Apple's and Meta's Robotics Ambitions

In this podcast, Motley Fool analyst Jason Moser and host Ricky Mulvey discuss:

• Apple's and Meta's robotics ambitions.
• The latest earnings report from payments company Adyen.
• What Berkshire Hathaway is buying and selling

Then, Motley Fool host Alison Southwick and personal finance expert Robert Brokamp answer listener questions about saving for kids, how inflation affects financial ratios, and starting a 401(k) plan at your workplace.

Start Your Mornings Smarter! Wake up with Breakfast news in your inbox every market day. Sign Up For Free »

To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool's free podcasts, check out our podcast center. To get started investing, check out our beginner's guide to investing in stocks. When you're ready to invest, check out this top 10 list of stocks to buy.

A full transcript follows the video.

Don’t miss this second chance at a potentially lucrative opportunity

Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you’ll want to hear this.

On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a “Double Down” stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you’re worried you’ve already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it’s too late. And the numbers speak for themselves:

• Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you’d have $348,579!*
• Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you’d have $46,554!*
• Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you’d have $540,990!*

Right now, we’re issuing “Double Down” alerts for three incredible companies, and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.

Learn more »

*Stock Advisor returns as of February 24, 2025

This video was recorded on Feb. 18, 2025

Ricky Mulvey: Buffet's throwing a barbecue. You're listening to Motley Fool Money. I'm Ricky Mulvey joined today by Jason Moser. Jason, how is your long weekend, man?

Jason Moser: Ricky, you had me at barbecue, man. The weekend was great. It was Valentine's Day Friday, which is really nice. Happy Valentine's Day, everybody. Ricky, I hope you had a great one, too. Dan. You as well? It's nice. We're trekking through the winter here in Northern Virginia.

Ricky Mulvey: We're getting those nine degree days out here in Colorado. Having a podcast to keep me busy ain't so bad. Let's get into this Apple stuff because tomorrow, Apple is set to announce a new device. They haven't said what it is yet, but a lot of observers, including Bloomberg's Mark German, believe it to be a lower cost iPhone. The iPhone SE, which according to German's reporting, "We'll have the company's first in house cellular modem chip, the A18 processor and Apple Intelligence, the home button will be replaced by Face ID in a USBC connector supplants the lightning port. Jason, anytime Apple is launching an iPhone, they need it to go well. What does Apple need from this launch tomorrow?

Jason Moser: I love all of the tech that you mentioned right there at the front. Because the meme that's out there I don't know if you've seen it and I'm sure most people have. It's the coffee mug, right, where the actual mug costs $500. But then the handle for the coffee mug costs an additional, I don't know, $1,000 or something like that. People are having a lot of fun with this one. We don't really know, but to me, what they need, honestly, they need something more than just a cheaper phone. They've been there and done that. Now, if this is the announcement that it is just a cheaper phone, I think it's going to be received with a collective sigh. That's not to say, I'm bearish on Apple.

I think Apple is an amazing company. I think what they've done has just been incredible. The technology they continue to produce is amazing. But I mean, this cheaper phone would rhyme with a lot of these other device launches, things like different size phones, different sized iPads, price points for everyone. It's just probably not as innovative as folks in the investing community might be looking for. But I guess we're going to have to wait and see.

Ricky Mulvey: That's why Apple is trying to figure out what's next as they look further out. You already know about the headset battle that they have with Meta. But Germans reporting that now the quieter competition is in robotics. Here's the two strategies as these companies go mono e mono, head to head. Meta's near term goal is to build basically the underlying software for robotics hardware makers. They want to be like the Android of your humanoid robots. Apple's trying a different tact because Jason, they like to keep everything in house. One of the ways they're going to do this for an at home robotics thing is I'm going to use my arm here, a tabletop device that's basically a robotic limb attached to an iPad.

What are your thoughts on these strategies? With the Apple one, I don't see how this tabletop device is solving a problem that really anyone has unless you're running around while you're on Zoom.

Jason Moser: I think that makes sense. It's in line with what Meta has been trying to do, particular you look at their AI strategy, for example, what they've been doing with their Llama models and whatnot. They're trying to kind of be the underlying software for people to create, whereas Apple operates in a little bit more of a walled garden, so to speak. The bigger opportunity here, a lot of this just reminds me of what Elon Musk said on Tesla's recent call here. He was talking about he thinks there's a path for Tesla to become worth more than the next top five companies combined. Now, he qualified that with saying, there's a very difficult path. It's not a done deal, but he could see it. But the key to that path was through autonomous vehicles and autonomous humanoid robots.

It doesn't surprise me to see Meta and Apple wanting to pivot in that same direction. Now, in regard to that Apple device, that robot iPad thing, I think you're right. I look at that and I think, This is really neat technology. It's amazing. Most of this technology, to me, it's all magic. It's just phenomenal but doesn't seem like it really solves a problem. It's like much of what they do these days, is just amazing technology, but it doesn't really solve a problem. It gives us a different way to do things, but that's not always necessarily so convenient. I think that's where Apple and others have been spinning their wheels for a bit. Now, on the flip side, I do think there are potential massive industrial applications here. I think about all of the work I've done over the past five or six years in regard to immersive technology, for example, and I think with immersive technology, a lot of the focus was on how is this going to impact the consumer us as the mass consumer. We're not quite there yet. The headset battles are still going on.

We're still trying to figure out exactly how we're supposed to use these things on a day to day basis, and the answer is not clear at all. But there are a lot of industrial implications that are already playing out right now. I think it's fair for investors to say, Look, there is a consumer side to this, but there's also an industrial side to this. Reminds me of the fire-foam that Amazon put out a while back. It seemed a dud from the get go, but you know they're going to learn some lessons from it. Maybe with Apple and this robot iPad device, maybe it's not something that really keys in on the mass consumer, but maybe they take some lessons from this, and it gives them some industrial opportunities that can make a difference down the road.

Ricky Mulvey: I think that's going to be the most clear with Meta, at least right now is they're looking into immersive tech, and a lot of investors have wondered, why are you spending so much on reality labs and studying how human hands move? They're spending billions of dollars on reality labs for this immersive tech for humans. But if you're studying it that closely, and then you can apply it to robotics, for the software, maybe eventually even the hardware of building humanoid robots, this might be the thing where ten years from now, Jason, we're looking at a case study of how a mistake became a billion dollar opportunity or whatever for Meta.

Jason Moser: I think that's a great point. There's no accident that all of these great companies are studying all of these phenomenal technologies. It's no accident that they're studying this stuff. You have to take that into consideration as well. There's something that will come from all of this. Granted, it might take a little time, but my suspicion is there will be some world changing stuff that eventually comes.

Ricky Mulvey: What's it going to take for you to get a humanoid robot in the Moser household? What's your bar for that?

Jason Moser: I don't even have a bar. I've thought about this before I love technology. Remember, I was one of the first to get an Alexa. I was just excited to see that technology, going back to that, what problem does it really solve? I just don't have any interest in some creepy robot skulking around my house at all hours, Ricky. I have a hard enough time trusting our cat isn't going to get off me in the middle of the night while I'm sleeping. Now, with that said, that's just me. I don't consider myself a proxy for what most people want. In fact, often I think I'm probably the opposite. But these are big ticket items, and I think that's something to keep in mind, as well.

Ricky Mulvey: You love cooking. Let's say there's something you don't love in the kitchen. Maybe it's peeling garlic. It gets stuck everywhere, as you're trying to chop it and mince it. You can outsource that now or soon to your humanoid robots showing up to your house.

Jason Moser: It's compelling.

Ricky Mulvey: Let's get into audience. We're coming off this wave of a big earnings week. Do you look at the war on cash? You think about payments companies and I wanted to look at a company that I own for selfish reasons, and that's Adyen, which is a behind the scenes payment processor for big companies. Think into it in Adobe. They're using audience technology to do their payment solutions. They report every half year is a European company. What they found is that revenue and processed volume grew by more than 20%. Adyen's investors sure were happy with these results. A lot happier than PayPal's investors were with PayPal's results. But as you dug into the earnings this morning, Jamo, what did you find?

Jason Moser: It seems to be on the right track in what is clearly a very competitive space. I like what Adyen does in focusing on trying to bring this singular solution to the payments industry. I like the fact that they focus on these big ticket customers because there's a lot of money that can be made there. Of course, you sacrifice a little bit there on pricing, but we'll have to see how that plays out. There's been a big question in regard to this company over the recent past years, just in regard to margins and intake rates. But I think the numbers, as you said, for the second half of 2024, very encouraging. Net revenue up 22% from a year ago, process volume up 22%. They noted that was actually 28% excluding a single large volume customer, but we're going to go with 22% Riky. Thought it was really great to see EBITA close to 570 million euros up 35% from a year ago. I thought this was, to me, what stood out, because this has been a big question over the last several quarters just in regard to that EBITA margin, EBITA margin came in there at 53%. That was compared to 48% from a year ago. Now, that was due to basically two things. We saw some strong top line growth with a scalable business, coupled with less hiring than they've seen in previous periods. They're becoming a little bit more efficient and they're making a little bit more with the money that they're making, which I think is encouraging.

Ricky Mulvey: There's one metric I want to get into because not all companies report this. I thought it was interesting to brag about this, Jason, but the shareholder letter is promoting that Adyen has a net promoter score of 66. Essentially, net promoter score is, how likely are you to recommend this business to a friend? If you think of companies like Amazon Prime, high net promoter score, or even Chewy, when they've reported that has been a pretty high net promoter score. Jason, 66, is that low? 66 seems low.

Jason Moser: [laughs] I know. Everybody asks, Is that good? Is that bad? It requires you to dig in there and understand a little bit about what the net promoter score actually is. To clarify, this net promoter score, the NPS, you're calculating this based on the answer to one key question, and it's using a 0-10 scale. How likely is it that you would recommend this particular brand to a friend or a colleague, and you can score it in one of three groups. Promoters are considered scoring 9-10, passives score 7-8, detractors score 0-6. Then ultimately the calculation is subtracting the percentage of detractors from the percentage of promoters, that ultimately yields the net promoter score. Now, that can range from a low and absolute low -100 to a perfect score of 100, which is really unheard of.

But I thought it was interesting to look this up the creators of the net promoter score, it's Bain & Company, and they suggest this framework where they say, a score above zero is good, a score above 20 is favorable, a score above 50 is excellent, and then a score above 80 is world class. We can see where Adyen is concerned. It seems like based on the numbers, they're not doing too bad.

Ricky Mulvey: We're going to negative 100. You think it'd be 0-100, but you start working in those negative numbers, it can get a little tricky, 66, it's actually good. Let's move on to our final story, which is another one from last week that we're picking up in this post President's Day, A segment. That's Berkshire. They released their buys and sells in the latest 13F statement. A closely watched SEC filing to see what Warren Buffett and his lieutenants Ted Wexler and Todd Combs are up to. Jason, this is what they're up to over the past quarter. They seem to be trimming, not seem to be. They are trimming their big banks holdings, Bank of America, Capital One, Citigroup. Meanwhile, looks like Buffett's throwing an outdoor barbecue. He's getting Domino's pizza. He's getting some beer with Constellation Brands, and what's a barbecue without a pool? He's grabbing some Pool Corp which does a lot of maintenance and services for pools. Let's start with the banks, though. What's going on with these banks numbers? Seems like Buffet's getting a little pessimistic on that.

Jason Moser: That could be the case. He's done very well with these holdings for the most part. I think that's something to keep in mind. This could be a testament that maybe they feel like the economy in the near term might be a little bit more challenged. The interest rate environment may be a little bit higher than perhaps they were thinking previously before. It's worth noting too. He's held Bank of America for some time, and has done very well with it. Trying to take some of those gains and be a little bit more productive with them makes a lot of sense. I wouldn't read too much into it, but, I mean, it is something to think about, for sure.

Ricky Mulvey: I want to look into these tea leaves. He wants to throw a party. He's doing pizza, beer, and pools. What's going on here?

Jason Moser: I love that. Pizza and beer, it's a great combo. I absolutely see the love for adding to Domino's. I mean, it's really a tremendous operator in its space. We know, obviously pizza. What Domino's does so well, they execute so well, not only on the delivery side but on the pickup side as well. Being an international business, I think, generally speaking, when you have that brand identity and you have the control over that company that they do, you can maintain some quality in regard to the end product, and that matters a lot.

In regard to Constellation, I think that really, to me, that strikes me as a big value play. Given how the company has performed over the last year or so when you look at the results, it's been very encouraging. They've been able to capitalize on Bud Lights misfortunes. Modelo Especial, has been performing very well. They noted they grew to pollutions there with that franchise over 3% last quarter, and it's upheld its position as the top share gainer in the US. Both companies pay very nice dividends, which I think is encouraging. Another interesting one it seems like a very Buffet-style investment. Hey, everybody loves Fools. It's big business. They're the leader in the space. The stock has had a very tough year, while it's worth noting, this is not one that lights the world on fire. A lot of the challenges we've seen have been in discretionary spend here recently, we'll just have to see how that plays out, but interesting picks.

Ricky Mulvey: For the stock investors looking at that, maybe looking to follow in Buffett's lead a little bit, are there any overall retail lessons for investors like you and me who are looking at what Berkshire is doing?

Jason Moser: For me, the perpetual lesson here is that it's always fascinating to see what smart and prudent investors are doing. But that doesn't mean you should necessarily be doing it too. There is a very big difference between what I'm personally trying to accomplish versus what they do. Of course, we're all trying to make money at the end of the day. But we're in very different boats, and we have very different goals. I think that's always just something to keep in mind is their actions, while interesting doesn't necessarily mean we need to mimic them because we need to take into consideration our ultimate goal as individual investors, as well.

Ricky Mulvey: Jason Moser, your actions always interesting to me. Thanks for being here. Appreciate your time and insight.

Jason Moser: Thank you.

Rick Engdahl: Schwab trading is now powered by Ameritrade to give you a new elevated trading experience tailor-made for trader minds. Go deeper with think or swim the powerful award-winning trading platforms now at Schwab. Unlock support from the Trade Desk, our team of passionate traders who live and breathe trading like you do and sharpen your skills with an expanding library of online education crafted for traders. All designed to help you trade brilliantly. Learn more at schwab.com/trading.

Ricky Mulvey: Up next, Alison Southwick and Robert Brokamp take on your questions about saving for kids and starting a 401k at your workplace.

Alison Southwick: Our first question comes from Vinny. Hi, Alison, and Bro. Thank you for your always excellent advice and perspective on preparing for retirement. Thanks, Vinny. Bro is going to take a victory lap. He's back. Vinny writes. My wife and I welcomed our first child and future Fool into our family over the weekend. Congrats, Vinny. That's awesome. We want to start investing on his behalf as soon as we can. We want to use the money for education and to set him up for the long term. You've covered at length the 529 and brokerage accounts options, but we have issues with all of them. We want to control our investments. We don't trust that the 529 funds converting to Roth IRA will stick. We don't want to give over control of a custodial account at 18 and would prefer if we could make the account tax-advantaged somehow. All that to say, we don't love our options. Can you please compare and contrast the plans and maybe jump into any plans, accounts that I'm missing here? Thanks.

Robert Brokamp: Well, Vinny first of all, congrats on the newborn child and the new adventure. It's going to be a lot of fun. Secondly, you say you want to use the money for education and to set your son up for the long term. Those are somewhat different goals, depending on how you define setting the kid up for the long term, but maybe we'll talk a little bit about that. Thirdly, frankly, none of these options are going to satisfy all your criteria. Let's just do a really quick lightning round of your options and the pros and cons, and you can decide which has the pros that most outweigh the cons for your situation. For saving for college, by far, the most popular option is the 529 plan. The pros, money grows tax-free, if used for qualified education accounts, very high contribution limits. It varies by state, but we're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars, possibly deduction on the state income tax return. If it's opened and owned by the parent or grandparent, it's considered their asset, not the kids, and that's beneficial when it comes to applying for financial aid and any unused money can be transferred to any other eligible relatives or to a Roth IRA if certain conditions are met.

Now, you say you don't think that's going to last. I've not heard that it's going to be eliminated, but sure, it could possibly happen, and you definitely do have to meet the criteria. The account has to be open for 15 years. You can't move over money. It's been contributed over the last five years. There are definitely a lot of rules around that. Now, there are really only two main cons to the 529, and that is you can only invest in mutual funds. If you love stocks, you can't do that. The investments can only be changed twice a year. If you're a long-term investor, it's no big deal, but you don't have a lot of flexibility. But if you don't like that or if you're looking for other options, another option is the Coverdale Education Savings Account. The pro of the Coverdale is that you can invest in stocks, and like the 529, the withdrawals are tax-free if you use for qualified education expenses.

The downside is very low annual contribution limit, just $2,000. Although there's still time to make a contribution for 2024, you have until April 15th. You can't contribute if you earn above a certain amount of money that starts to phase out at $95,000 for singles, 190,000 if you're married, though you can get around that by gifting the money to somebody else, and then they make the contribution. With the Coverdale, the money must be used by age 30. It can be transferred to another relative, not to a Roth IRA. Let's talk about some other options that you touched on, as well. You could open a brokerage account owned by the kid. This is an UTMA or an UGMA. The main advantage is there's some tax advantages. There's a certain level of interest in capital gains and investment income that is tax-free to kids or taxed at a low rate. The downside, as you touched on, is the kid does get control at the age of majority. It depends on your state, but eventually they do get it, and you have to hope that they're responsible with it. It is considered an asset of the kid, which will have a more harmful effect on financial aid eligibility when they go to college.

Now, you could instead have a brokerage account that's owned by the parents. That way, you maintain control, and then you just gift the investments to your son when you think he's ready, and you can do it all at once or just gradually over time. It's your asset of the parent, so it does not have as much of an effect on financial eligibility. The downside is you will owe all the taxes on the investment income, capital gains, or whatever else is going on in that account for as long as you own it. Then the last thing I will highlight is the Roth IRA. This is the thing like, if you really want to set your son up for being financially secure in the long run, do a Roth IRA. It grows tax-free if left alone until age 59.5. You can take some money tax and penalty-free out beforehand for qualified higher education expenses. You can always take out the contributions tax and penalty-free for any reason, and then the withdrawals for higher education expenses will be free of the 10% early distribution penalty.

The downside is the kid has to have earned income. Unless your newborn is already working, they're probably not earning money. There are people who try to get creative with this, so maybe they have a business. They take a picture of their kid. They put it on their business website, and then they pay their kid a modeling fee. There's all funny ways that people try to get around it, but they do have to have earned income. Like the regular brokerage account, it is their money so they can control at the age of majority. All this to say, there's no perfect solution, but it's also not an either or decision. You could choose two or three or more of these options, and regardless of which you choose, your son is very lucky that you and your spouse are already thinking about his financial future. Just know that everything that I discussed here is just the basics. To learn more about all these options, especially when it comes to paying for college, visit savingforcollege.com.

Alison Southwick: Our next question comes from Brett. My question is about valuations, the price-to-earnings ratio or PE to be specific. I read an article some years back about investors being price-anchored to PE when they first started investing. If you look back 100 years or so, you'll see spikes above 20 were rare until the '90s. From then on, PE ratios continue to climb steadily. My question is, can PE ratios be affected by inflation? Like every other good whose price climbs, why wouldn't valuations be more expensive over time? Does that correlation stick?

Robert Brokamp: Well, Brett, I would say that the E in the PE, the earnings are definitely affected by inflation. Earnings are profits. Profits are what you charge for revenue minus the cost of doing whatever you do to make a business. If inflation is higher, the inputs into your business are higher, which could reduce earnings. On the other hand, if a company can increase the prices above the rate of inflation, then earnings will benefit. But inflation doesn't really explain why people are willing to pay more for earnings over the past few decades, which is the P and the PE ratio. But there are a few theories for why over the last 20 or 30 years, PEs have risen. One is that it's because interest rates have been really low, which can be good for stocks because loans are cheaper to the business, and there's not as much competition from cash and bonds. Interest rates have gone up over the past year or so, but they're still very low compared to what they were in the '80s and '70s.

Another possible reason suggested by Wharton Professor Jeremy Siegel, is that investing is now easier and cheaper. You can invest with the click of a button and you don't have to work with a stock broker. Siegel says that commissions and bid-ask spreads used to reduce the returns as someone earned by 1-2% a year, whereas now transaction costs are virtually nothing, plus tax rates are lower now, so stocks deserve a higher premium, according to Siegel. Finally, there's just more demand for stocks, largely thanks to the popularization of 401ks and IRAs over the past 40 years. According to the Federal Reserve, less than 10% of households own stocks in the early 1980s compared to more than 50% today. There are plenty of possible reasons why PEs have mostly been higher in 2000, but it's not likely due to inflation.

Alison Southwick: Cat writes. Does a stock's price go down proportionately to cover a dividend payment, or is it just a reaction from the investing community?

Robert Brokamp: Well, I think the answer is both. The price does go down proportionally, but it's due to a reasonable price adjustment that is basically demanded by the investment community. When a company pays a dividend, it's essentially distributing one of its assets, in this case, cash. After the company distributes an asset worth millions of dollars, and in some case, hundreds of millions of dollars, the price of the stock should adjust because the company is no longer worth as much. Here's generally when you'll see it happen. When a company declares a dividend they will also declare a record date, which is when you have to be a shareholder of record to get the dividend. In most cases, the record date will also be the ex-dividend date, though sometimes ex-dividend date is a day before. You have to own the stock before the ex-dividend date to get the dividend.

That ex-dividend date is generally when you'll see most of the adjustment to the stock price because anyone who buys it on that date or later won't get the dividend. If the dividend is small, it may be hard to tell whether any of the price movements are due to payout or just regular market noise. But if it's a higher-yielding stock you're looking at or a higher-yielding fund, such as a bond fund, you'll see a much more noticeable price adjustment on that ex-dividend date.

Alison Southwick: Our next question comes from Jonathan. Hi, Alison and Bro. I've been a long time listener back when you had your own show. I even sent you a postcard at one point. Jonathan, I still have that postcard somewhere.

Robert Brokamp: I'm sure it is somewhere.

Alison Southwick: We have hundreds and hundreds of them from listeners. Thank you. Jonathan Writes, my mum passed away in 2023, and we, my sister and I sold her house in Arlington, Virginia in 2024. We hired a CPA to handle the taxes for the trust and the estate, and they told us that as the beneficiaries, we should expect to receive a K-1 form from both the estate and trust. What exactly is the K-1 form, and how will that affect my personal income taxes?

Robert Brokamp: There are a couple of versions of the K-1. A couple of those versions are for businesses, so that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about the K-1 that is specifically for estates and trusts. You can pull the form up on the Internet, and you'll see basically especially with the trust, you'll have a share of any of the income that is distributed by the trust. K-1 will say, how much of it is yours and how it should be categorized. If you look at the K-1 form, you'll see different lines for interest income, ordinary dividends, qualified dividend, short-term gains, long-term gains and then you basically take that information and put it on your income tax return when you file your taxes.

Generally speaking, there aren't that many taxes related to the estate because one of the jobs of an executor is to pay the estate's taxes before the money is distributed. But since your CPA said you might get something, keep an eye out for it. I would just say since you have any CPA, you might want to get help from that CPA to know where to enter the information on your tax return and if you use any tax prep software, you probably could do an online search for how they handle information you receive from a K-1.

Alison Southwick: The next question comes from Mason. My workplace, a nonprofit, does not offer a 401k. How have you seen workers effectively advocate for one? Who should I tell the director to go to in order to start one?

Robert Brokamp: I would say, the first thing to do is talk to the director about why they don't offer one. You want to understand what the limitation is. It might be just that they're not particularly savvy about investments or retirement or anything like that or benefits. A lot of small companies, a lot of small nonprofits are very good people who started their companies or nonprofits for good reasons, but they're actually not that aware of how to do all this. Just find out why they don't, and then explain why you want one. Why it's good for the organization. It's a retention tool. It keeps employees, attracts employees, and it's good for the director, too, if the director works for a nonprofit, and then knowing that criteria, maybe help doing some of the research.

Nonprofits are generally associated with 403(bs), but a few changes over the past couple of years have made it easier for nonprofits to have a 401k, so you don't have to limit yourself to the 403(b). If it comes down to cost and administrative overhead, perhaps the easiest choice might be what's called a non-ERISA 403(b). ERISA is E-R-I-S-A. It's referencing a law that was passed in 1974 that basically regulates retirement plans. By making it a non-ERISA 403(b) that'll be easier and cheaper to operate, but it has some drawbacks, such as there are not as much protections for the workers, and the employer can't offer a match, but it might be better than offering nothing.

Ricky Mulvey: If you've got a question for the show, email us at podcasts@fool.com. That is podcastswithinus@fool.com. As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about, and the Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against Snow Buyer Sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows Motley Fool editorial standards and are not approved by advertisers. The Motley Fool only picks products that would personally recommend to friends like you. I'm Ricky Mulvey. Thanks for listening. We'll be back tomorrow.

Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Charles Schwab is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Citigroup is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Bank of America is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool’s board of directors. Alison Southwick has positions in Amazon and Apple. Jason Moser has positions in Adobe, Amazon, Apple, Chewy, and PayPal. Rick Engdahl has positions in Adobe, Amazon, Apple, Berkshire Hathaway, Meta Platforms, and PayPal. Ricky Mulvey has positions in Adyen, Charles Schwab, Chewy, Meta Platforms, and PayPal. Robert Brokamp has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Adobe, Adyen, Amazon, Apple, Bank of America, Berkshire Hathaway, Chewy, Domino's Pizza, Meta Platforms, and PayPal. The Motley Fool recommends Charles Schwab and Constellation Brands and recommends the following options: long January 2027 $42.50 calls on PayPal, short March 2025 $80 calls on Charles Schwab, and short March 2025 $85 calls on PayPal. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.