Inversion. They would operate as a standalone brand. Two points on the burger king deal, even though it is an inversion, this deal likely a little bit more like a real deal in terms of strategic merit, both in terms that 50 of the company would be based in canada. There are reasons to keep it there, but more importantly from a 3g perspective, the guys that own burger king, we saw what they have done with inbev and heinz. This is sort of their approach at taking a Restaurant Company and using it as a platform to buy a lot more. I would argue to everybody that this is just the beginning. We should see the transaction cross the tape later this week, probably tuesday more likely wednesday. Well talk more about that in a moment, but for now well send it over to michelle. Im dying to talk burgers and donuts. I think it has more to do with fries. They finally said, you know what . The fry situation, the fry problem was too big for us at burger king. Youre right. Tim hortons has a track record
For five straight weeks, gentlemen are yet according to a terrific piece in New York Times far few americans own stocks these days. Given the amazing run, you have to ask yourself, why did people leave the market in droves. Could it be people who dont know they own stocks and just have forgotten about them . Or is it people who stopped listening to all the incredibly smart commentators we hear, read and watch, who have endlessly told us that we should be fearful, that we should be cautious, that we should counter one foot out of the door at all times, or that were in big trouble, because all of our gains had to be wiped away, at some point we just dont know when. As i study the output over the weekend andal day today, i saul the you are negative themes that have kept people out of the this amazing move. It was a pretty horrific, frankly reality check that jibes exactly with what the New York Times piece said about the vanishes u. S. Investors. May i sigh fruitless debate over when the