil and gas production volumes—all of which would take many months, Galimberti said.

Oil prices—down to about $94 a barrel from over $110 the day prior—could continue to fall but remain elevated from pre-March levels by at least $10 per barrel longer term, including from higher insurance costs on tanker journeys, he said.

“The political risk premium is going to be embedded for a long time,” Galimberti said.

A return to the normal transit system of goods and commodities means ensuring insurance availability, commercial trade financing, and the resumption of empty, inbound “ballasting” vessels.

While the currently trapped ships will want to exit as quickly as they can, resuming other traffic is much harder, said Alan Gelder, senior vice president for refining, chemicals, and oil markets with the Wood Mackenzie energy research firm.

“[Inbound] ballasting vessels are unlikely to enter via the Strait of Hormuz any sooner than a ‘just in time’ logistics basis, at risk of becoming trapped if hostilities resume,” Gelder added.

As for the liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, which mostly come from Qatar, shipments could be back up and running by the end of the summer, but more than 15% of its export capacity will remain offline for years because of serious damages inflicted by Iranian attacks.

In the meantime, McNally sees investors and energy traders overreacting to the ceasefire—as evidenced by the big spike in stock markets and the opposite drop in oil prices.

“The market was eager to hear a ceasefire had been reached. And the market continues to underappreciate the gravity and the risk of a prolonged disruption from Hormuz,” McNally said. “I still think there’s an unwarranted, large reservoir of hope and optimism that you see reflected in prices today.”

We’re Selling Our Rentals (Here’s Why)


We’re selling off rental properties. Nope, that’s not clickbait; we’re actually getting rid of cash-flowing rental properties from our real estate portfolios.

Is there a market crash we fear is coming? Do we think this is the peak of real estate? Have we finally decided to listen to the social media doomers who keep telling us it’s another 2008? Not quite. Instead, our reasoning behind selling might make a lot more sense than you think. In fact, after you listen to this episode, you might decide to sell some rentals. 

So, what are we doing with the money? Are we going to sit on cash, pay off properties, or retire early? Both Dave and Henry have different reasons for selling, but both agree there’s one thing you should do (at least twice a year) to see whether you should sell properties in your portfolio.

Thought you were supposed to “hold forever,” as many of the traditional real estate investors have told you? We have proof that selling can often make you much wealthier than holding—here’s how.

Henry Washington:
It’s 2026 and I’m selling a bunch of real estate. That’s right. I’ve got properties in my personal portfolio that I am listing on the market and I’m hoping someone else buys them before their values drop. I am constantly analyzing my market and that’s what it’s telling me to do right now. But this isn’t one of those real estate is dead videos. I’m not selling everything and I don’t think the crash of the century is coming. In fact, I’m also buying properties right now. That’s right. I’m selling and buying real estate all at the same time. If that sounds crazy, then let me break it down for you. What’s going on everybody? I am Henry Washington and I’m here with Dave Meyer. Today, we’re going to talk about selling some properties. Dave, are you selling properties?

Dave Meyer:
Yes, I am selling property, but I’m kind of always selling properties. So I don’t really feel like it’s that different from what I’ve done for the last eight years at least. And I want to talk about what I’m selling, what I’ve sold in the past. We should get into this. But I also, just before we get into this and people start panicking, I also want to say I’m also buying. So it’s not like a one way thing where I’m only selling properties right now. I’m also buying properties. That’s part of the reason I am selling some properties is because I want to buy other or different things. And we’ll get into that, but I just don’t want anyone to confuse, I’m selling off my whole portfolio. I’m only getting rid of stuff and I’m not reinvesting. That’s not the case.

Henry Washington:
Yeah, that’s very true. That’s a great caveat to make as I just left the bank grabbing a check to take to my title company because I am literally buying a house when I get done with this podcast.

Dave Meyer:
There you go. Exactly. So keep this all in perspective. Selling, I think is just a tool just like acquisitions, just like doing a renovation. It’s one strategic lever that you can pull as you build your portfolio. And I think it is an undertalked about and very valuable part of being an investor. I just never understand those people are like, “Buy and never sell. I’m never selling.” It’s just so stubborn and silly. It doesn’t make any sense.

Henry Washington:
Yeah. I mean, sometimes properties run their useful life in terms of kind of where they are from a maintenance perspective and how old they were when you bought it. It’s not logical advice. Now, in a perfect world, should you just keep everything you buy and amass a ton of wealth over a long period of time? Sure, that sounds great. But real life happens. Assets diminish beyond the point of your financial ability to bring them back to life. Your life finances and circumstances change, and maybe you can’t hold onto properties as long as you thought you could. Or sometimes you just need some money, Dave, and you got to sell something to get some money.That’s okay, guys.

Dave Meyer:
Yeah. Sometimes you just enjoy the fruits of your labor or take a little bit of benefit for paying for your kids’ college or a wedding or life. You need a new car, whatever. Real estate to me always has been and always will be a means to an end. So if there is a better end, if you need some other use of your money, if there’s a better use for your money, go do that. I think that’s another reason. But I also just want to reiterate that from a math perspective too, there are also just times that it makes more sense. You will make more money in real estate by selling and buying something else. And I think we should talk about all of these different scenarios today.

Henry Washington:
Yeah. I think there’s a lot to cover here and I want to jump into it. And I guess one of the things that I first want to talk about with you is you said you are buying and at the same time you said you are selling. So it sounds like you’re strategically selling some so that you have cash to buy something different, which may be a slightly different approach than what I am taking in my portfolio. I am selling some rentals, but I am not turning around and acquiring nearly as many rental properties. I am selling for a different reason. So what’s your theory behind what you’re selling and what you’re buying?

Dave Meyer:
I mentioned this, I think at the beginning of the year, but I’ve just sort of entered what our friend Chad Carson would call sort of like the harvest phase of my investing career. Just for everyone’s reference, Ched Carson, great investor. I’ve been on the show many times, has this framework where he says there’s basically three stages to an investor’s career. The first one is just starting. Get in that first deal, do your first two deals, learn a little bit. Then you go into growth mode, which is like when you got to hustle. It’s like you’re doing the Burge, you’re doing what Henry does, off market deals. You’re just trying to find ways to build wealth as quickly as possible. But at a certain point, I think for most people, five, 10, 12 years into their investing career, they reach a point where they want to get into what he calls the harvest mode, which is that you’ve built enough equity, you have enough properties, and now it’s time to realign your investments in your portfolio with the lifestyle that you want going forward.
There are some people who want to stay in growth mode forever. Our mutual friend, co-host of On the Market, James Daynard, that dude literally can’t stop. He would do it for free.

Henry Washington:
He would be miserable if he wasn’t

Dave Meyer:
Involved. I don’t know what he would do, but it’s good that he has this because he would go crazy. And there are other people like that, but I’m personally just not like that. Like I said, real estate is a mean to an end for me. And I am trying to go into what I’m calling sort of like the end game portfolio. I’m only 38. I’m sure I’ll still keep trading, but I’m starting, my buy box has changed. The type of assets I want to own in this harvest stage of my career are different. And I could just give you some examples, but I’ve bought a lot of really old properties in my career. I invest in the Midwest. I invest in Denver. Both have a lot of old housing stock and they’ve done great, fantastic. I do them all again. But at this point in my investing career, I just flew to Denver last week to look at some maintenance stuff.
I don’t really want to do it anymore. I invest out of state. I want stuff that’s really rock solid that I can go once or twice a year, look at these properties, say they’re good, and keep going. So that’s the general philosophy is just find stuff that aligns with me as a 38-year-old dude instead of what I was doing when I was 25 and had a lot of time and frankly, more drive to build a lot of wealth. I’m in a fortunate position where I’ve made a good amount of money in real estate and now I want to use it differently.

Henry Washington:
Yeah. There are some parallels to our stories. I’m also following a three-step framework, but I am following selfishly my own three-step framework, which is very, very similar to Chad Carson’s. And I’ve often said this that I see investing in three buckets, which is, again, your growth mode. So that’s a little bit about what you talked about in your three-step process. So you’re building and growing, and then you’re stabilizing, and then your third bucket is protection. And most people are going to spend time in two buckets at a time, but disproportionately in one versus the other. So when you’re first starting out, you’re spending probably 80% in growth, 20% in stabilizing. And then at some point you’ve grown enough and you’re finishing your stabilizing, so you’re spending the majority of your time and you’re stabilizing, and then you’re spending 10, 20% of your time in protection.
And me, protection means paying off assets, right? We don’t truly own the assets until we pay off the lender. And so protecting what you’ve built is part of my process. And part of my investing goal has always been to be able to leave paid off assets for my children. Part of my goal is that my children will be able to be the people that they’re called to be and not the people they have to be to make money. I want them to have income producing assets so that if they are called to do something that doesn’t make a lot of income, they’ve got some income coming in. So for me to do that, I got to get to paying some of these off. And I had this realization over the past couple of years that like, all right, well, how many do I need paid off to leave to my children?
And so I have done all the math and built all the spreadsheets and I have literally outlined the properties that I want to keep. I’ve outlined the properties that I’d like to keep but would be willing to sell and the properties that I absolutely want to sell to be able to achieve that goal of paying off the chunk of the portfolio that I want to pay off. And so I am selling assets as a part of that process. We’re selling assets and then we’re refocusing that money to pay off some of the other assets in our portfolio that we want to keep. You’re selling because it’s a good time right now. We’re finding great deals on the market. So it’s a great time to take some of that money and go buy other assets if that’s part of what you want to do in your real estate business.
But I think what I want people to take away from this part of our conversation is that both of us got started, built a business, operated our lives, and then saw how our lives have changed over time, saw how our businesses were running over time, and now we’re making adjustments based on our current or new end goals that we want for ourselves. And that’s like the best thing about real estate is you can build any life that you want and you can position your portfolio to provide or help providers support the life that you want. That’s the goal. This is what everyone should be doing at some level.

Dave Meyer:
Hell yeah. That’s the whole reason you do it.

Henry Washington:
Right. Does it mean everybody needs to sell something right now? No, but it does mean that you need to be looking at your portfolio, looking at your business and looking at your life and saying, “What is it I want for my life in the next one year, five years, and 10 years?” And then make decisions based on those things. And if the decision is selling gets you to those goals in the most efficient way, then you absolutely should be looking at selling.

Dave Meyer:
I couldn’t agree more. If you understand your goals, that’s how you start to decide if you’re going to sell. I want to get into that a little bit to help people understand what to sell, if they should sell. And it really does all start with goals. I think you heard Henry and I both just say that. I want to have a lower headache portfolio. Henry wants to de- risk his portfolio by reducing debt, both fantastic goals. It really makes these decisions about what to buy and what to sell a lot easier if you have clarity about those goals. But before we get into that, Henry, I got to address the elephant in the room. Are you selling at all at all because of market conditions and you think prices are going down or you just don’t like what’s happening in the housing market? Is that influencing your decision at all?

Henry Washington:
A very small percent of that is true. The market conditions are playing into it because it’s such a good time to sell because values are still up. And even though expenses and a lot of the things that come along with real estate are also up, what you’re really not seeing nationwide is value starting to drop a ton because of those things. In some markets, yes, values are coming down a little bit, but because values are stable, I’m able to capitalize by selling assets that make sense for me to sell and getting a decent chunk of money for doing so. Does that mean I’m doing it because I think values are going to plummet in the next year or two? No, but I know where they are now and that’s the decision I can make. I’m not guessing about where they’re going to be in the future.
I’m taking advantage of where they are now.

Dave Meyer:
Right. You know your goal, you’re responding to market conditions. That’s exactly what any investor in any asset class should be doing. And I’ll be honest, the way I’m going about it is definitely because of market conditions, but not because I think there’s going to be a market crash. I just think that the types of deals that worked for the last 10 years and the types of deals that are going to work in the next 10 years are a little bit different. Going forward, you’ve all heard my thesis. I think we’re not going to have a lot of appreciation in the next couple of years. And so I’m looking at these deals that I have and I say, if they’re not earning me solid cash flow, if they were just kind of those like mid-cash flow deals and they’re not going to appreciate, I don’t want them.
What’s the point of holding onto an old building that’s not going to appreciate and has mid-cash flow? I still made a ton of money off those deals from appreciation, but they have served their useful purpose. And I actually think, I know gasp, I think cashflow opportunities are going to get better in the next couple of years. Prices, in my opinion, are going to come down. I think rents are going to start going up in the next couple of years, and that’s going to make better opportunity for cashflow. So I’m just shifting towards those kinds of deals. And if they appreciate, fantastic, but I’m just changing a little bit what I prioritize, not because I am like, “Oh my God, these properties are going to tank.” It’s just like, no, there’s better opportunity out there and I can do better things with my time and money.

Henry Washington:
Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. And it’s actually a great transition into the next question I wanted to ask you. And that’s basically around for those investors that are listening, especially the ones who have a portfolio, maybe they have five properties, maybe they have 25 properties. What kinds of properties should investors consider selling or what trigger points should they be looking for in their assets to determine if it’s time to sell it or if it’s time to hold onto it? And I’d love to hear your thoughts right after this break. All right, I am back with Dave Meyer on the BiggerPockets Podcast and we’re talking about selling it all. No, we’re not selling everything. We are selling some assets.

Dave Meyer:
Buyer sales. If you want to buy Henry’s entire portfolio for 50 cents in the dollar, give them a call.

Henry Washington:
We are talking about selling assets. And before the break, I asked Dave, what trigger points or things should people be looking for in their portfolio to maybe tap them on the shoulder and say, “Hey, you might want to think about selling this asset.” Given that we are in a position right now where values are stable for the moment, so if they want to take advantage of values where they are, what should they be looking for?

Dave Meyer:
I love this question. This is one of my favorite things to talk about. And I’m going to give you one Dave nerdy analytical response and one maybe more applicable response. So the one nerdy thing is I always look at a metric called return on equity. It’s just basically a measure of how efficiently your money is earning you a return. And I look at that for all of my properties a couple times a year and the ones that aren’t doing well, I compare them to what I could go out and buy in the market today. And so if I go and see my return on equity on XYZ property is 9% and I can go buy a fresh deal and it’ll get me 12% or 15%, I’m probably going to sell it and just 1031 it into another deal. And this is actually really common for return on equity to decline over the lifetime of your deal.
And it’s a good thing. It’s a sign that your deal actually went really well because what happens is usually if you do like a renovation or a Burr or some type of value add, you get a lot of equity built up upfront. And that’s great because you make a lot of money in those first few years, but then you have a lot of equity trapped in those deals. And so your efficiency of how well you’re using that equity goes down. And so I always try to do this thing called, I call it benchmarking. I’m like, that’s why I always look at deals because even if I’m not planning to buy, I’m always looking at deals in the markets I invest in and be like, okay, I could get a 12% ROE, I can get a 15% and I compare that to my other deals. And that’s like the sort of the analytical way I do it.
The other way, honestly, a lot of it is just vibes. And I know that sounds ridiculous, but it’s totally true. It’s so true. Everyone who owns property knows this. You have that city property that you don’t want to own anymore. And it’s just like, sometimes you’re like, “Oh, you made me all this money.” I’ve gotten to the point where I can be not emotional about it and be just very objective about it and be like, “I don’t want to own it. It’s annoying to me. ” I actually, I went to Denver last week because I wanted to go see a couple properties, a major rehab going on in one of them, and I just wanted to see them. And I walked into one of those properties and I was like, “Uh-uh, nope, uh-uh, not for me anymore.” It was what I thought I was going to hold onto forever.
And I looked around and I was like, “I’m getting rid of this thing. I don’t want it. ” So there’s just part of it. And I think you and I probably have the ability to do that because you can look around a property and be like, “This is just going to be annoying forever.” And you could just feel that. And I was like, “I don’t want to be annoyed forever, so I’m selling it.

Henry Washington:
” Yes, that is absolutely true. I have walked into properties, rentals that I’ve bought and just in the middle of a turn and went, “I don’t want this. I don’t want this anymore. I don’t want to be here.” Absolutely. That’s so true. I love it. Selling based on vibes and we joke about this, but there is absolute truth to it. And the more seasoned you get as an investor, the more you’ll start to understand those things and those feelings.

Dave Meyer:
That’s right.

Henry Washington:
So for me, I’m looking at, is the property performing like I underwrote it to perform? And Dave and I are similar in that we underwrite very conservatively. And so most of the time properties end up performing better than I underwrote, but sometimes they still don’t. And you have to know that so that you can make a decision. And it’s not just like, “Oh, it’s underperforming. Sell it. ” For me, it’s like, all right, is it underperforming? All right. If it is underperforming, then what is it going to cost me in terms of money and time to get it to perform like I want? And before I even look at that, I think through, is this the kind of property I want to own 10 years from now? So if the answer is yes, I want to keep it for a long term. I love the location.
Then I look at what’s it going to cost me in time and money to get it to perform like I want? And then once I do that, I can make an informed decision. I can decide whether, let’s say it’s going to cost me $25,000. Now my decision isn’t do I sell it or do I spend 25 grand? Now that decision is like, do I spend the 25 grand to get it to perform or is my money better spent selling it and then taking the money I would’ve spent on that property and buying another asset? And that’s based on you understanding your market and your buy box because right now what I am seeing is great buying opportunities. So if this was 2025 or late 2024, I might consider fixing an asset and keeping it because the cash on cash return I would get from buying a new asset was not as good as it is now.
And so now the decision in this year might be, “Hey, let’s just take this and go buy a different asset because I can get so much better numbers. I can get a higher return for that money that I’m going to spend.” Whereas a year ago, that wasn’t the

Dave Meyer:
Case.That makes so much sense. I think Henry and I could probably do this by vibes because we just have, as an investor over time, you will get there if you’re not there yet. You will just be able to walk into a building and be like, “This has potential or it doesn’t.” You just know if you know your market well, if you know what construction costs, you know what rents are going to be in the area, you know what people want to rent or buy, you’ll be able to know. And the vibes that I’m talking about is basically just a cost benefit analysis that you’re doing in your head. I’ll actually just give you an example. I’m choosing to sell a property. It’s a duplex. I got a great buy on it. I haven’t hold it that long, but because I’ve got a good buy, I could sell it and make money off the equity.
But the layout of one of the units is weird. And I was getting quotes for doing the layout. I think it was going to be around 30, 35 grand to do the renovation. The amount that it was going to increase my rents was like 200 bucks a month, which is not very good in my opinion. And it was going to be 30 grand to … I talked to my agent, maybe the ARV was 50 higher than it was going to be. It’s like, so am I going to invest 35 grand to make 15 grand in equity and 200 bucks a month in rent? And I was like, no, I could just keep that property, but it’s not going to rent very well as well as I want to with the weird layout. And I have a lot of equity that I’ve built in this property.
So why wouldn’t I go find a property, find a project where I could do a better Burr, do the kind of renovation I’m talking about where the numbers are just better, where it’s going to increase my rent more than 200 bucks a month, where I’m going to earn more than 15K in equity for investing 35K. For me, it didn’t take that mathematical analysis. I could just walk in and be like, okay, this is not going to work. But that’s kind of what’s going on in my head. And if you’re sort of a newer investor, you should just do the numbers, get the quotes, run the comps and figure that out. And I think you’ll see that sometimes selling actually makes a lot of sense.

Henry Washington:
Yes. Some of the other reasons I sell, look, I’d be lying to you if I told you I hadn’t sold a property that positively cash flows just because it’s a big pain in my butt. So sure, I will sell a headache property.

Dave Meyer:
Well, what kind of headaches? I’m just curious because I have a good example I’m thinking of this, but what do you see as headaches? Is it maintenance?

Henry Washington:
Two reasons. It’s either maintenance or it’s just super hard to rent. When it rents, great. Cashflow’s great, but maybe something weird about it makes it hard to rent. And that is a big headache in my butt because vacancies kill you.

Dave Meyer:
That’s the one I was thinking of. I sold a property because my neighbor just kept bothering my tenants and they kept moving out. I would get all of these great tenants and they were just like, “This guy, Ed,” that’s his real name. So weird and so- We are not

Henry Washington:
Hiding names to protect the innocent here.

Dave Meyer:
I won’t share his last name, but Ed, dude, killing me. And I would have these great tenants and they’re like, “We’re sorry we love the house, but we’re leaving because this guy won’t leave us alone.” And I tried talking to him and eventually I was like, “You know what? I was just going to do something where I don’t have to deal with this guy because he’s annoying to me. ” And I think the key is I could do that because I had a good buy, because I executed my business plan and I had already built enough equity in this property that if I went to sell, the transaction costs aren’t going to kill me. I think the problem you get in, and I think that we should talk about this a little bit, is when you’re forced to sell within first year, two years, that’s where I think you really can get in a little bit of trouble.
That’s the situation that I think I personally try and avoid.

Henry Washington:
All right, Dave, since we are landlords talking about selling properties either because they got the wrong vibes or the numbers don’t make sense to us or we’ve maxed out the equity, are we saying that new investors should be scared to buy properties from older investors? Hold that thought because I want to hear your answer right after the break. All right, we are back on the BiggerPockets Podcast. I am here with Dave Meyer and we are talking about why we are selling off some of the properties in our portfolios. And some of the things that we’ve covered is basically understanding and tracking the data for your portfolio so that you can make informed decisions about what you should or shouldn’t sell based on what your return on investment’s going to be for selling based on whether you think you could buy something new that’s going to give you a better return than either fixing or selling something that you currently have.
But just in general, being able to evaluate your portfolio on a consistent basis and make informed decisions. I believe that every real estate investor has to do this and has to do this well if they want to maximize their portfolio. But we’ve been talking a lot about what we are selling or why we’re selling some of these things, and I bet it’s giving some new aspiring real estate investors pause about buying properties from old crotchety landlords like us.
So I want to hear your thoughts. Should new investors be scared to buy properties from landlords who’ve owned properties for ages?

Dave Meyer:
Absolutely not. I actually think it’s some of the better opportunities, to be honest. I have definitely sold properties where I’m just like, “I don’t have the hustle anymore to do this. ” Or my portfolio is so big that I don’t want to dedicate all of my time to this one property, but I’ve definitely left meat on the bone when I’ve sold properties to people. I think that this happens quite a lot because investors like Henry and I, or you talk to James who’s always trading out properties as well, it’s just sometimes it’s not your buy box at that perfect time, but different properties work well for different people at different times in their life. So I can just think of properties I’ve sold that would’ve been a perfect live and flip or a perfect house hack for someone, but I’m not house hacking anymore. So it’s not a good idea.
I’ll also just throw out, I was looking at a deal, a landlord who owned a couple of properties, it was three, four units in a neighborhood I like, and unfortunately he passed away and his wife had the property, didn’t know what to do with it. There had been a lot of deferred maintenance over the last couple of years, but I was like, “This is a pretty good deal. The deferred maintenance rents are well under, so they’re pricing it low, but I can actually make something out of this. ” And I think you see that a lot with older landlords is that they don’t keep up with current rents and that’s an opportunity. Are there some people who are going to demand top dollar and they’re hiding something? Yes. But if you do your due diligence, I think actually buying portfolios or buying from old landlords is probably one of the better options right now.

Henry Washington:
Yeah. I mean, a solid chunk of my portfolio came from landlords getting out of the business, but this is the entire point of the underwriting and due diligence process That’s what it’s for. Focus your time and efforts on getting really good at understanding your buy box and getting really good at analyzing deals and making the offer that makes sense for you, not the offer that you think the seller will accept.

Dave Meyer:
That’s right.

Henry Washington:
And I think that new investors especially get caught up in this. They either don’t make an offer because they just assume the seller will say no, and so they make a decision for the seller, or they increase their offer because they feel like what they need to pay is too low, but they really want the deal. And so they fudge the numbers a little bit and increase their offer because they don’t want to hurt somebody’s feelings. You cannot do this. Do not be afraid to buy from anyone.

Dave Meyer:
That’s right.

Henry Washington:
Get good at underwriting. Get good at analyzing. Get good at knowing what questions to ask about deals to give you the comfort you need for that deal and then buy the ones that work. It doesn’t matter who owns it. Control what you can, and you can control how you underwrite, you can control what you offer. What a seller wants for their property is between them and Jesus. That ain’t got nothing to do with what I can pay for it. And that goes for me too, as a seller of properties right now. Just because I’m asking 500,000 for a property doesn’t mean that’s what somebody has to offer me. If somebody offers me something for 250 for it, I’ll look at it. Does it mean I’m going to accept it? Nah, but shoot your shot.

Dave Meyer:
Yeah, 100%. That makes total sense. This property I was just talking about, the one that the duplex I decided to post on the market, my agent was like, “We could list it for, I think it was like 290, 295.” He’s like, “Or I might be able to find someone off market will buy it for 285.” And I was like, “Great, sell for 285.” For me, the time is more important. And so someone could be walking into 10 grand of equity because I don’t want to be inconvenienced. And that’s just how it works.That’s how a lot of investors work. Sometimes you trade money for convenience. And if you’re an early investor, you trade convenience for money.That’s kind of the way this works. If you are going to hustle and go do these things, maybe you’re going to be a little inconvenience, but you can get 10 grand of equity off me today.
That’s just how investors work. So I think that’s why you need to be able to underwrite, understand what the value of this property is and be able to understand where it fits, what role it plays in your portfolio. And you can absolutely find good deals from existing landlords.

Henry Washington:
What would you say should be the timeframe that investors should be analyzing their portfolio? Should they do this once a month, once a year? What do you think makes the most sense?

Dave Meyer:
I would recommend most people do it twice a year, at least. I probably do it quarterly because I’m just a crazy person, but I think twice a year is the right number for most people. You can get away with once a year if you just know you’re not going to do anything that year. Sometimes you’re like, “I’m so busy. I have a new job. I have a new baby.” Whatever. You’re just like, “Fine.” But if you’re trying to grow your portfolio and actively manage, I think six months, something like that.

Henry Washington:
I think you should be doing it in the winter and in the spring at a minimum, because it may take you a year to get a property ready to sell so that you can maximize the value. It may take you six months. And so if you want to be strategic with it, like we are right now, I am listing several properties that I probably could have listed a couple of months ago, but we held off on listing them until this spring and we were actively getting those ready to sell so that we could list them in the spring. So had I not been looking at this six months ago, I wouldn’t be able to capital eyes on what I’m hoping is more bang for my buck by having them ready to go and put on the market in spring. It may be that you’ve got to non-renew a tenant and just put them on month to month so that you can be ready to list that property.
It may be that you’ve got to get a tenant out so that you can do some refreshes to that property before you list it. There are things that are going to have to happen with a property before you can get the most value out of it. And if you’re not doing this at least twice a year, you’re going to miss out on opportunities to list them in favorable times in order to maximize the return that you’re going to get for selling that property.

Dave Meyer:
That just kind of happened to me. There’s this property I’m thinking about selling. I haven’t decided yet, but I was looking at this in January and I was like, oh, the lease isn’t up till the end of July. So there’s no reason for me to really think about it. But I said in my calendar, think about this again in April because then I would have three months to figure out whether or not I’m going to sell it, talk to the tenant if they’re going to re-up, just do the analysis. It sort of just reminds you. And I know if you only have one property, you probably know when your leases are up, but when you get to a bigger portfolio, you forget. And so you just kind of need to be doing this continuously. I think that makes a lot more sense. So Henry, before we get out of here, one last question.
What do you say to the people who say buy and never sell? What’s your last piece of advice for people listening here?

Henry Washington:
I think buying never sell is just unrealistic advice. Let me give you an example. If I bought a hundred year old house, and even if I spent some money renovating that property and now I’m 20 years in, well, now that house is 120 years old. If the market is favorable in terms of being able to buy something that’s going to give me a higher cash on cash return than the property that I currently own, even though I’ve been paying on it for 20 years,
If the maintenance is kicking you in the teeth, it may make sense to sell that asset to go buy a better quality asset because my goals and what I want from my family and what I want out of my real estate business, that older property is not the best fit for my goals. So it’s too much of a blanket statement to say you should never sell. Sometimes you just got to sell an asset because you might need some cash. I think people who say they never sell is crazy to me. That just means to me, I just think you have a bank account full of money and you never, ever, ever have to worry about any of the expenses involved in real estate because you’re just flush with cash all the time.

Dave Meyer:
Yep. I mean, it doesn’t make any sense. I’m glad we’re doing this episode. And part of the reason I wanted to do it right now is because the other day, my real estate agent in Denver just sent me a text and was like, “This property that I used to own and sold just hit the market again.” So I’m just going to give you the numbers right now. I bought this in 2010. It was my first deal. Bought it in 2010 for 462. I sold it in 2018, so eight years later for $1.025 million. So huge, huge return. I had three partners on that deal, but huge return there, right? Massive. But it was a pain in the butt. It was just because we had some issues with tenants, we had break-ins. It was a pain in my butt. Know what they’re selling it for now?
1.050. So I made about $600,000, and then in the eight years since, people have made $25,000. I’m just saying, I haven’t timed all of them that well, but I just want to show that I took that money. I 1030 to wonder into two other deals that have done very well. And I just think I saw the writing on the wall that the property had reached its maximum age. Now, this might go back on scaring people from buying from people like I said. But I just want to show people that this actually works. I didn’t pull all my money out of the market. I reinvested it. Those deals have done well. I’ve actually sold both of those deals and I’ve reinvested those again. So that’s my style of investing. I like optimizing, but I just want to show you that it actually works. Had I held onto that deal forever, like everyone said you should have, I would’ve made a lot less money.
So I just want to give you some examples and I have plenty more where this actually works. So just think critically about the best way to use your time and money. That’s the job of the investor and selling is a crucial tool in your tool belt as an investor.

Henry Washington:
Again, I know people are listening to that and thinking, oh, you got lucky in time in the market. And was there some luck to it? Sure. But there’s a lot of experience and research to that too. At the beginning of this episode, you talked about you think that values are going to either stay flat or come down a little bit over the next few years. And if you’ve been in this business for the last five years, you know we got huge equity bumps in between 2020 and like early 2023, like drastic equity bumps. And so if you have an understanding of real estate in general, what’s going on on a national perspective and then diving deeper into what’s going on locally in terms of values, it can help you make decisions like this. So what Dave is essentially saying is, “I don’t think I’m going to get a massive equity bump in the next few years.” So if I’m going to sell something, now’s probably a good time to do it because it’s not like I’m going to miss out on massive amounts of equity by selling that asset over the next couple of years.
So it’s not just luck. It is critical thinking and it is understanding your market and knowing what data points are important to those things.

Dave Meyer:
I think in the kind of market, in a buyer’s market that we’re in, it’s a good time to reload right now. It’s a good time to take stock and say, “Hey, my portfolio has been great. I am super grateful for everything that it’s done for me so far. Might need to change what it looks like a little bit for the next phase of my investing career.” And that’s where I’m at, but I encourage people to think like that all the time, every year. Think, is this the right portfolio for me at this point in my life? And if not, bite the bullet, sell some stuff, reallocate, use some of your money, have fun, go on vacation, whatever you want to do.

Henry Washington:
Buy the Lambo, post it on social

Dave Meyer:
Media.

Henry Washington:
Tell everybody how to get rich in six years.

Dave Meyer:
That is what I’m going to do. What’s this property? What’s this two block sells? They’re going to go buy a Lambo.

Henry Washington:
Oh gosh, that’d be the day. That’d be the day.

Dave Meyer:
Yeah.

Henry Washington:
For the record, Dave will not do that. Dave would buy like a brand new forerunner before he buys a Lambo and then drive it for the next 50 years is what he would do. All right everybody, thank you so much for joining us on this episode of the BiggerPockets podcast. Again, it is okay to sell assets. Just be strategic about when and how you do it. And in order to do that, you’re going to need information, which means you need to have your accounting and bookkeeping in order so you know which assets in your portfolio are ripe for selling. And you’re going to need to understand a little bit about the real estate market so that you can know if it is a good time to actually turn around and try to sell those properties. But don’t listen to anybody that tells you you should never sell.
You can’t make blanket statements. Every investor has a reason for investing. Every investor has a life. So build your business and make business decisions around the performance of your assets and the life you want to live. And I think you will be a much happier investor than trying to hang onto something just because you think you’re supposed to. As always, this is Henry Washington. He is Dave Meyer. We appreciate you being here and we’ll see you on the next episode of the BiggerPockets Podcast.

 

Help us reach new listeners on iTunes by leaving us a rating and review! It takes just 30 seconds and instructions can be found here. Thanks! We really appreciate it!

Interested in learning more about today’s sponsors or becoming a BiggerPockets partner yourself? Email [email protected].

20 High-Paying Remote Jobs You Can Get Without a Bachelor’s Degree


Johnson / Money Talks News

For decades, the four-year degree was sold as the only ticket to a decent paycheck. That story is finally falling apart. According to TestGorilla’s State of Skills-Based Hiring 2023 report, 73% of companies surveyed used some form of skills-based hiring in 2023 — up from 56% the year before. Translation? The “bachelor’s required” line on a job posting is often just a leftover template.

Has American Express Dropped the 5 Card Limit?


American Express 5 Card Limit

American Express has long had a limit of five credit cards that a customer can hold at any given time. This limit didn’t include charge cards or Amex cards issued by other banks.

But a report on reddit points at a chat rep saying that American Express no longer has this five card limit. The customer was chatting specifically to close a card because of that limit, and the chat rep replied:

“To clarify, we no longer have a five‑card limit. All applications are reviewed individually and are subject to approval based on several factors.

If the number of existing cards is the reason an application cannot be approved, this will be clearly indicated at the time of submission. In those cases, the application will not remain in a pending status—you will immediately see a message stating that you’ve reached the maximum number of allowable cards, and the application will be declined for that reason.”

This seems like very specific information. The chat rep acknowledges that the five card limit existed, but has now been dropped. That information could still be wrong, as it has been the case with lots of information provided by phone and chat reps in the past.

In this case the rep says that there is still some kind of limit when it comes to the total number of American Express cards that you can hold. Once you’ve reached the maximum number of allowable cards, you will be told so once you submit an application.

Have you applied for any Amex cards recently? Leave a comment and let us know if you have been able to go above that 5 card limit!

Could this be the end of green building standards in Ontario — again?




Premier Doug Ford’s government is taking another swipe at green standards while nixing a requirement for municipalities to build climate change goals into their official plans. 

Is Your Company Suffering from Initiative Overload?


ALISON BEARD: Welcome to HBR On Leadership. I’m HBR Executive Editor Alison Beard. On this show, we share case studies and conversations with the world’s top business and management experts, hand-selected to help you unlock the best in those around you. We carefully curate this feed from across the HBR portfolio, aiming to help you unlock your next level of leadership.

I hope you enjoy the episode.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: Welcome to the HBR IdeaCast from Harvard Business Review. I’m Sarah Green Carmichael.

Launching a new initiative is one way a manager can make their mark in a new job – or show their value at a company they’ve been at for years.

So it makes sense that more and more managers across industries might be piling on more and more new projects.

The downside, though, is that more and more work gets saddled on middle managers and frontline employees. Workers are getting overwhelmed.

ROSE HOLLISTER: When you have large organizations and lots of different people wanting to make things happen, the ripple effect all the way down is where it simply becomes almost impossible to keep up. And with all good intentions – people want to support these initiatives, they are great ideas – there are simply too many to be able to support to the right level.

That’s Rose Hollister. She and Michael Watkins looked at how companies – like a Fortune 500 retailer – ultimately suffer from overloading their employees like this.

They are the co-authors of the HBR article “Too Many Projects,” and both consultants at Genesis Advisers. Rose and Michael, thanks for joining us today.

MICHAEL WATKINS: Great to be here.

ROSE HOLLISTER: Thank you, happy to be here.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: So has initiative overload always been a problem or are initiatives more popular now?

ROSE HOLLISTER: We think that initiative overload is becoming more of a problem. We think it’s been a problem, but we think it’s escalating, and we think it’s escalating for a few reasons. One, organizations over the last five to 10 years have gotten leaner and so they cut costs. Usually one of the main ways to do that is by cutting headcount. And then usually what doesn’t happen is that they don’t change the work or cut the work to fit the cut in people.

The other thing is that if you think about it, year after year, a department or a function wants to do something better; they want to launch something; so they start something new this year, something else next year and the following year and large departments might launch many initiatives and that happens over an entire organization. And then there are legacy initiatives that have been in place for a long time that maybe should be stopped but haven’t been.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: Is this just kind of like every executive has to have his initiatives that he’s running or she’s running?

MICHAEL WATKINS: This is a part of the problem and it’s not uncommon. A leader only has a couple of years in a role. They want to make a mark. One way to make a mark as to launch a signature initiative, right? And this is also a great example of what we call the “magnifier effect,” right, which is you may have executives, you know, individually launching a few initiatives, but then there’s some critical level at the organization – in this case, the store managers, where it all comes to a focal point and people literally get burned out by everything that’s kind of coming down towards them.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: It’s interesting because there are like, you know, mathematical equations that support that too, right? It’s like, if you look at a road, traffic’s flowing smoothly and then all of a sudden you just get a couple more cars on that road and the road can bear you have a traffic jam.

MICHAEL WATKINS: Exactly.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: Sounds like the same thing.

MICHAEL WATKINS: Very similar, but I think also just understand that those executives that you mentioned earlier that are launching those signature initiatives – that’s happening in all the departments. And they’re all trickling down, but where implementation needs to happen often is at focal points where, you know, it all kind of comes together. And so a couple of initiatives from each department can translate into a dozen right at the level of something like the store manager.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: So I just want to ask why simple sort of prioritizing techniques don’t seem to work here, because this is something where I know in my own career when I’ve felt overwhelmed, my boss said, “Well, I don’t expect you to keep every ball in the air, just the most important ones. And some things will drop and that’s fine. And these are your priorities. And just do them.” Why doesn’t that kind of conversation help?

ROSE HOLLISTER: I think the problem is, as Michael said, there are so many different functions or departments all with signature important initiatives. So if marketing has their initiatives for the year, if IT has theirs, if HR has theirs, if operations has theirs – and I could go on and on. In big organizations they might be doing multiple big initiatives. Well, they usually prioritize in silos and they say, “We’re going to do these five or these 10 or these 20.” Well, that happens in every single function and what usually does not happen, is a senior leadership team saying, “Let’s look at all of these. Let’s look across the enterprise.” What Michael and I would call a balcony view. Let’s get on the balcony. Let’s look. Let’s not just look at the dollars this will take. Let’s look at what the hours it will take for people to either learn this, support this, execute on this, sustain this.

That kind of inventory usually is not done. And somebody can juggle, but there are so many things coming at them that prioritizing isn’t enough at the team leader or employee level. That prioritizing has to happen, should be happening at the senior team level.

MICHAEL WATKINS: I love your example because you had a boss and you had a reasonable boss. And I want you to imagine you had three bosses, none of whom were reasonable, all shooting things at you – maybe with conflicting priorities. All asserting that it’s really important that you do this work today.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: Oh, that sounds like a nightmare!

MICHAEL WATKINS: Right, and that’s what really does it. It’s both the number of channels that things are coming out people through, combined with a really a lack of attentiveness to what people reasonably can accomplish.

ROSE HOLLISTER: Well, and just to build on what Michael said, that “reasonably accomplish” – depending on the culture, it might not be culturally okay to say we’re at our limits. And people fear saying I can’t do more or they’ve tried it and they haven’t gotten heard. And so I think there’s also a, “We can do this, let’s work harder, not more!” And well that only works when there’s a reasonable amount of things on the plate.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: So if senior executives are somewhat clueless to the havoc that they’re wreaking and people are either afraid to speak up or aren’t heard, then how do companies know if they’re creating this problem?

MICHAEL WATKINS: I think that’s a really big problem, which is often they don’t, right? This is something we call “impact blindness,” that basically senior management does not have sufficient visibility into the cumulative impact that the executive team is having on people at lower levels. Maybe they’re not paying attention, maybe they don’t want to pay attention, maybe they’ve got their own agendas they’re pursuing, but the net impact is they do not really have visibility into what they’re doing to the organization. And the organization will survive doing this for a while, and then the cracks will begin to start showing.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: When those cracks start to show, what do they look like? Is it decreased engagement? Is it turnover? What is it?

ROSE HOLLISTER: It’s decreased engagement. It’s turnover. It’s people leaving for other jobs. There was an SVP that we were in an interview with and he was a leader at a human resource consulting firm and he said, “I love this organization. I love the work. I love the team. The pace is unsustainable. If I stay here, I will have a heart attack.” And he left and he found another role.

I was just talking to one of my clients and they had gotten in their engagement survey, they had gotten scores about that work-life balance wasn’t where they wanted it to be. And as they unpacked that and said why – it wasn’t that managers weren’t flexible and weren’t saying, “Yes, take care of your home life, your children,” those things. It was that there were simply too many initiatives going on for people to be able to get it done in a reasonable amount of time.

MICHAEL WATKINS: I would add that this sort of thing can work okay when unemployment is high, right? And people are worried about their jobs and they’re worried about saying things. But when you start to get to a full employment situation and people have lots of opportunities, the real risk is you’re going to lose your best talent.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: And is that because the good people have more options or because the good people are the ones who tend to be the most overloaded with a million initiatives?

MICHAEL WATKINS: Yes, to both. Right? I think it’s both things. One is that they tend to bear the brunt, right – your high performer, you know, tends to get more loaded on them, right, which of course can generate some resentment because other players are not doing the job and they have options. And so they look for places that are going to appreciate them and modulate the workload better than where they are.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: How do companies usually try to solve this problem and does that work?

ROSE HOLLISTER: Well, typically, first of all, they say “By function, let’s go prioritize.” And so the marketing department says, “Okay, here’s what’s top for us, here’s what we’re doing, let us lead on our initiatives,” and that happens across every other function – whether that’s finance, whether that’s IT. That typically doesn’t work because there’s not an understanding of the impact.

Now there was someone that we know that looked at his organization and realized this was an issue and he asked every senior leader of this organization – the C-suite – to come to a three day meeting and as their homework, they had to bring every initiative that was happening under their oversight: What was the business case for it? What was it taking in people time? And then how did it meet two screens – one, to support the building of the business, the growth of the business, and second to support customer satisfaction?

Now that C-suite took three days, they looked at every single initiative, and as a group they said, “We won’t do this, we won’t do this, we won’t do this.” Then they reallocated resources from the things that they weren’t doing to the key initiatives. But at the end of the day, they significantly decreased the number of initiatives across the enterprise. When someone does that, the whole organization wins and the business results gave proof to this because looking down the road, customer service scores did go up, the business did grow and people looked back on that three day retreat as a turning point in the organization.

MICHAEL WATKINS: Yeah. I would add a couple things to that, too. That’s potentially a highly conflictual process. Right? That’s a really difficult process of making tradeoffs between people that really want to drive certain things in their organizations. Second thing is you’ve got to be very careful about interdependencies between things, right? You can stop this and it turns out it really impacts that – and so you’ve got to be willing to think through those interdependencies. And then, you know, once you’ve decided to kill something, you actually have to kill it. I mean we see these Zombie initiatives, right, that they sort of rise from the dead because they’ve got an agenda associated with them and people find little hidden pockets of resource or think they do to try and pursue them.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: So usually when projects don’t die or stay dead, leaders get blamed by employees and employees who feel kind of disgruntled and kind of like, “Ugh, like, you know, management never kills any these projects,” but I know that from talking to leaders, leaders feel like employees won’t stop doing the work. I mean – it’s sort of each side kind of blames the other camp.

MICHAEL WATKINS: Yeah. I’ve been doing some work with a big pharma company – R&D. And I think I’ve seen this very much happened because people get very identified with projects, right? They begin to think their employment may depend on certain projects being pursued or they really strongly believe that this particular drug is going to change the world. And so there’s resistance to this notion that we’re actually going to kill something. Prioritization – really prioritizing and really making it stick – that’s really hard.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: So as a leader, how can you deliver that message convincingly and compassionately?

ROSE HOLLISTER: I think part of this, and one of the things that we find is there needs to be better dialogue going both ways. There needs to be an understanding from the people who are being asked to execute on this initiative, what’s the true impact? Or if we’re stopping it, are there pieces of this that are related somewhere else? Because in big organizations, as Michael said, there are so many interdependencies that stopping something – maybe you can stop 85 percent, but maybe another department is depending on this 15 percent. And so part of this is more robust conversations about what will it mean to stop? What’s the impact on the organization? If we stop and what’s the plan to stop it?

MICHAEL WATKINS: You need to recognize that really doing this kind of privatization and winnowing across an organization is a kind of change management exercise. And change management exercises tend to work best when you start with the why: Why are we doing this? What are the benefits, right? Rather than just jumping straight to the “what” or the “how”?

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: So clearly it would be better to prevent this problem from occurring. What are some of the questions that leaders should be asking before launching initiatives to avoid this kind of thing?

ROSE HOLLISTER: I think the example for me would be if I just say “I’m going to buy a car” and I budgeted for my car. Well I go and buy that car, but if I can’t afford the gas, if I can’t afford the maintenance and the insurance, I can’t really afford the car. Well, I think for a lot of initiatives we get the initial funding, but we don’t understand all the peripheral things that are needed in order to support it for the long-term. So it’s understanding will this initiative truly solve the problem? Did we do enough homework to understand whether this isn’t just a Band-aid but it’s actually the right answer, and then if it is the right answer, have we truly looked at the costs, and does it make sense – with all the other things in the organization – is this truly one of the priorities? One of the quotes we really like is from Steve Jobs that says that we all need to get better at saying “no” to hundreds of really good ideas.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: What about the sort of – I think of it as the closet cleaning approach, where for every new piece of clothing you buy you have to donate an old piece of clothing or give it away. I mean, can you take the same approach with initiatives or is that just too rigid?

ROSE HOLLISTER: It might be like, let’s say that I buy a wool coat, but I give away a pair of socks. So they’re not quite equal. So I think that where it’s a nice idea to add an initiative, take one away. I think it’s about how, what will it take for the organization to support this initiative?

I used to, when I was running the team at Mcdonald’s, I used to ask my team about once a quarter: “What are we doing that we could stop doing and no one would notice?” We also one year took the time to say for everything that we’re delivering, what does it take in time to deliver it? And we got a really amazing sense of if we were doing a high potential officer program, what did it take us in hours to support that. And we did that across every single program we ran.

And then when we sat down to plan for the following year, I had all these great ideas. I wanted to start this. I wanted to start this. I wanted to do this. And my team who had been working with me tracking it said “We have 15 percent free time. That’s all. So if you want to start these things, are we going to get other resources? Are we going to stop doing some other things?” We had done our homework to truly know what it took to deliver. Most times we’re all just working so hard, we don’t really know what it takes to make something happen.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: If you’re talking to people at the C-suite level, what’s sort of the most important thing you’d want them to take away when they’re thinking about initiatives in their company, either starting new ones are finding ways to cut back?

ROSE HOLLISTER: I would really encourage the C-suite to get an inventory to truly understand across the enterprise what are the projects – the initiatives – that are currently in place, and then what I see pretty much every year with a budget process is new initiatives are added to that. So before any of those things are funded for the C-suite team to take enough time to say what are we already doing? What of those things do we keep, and then what do we add?

MICHAEL WATKINS: As you’re thinking about doing an inventory and looking at what your organization is doing as a senior executive team, don’t just look top down. Start at the base layer of your leadership and management, the people managing your frontline contributors, and take a very hard look at what’s happening there.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: Once you’ve done the inventory, what does success with initiatives look like?

MICHAEL WATKINS: Yeah, I think it’s an important point, right? Which is that success in doing this doesn’t just mean that you’re sort of funding what you’re doing better. It also means you can do things that really are going to contribute, you know, powerfully to what is going to drive the business forward. So there’s a combination of benefits here. I mean sometimes you’ll see as a part of doing this exercise that there’s this little jewel of initiative that really isn’t getting the support it needs, right? And okay, we’re gonna put some resource into that. Sometimes it’s: This thing is a dog, right? We’re gonna kill it and we’re going to make sure it stays dead and sometimes it’s a, “Hey, this means we can do this. We can pursue something that’s really pretty exciting.”

ROSE HOLLISTER: I think what we find is that when companies do fewer initiatives, the most important ones finally get the support they need because people have the time, they have the focus, they have the energy to really move that initiative forward. The fewer they’re doing, they’re doing those fewer much better, and so instead of every initiative getting to move things to steps, one or two big initiatives can move things significantly farther forward.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: We’ve talked a lot about handling initiatives that are kind of pushed down onto you, but I’m also wondering about the way that sometimes managers reach out and grab initiatives that maybe they shouldn’t. It has happened where sometimes managers will say, “Oh gosh, my team needs a piece of that project, or my team needs a seat at that table” and suddenly you’re contributing to initiative overload even though you know it’s a problem, so how can you resist that urge to kind of horn in to a project where you feel like maybe you should have a seat at that table even if you don’t have time?

MICHAEL WATKINS: Yeah. There’s a question of managerial maturity here, and unfortunately not all managers are mature, right? They’re not able to distinguish between those things that they should be doing – or more importantly committing their people to be doing because that’s often where the cost rests – as opposed to what are all of the lovely little pies I’d love to have my fingers in.

ROSE HOLLISTER: In some ways I believe this is at the heart of it: We all want to be involved. We all want to be well-thought of. We all want to be showing that we’re making progress and improvements and making things happen and we have limits. And so I think that’s the challenge here is: “What’s the highest and best use of my time? Yes, I’d love to weigh in on that project. With everything else we’re being asked to deliver, can we?” Sometimes the organization is pushing us to do it, sometimes we are part of the problem because we want to be in there and we put ourselves forth for volunteering for this or being a part of this and we’re the ones that sometimes cause our individual initiative overload.

SARAH GREEN CARMICHAEL: So if you’re just a middle manager or individual employee, is it realistic that there’s something you could do to fight initiative overload at your company?

ROSE HOLLISTER: I’d say start with your own area and look at: “What do we have on our plates? And then be realistic with what does it take, not to just support our own initiatives, but what are our interdependencies and then working to say, “What can we limit? Can we get additional resources? Are there things we can stop doing? Can we move the calendar out? So, when I think about this as a middle manager, what I really think about is that locus of control. What does that middle manager, what are they able to impact? What are they able to influence? Because they can start with their area.

Part of this is also making sure that they’ve had the conversations. I worked with somebody for years who was very well-thought of and people kept saying, “Give him this new responsibility, give him this new area.” And this came up year after year and his response was always, “I will take that on when I get the resources,” and as an employee I was like, “Can we say no? Is that okay? I felt bad. I thought, oh, we’ll figure it out.”

But what I realized is that his answer was the right answer, not just for our function but for the organization.

ALISON BEARD: HBR On Leadership will be back next Wednesday with another hand-picked conversation from Harvard Business Review.

This episode was produced by Mary Dooe. On Leadership’s team includes Maureen Hoch, Rob Eckhardt, Erica Truxler, and Ian Fox.

If this episode helped you, please share it with your friends and colleagues, and follow the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts. While you’re there, consider leaving us a review.

When you’re ready for more podcasts, articles, case studies, books, and videos with the world’s top business and management experts, find it all at HBR.org.

2 Monster Stocks to Hold for the Next 10 Years


When the discussion turns to “monster stocks” that have done extremely well from the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI), many investors’ first thoughts turn to chip companies like Nvidia. If they expand their notions of stocks expected to be AI beneficiaries, the thoughts might include memory storage companies (i.e., data centers). Further expansion might eventually lead to the realization that the companies that could deliver some of the biggest gains from AI over the next several years aren’t even from the tech sector. Rather, the biggest beneficiaries might just be the energy companies uniquely positioned to serve the growing power needs of data centers.

Two energy companies experiencing AI tailwinds you might want to consider buying and holding for the long term are Bloom Energy (BE +9.93%) and Vistra (VST +1.90%).

Image source: Getty Images.

1. Bloom Energy: Quick launches, constant power

Bloom is carving out a role as an on-site infrastructure provider with its solid oxide fuel cells. These cells convert fuel into electricity in a highly efficient and relatively clean way that also provides consistent power, and Bloom’s energy servers can be up and running in 90 days.

Bloom initiated a contract in July 2025 to provide its fuel cells onsite to power to select Oracle data centers. It also expanded an agreement with Equinix in 2025 to help power its data centers.

As it ramps up production, the company is unprofitable, but revenue is growing steadily. Bloom reported $2 billion in revenue in 2025, a roughly 37% increase from the previous year. It’s also showing that the demand for its cells is persistent. At the end of 2025, Bloom finished with a product order backlog of $6 billion.

Bloom Energy Stock Quote

Today’s Change

(9.93%) $13.49

Current Price

$149.40

For this stock to work out for long-term investors, Bloom will need to show it can convert its backlog into revenue, then turn growing revenue into eventual profits. The forward price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio is a steep 94.3, and the beta is 3.1, meaning the stock price is more than three times as volatile as the broader market. That means this is an investment only the most aggressive long-term buyers should consider.

Investors who believe in Bloom’s long-term potential could consider dollar-cost averaging (DCA) — buying a set number of shares or investing a fixed dollar amount on a set schedule. That helps offset some of the worry about buying a large number of shares all at once and watching the price swing lower, as using DCA can help lower your average cost per share over time.

2. Vistra: The transition from a utility to a high-growth opportunity

Vistra operates a diversified energy generation fleet, including natural gas, nuclear, coal, solar, and battery storage that serves residential, commercial, and industrial clients. Over recent years, the narrative around the company has shifted from a traditional utility to a high-growth opportunity, as it has tapped more into servicing AI demand.

As two examples, it has an agreement with Meta Platforms to support its energy needs through nuclear power plants. It also has an agreement with Amazon to supply Amazon Web Services with nuclear power.

Vistra Stock Quote

Today’s Change

(1.90%) $2.92

Current Price

$156.60

To further its capabilities to meet energy-driven demand, pending regulatory approvals, Vistra has a definitive agreement to acquire the utility company Cogentrix Energy for $4 billion. If the acquisition closes, it will add 10 natural gas facilities to Vistra’s operations.

Shifting into the narrative of being a potential growth stock also means Vistra will have higher expectations to clear. The stock price is up 54% over the last year, but it has been on a noticeable downward dip since its Q4 2025 earnings report largely seemed to underwhelm investors after its release in late February.

The forward P/E ratio is 16.8, so its next quarterly report will be important to show it can justify its valuation, as well as the narrative that it truly is more than a traditional utility provider.

A bonus worth mentioning on Vistra is that it offers a dividend payout. The yield of 0.6% is not significant for those primarily seeking income generation, but Vistra is still paying shareholders as its growth story continues to take shape.

Gold & Crypto Analysis – Live || 13 March || Trade Time with Pranjal – Pranjal Singh



✅ XM-
(Partner code – Pranjal )
———————————————————
⚡ Join My Only Official Telegram Groups:
🔹 🟢Free Telegram Channel link –
———————————————————-

Gold & Crypto Analysis – Live || 13 March || Trade Time with Pranjal – Pranjal Singh

———————————————————–
✅ Message Me At Telegram – +91 6393537648
or Telegram I’d – @Pakkibhai007
———————————————————————————————————————
—————————–

🚀🚀 Open account By given Link And Get Access Of VIP Group And PSC Course

✅ XM-
( Partner code – Pranjal )

✅Vantage –
( Partner code – Pranjal )
🚀 Top Recommended Brokers:
Best For Indian User-
✅ Delta Exchange India – Secure & Reliable FIU 👉

—————————-
💰 Best Indian Broker:
✅ Dhan – Trade Smart with India’s Top Broker 👉
—————————–
⚡ Join My Only Official Telegram Groups:
🔹 🟢Free Telegram Channel link –
🔹 🟢Free Gold And Crypto Telegram Group –
—————————–
📢 Stay Connected on My Verified Social Media:

——————————————————————————
📢 ⚠️ Important Disclaimers:
📌 I am not a SEBI registered advisor. This video is intended strictly for educational purposes. We aim to explore and understand subjects related to the Stock Market, Cryptocurrency, Futures & Options—covering instruments such as Nifty, Bank Nifty, and individual stocks.
We do not offer any buy or sell recommendations in this video. All content is purely informational and should not be considered financial advice.
Trade Time With Pranjal will not be responsible for any profit or loss, whether direct or indirect, arising from the information shared in this video.
According to FEMA regulations, it is illegal to trade in currency pairs that do not include INR or to use brokers not registered with Indian authorities.
Investing and trading in the stock market or cryptocurrency involves significant risk. Always conduct your own research or consult a certified financial advisor before making any financial decisions.
All content on this channel is produced with the sole intention of education and awareness.
Note: Some links in the video description or pinned comment may be affiliate links. Using them may earn me a small commission at no additional cost to you. This helps support the channel and its future content.
Legal Note for Indian Viewers:
This video is accessible globally. .

🔔 Like, Share & Subscribe for More Trading Insights! 🔔

Gold & Crypto Analysis – Live || 11 March || Trade Time with Pranjal – Pranjal Singh
#goldtrading #cryptotrading #bitcoin #cryptotrading #livebitcointrading #livecryptotrading #goldtrading #bitcointrading #tradingtechstreet #tradingtechstreetlive #livetrading
———–

source

New Data: Colleges Now Discount Tuition 56% on Average — A Record High


Key Points

  • Only about 12% of college students pay full sticker price. The share paying the advertised rate has been shrinking for 25 years and hit new lows in the 2024-25 academic year.
  • Roughly one in four students pays nothing in tuition after grants and scholarships. At community colleges, that figure is closer to 40%, and full-time community college students have received enough average grant aid to cover tuition since 2009.
  • Despite widespread discounting, most families still pay $25,000 to $100,000 out of pocket over the life of a degree when room, board, fees, and living costs are included — meaning tuition discounts alone do not tell the full story of college affordability.

The sticker price at some private colleges now tops $70,000 a year. At public universities, the published rate for in-state students averages nearly $12,000. But federal data and institutional reporting tell a consistent story: the vast majority of students are not writing checks for those amounts.

The frustrating part is that most of this discounting is done in secret – via individual financial aid awards. That makes price transparency difficult – and many families get stuck on the headline numbers. 

According to the most recent data, only about one in eight undergraduates pay the full advertised price. This aligns with The College Investor’s recent study of what families actually pay for college out of pocket.

Nearly everyone else receives a discount — and for a growing share, tuition is covered entirely.

Donut chart showing what college students actually pay vs. sticker price — 28% pay $0 tuition, 22% pay 1–25%, 28% pay 26–75%, 10% pay 76–99%, and only 12% pay full sticker price, based on NACUBO and College Board 2024–25 data. Source: The College Investor

Would you like to save this?

We’ll email this article to you, so you can come back to it later!

Actual Numbers Of How Many Families Get Scholarships That Discount The Costs

At private nonprofit colleges, the gap between sticker price and what students pay has never been wider.

NACUBO’s 2024 Tuition Discounting Study, found that the average discount rate reached 56.3% for full-time undergraduates in the 2024-25 academic year — a record high. That means for every dollar of published tuition, these schools returned roughly 56 cents in institutional gift aid.

In other words, if a school published a tuition rate of $50,000 per year, the actual tuition cost out of pocket would only be $21,850. Nearly 90% of incoming freshmen received some form of institutional discount.

Public four-year universities show a similar pattern, though the mechanics differ. The College Board reports that average net tuition and fees for first-time, full-time in-state students at public four-year schools fell to an estimated $2,300 for 2025-26 — compared to a published sticker price of $11,950. That is an effective discount of more than 80% on tuition alone

Community colleges stand out even more. Full-time students at two-year public institutions have been receiving enough average grant aid to fully cover tuition and fees since the 2009-10 academic year, according to the College Board. 

With more than 30 states now operating some form of free community college program, that number makes sense.

Very Few Families Pay Full Sticker Price

Brookings Institution research by economist Phillip Levine found that only 26% of in-state public college students and 16% of private nonprofit students paid the full sticker price in the 2019-20 academic year. 

Both figures have dropped sharply over time: down from 53% and 29% respectively in 1995-96.

Even among higher-income families who do not qualify for need-based aid, the share paying full price has fallen significantly. 

At public institutions, 79% of higher-income students paid sticker price in 1995-96, but by 2019-20, that had dropped to 47%. At private schools, the decline was steeper: from 64% to 28%.

The growth of merit-based aid explains much of this shift. Colleges increasingly use institutional scholarships to attract students regardless of financial need, making discounts available across the income spectrum. 

The result: the sticker price is becoming an unreliable indicator of what college actually costs for almost everyone.

Trying To View The Full Picture: What Families Actually Pay

Tuition discounts are real, but they don’t tell the whole story of college affordability. As we reported in our analysis of what families really pay for college out of pocket, most households end up spending between $25,000 and $100,000 over the course of a degree once room, board, fees, transportation, and other living costs are factored in.

Only about 1.35% of bachelor’s degree students receive grants and scholarships that fully cover the entire cost of attendance, according to the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study.

In other words, a student who pays zero in tuition may still face tens of thousands of dollars in housing, meal plan, and living expenses that are not covered by grants. 

This gap between “tuition is free” and “college is free” is where many families get caught off guard. A $0 tuition bill at a state university still comes with a $10,000-$15,000 annual tab for housing and food alone.

This is also where families can get themselves in financial trouble, and need to separate out the value of the degree vs. the value of the experience. 

Sticker Shock Deters Families From Even Applying

If most students are not paying sticker price, why does it matter? Because the published number still shapes decisions. Research consistently shows that lower-income students are more likely to rule out schools based on the advertised price without investigating the net cost.

A 2025 EducationDynamics survey (PDF File) found that 46% of students considered tuition cost the most important factor in their college decision, yet fewer than half found it easy to locate actual pricing information on college websites.

Some colleges have responded with “tuition resets,” dropping published prices closer to what students actually pay. Others have expanded net price calculators and financial aid messaging. But the broader system still relies on a high-sticker, high-discount model that rewards families who know how to navigate it and penalizes those who don’t.

What Families Should Do

Never eliminate a school based on sticker price alone. The published cost is the ceiling, not the floor. Run the school’s net price calculator before making any assumptions about affordability.

File the FAFSA regardless of income. Merit aid, state grants, and institutional discounts often require a FAFSA on file. Skipping it can cost you money you would have qualified for.

Budget for the full cost of attendance, not just tuition. Room, board, and living expenses routinely add $10,000-$20,000 per year on top of tuition. A school with free tuition is not the same as a school with free college.

Compare net prices across school types. A private school with a $45,000 sticker price and a 56% discount may cost the same as a public school at full in-state rates. Use tools like TuitionFit to compare your financial aid award and see how it compares to others.

Consider the community college pathway. With 30+ states offering free tuition programs, starting at a community college and transferring can cut total degree costs nearly in half.

Don’t Miss These Other Stories:

@media (min-width: 300px){[data-css=”tve-u-19d3b2c6b8a”].tcb-post-list #post-22108 [data-css=”tve-u-19d3b2c6b90″]{background-image: url(“https://thecollegeinvestor.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/What_Are_Private_Non-Profit_Student_Loan_Providers_1280x720-150×150.jpeg”) !important;}}

10 Best Private Student Loan Lenders For College

10 Best Private Student Loan Lenders For College
@media (min-width: 300px){[data-css=”tve-u-19d3b2c6b8a”].tcb-post-list #post-21877 [data-css=”tve-u-19d3b2c6b90″]{background-image: url(“https://thecollegeinvestor.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Average_Cost_Of_College_1280x720-150×150.png”) !important;}}

How To Pay For College: The Best Order Of Operations

How To Pay For College: The Best Order Of Operations

Editor: Colin Graves

The post New Data: Colleges Now Discount Tuition 56% on Average — A Record High appeared first on The College Investor.