Disney Needs TikTok Creators. But Who Gets Paid?

Sources

The Walt Disney Company, "The Walt Disney Company and TikTok Announce a First-of-its-Kind Global Short-Form Content-Sharing Deal," 5 August 2026https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/news/tiktok-content-sharing-deal/

TechCrunch, "Disney looks to TikTok creators to bring fan content to its short-form video feed," 5 August 2026https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/05/disney-looks-to-tiktok-creators-to-bring-fan-content-to-its-short-form-video-feed/

IAB, "U.S. Digital Video Ad Spend to Surpass $80B in 2026"https://www.iab.com/news/u-s-digital-video-ad-spend-to-surpass-80b-in-2026/

IAB, "Video Ad Spend Report 2026"https://www.iab.com/insights/video-ad-spend-report-2026/

JUVE Patent, "Munich Regional Court stops Suno using GEMA-protected music," 31 July 2026https://www.juve-patent.com/cases/munich-regional-court-stops-suno-using-gema-protected-music/

GEMA, "AI lawsuit" (case background and statements)https://www.gema.de/en/news/ai-and-music/ai-lawsuit

Chapters

00:00 This week in the creative economy

00:18 Disney opens its IP to TikTok creators

04:12 Who gets paid: platforms, creators, and the missing compensation

07:02 Social video overtakes connected TV in US ad spend

10:06 Why Nolan won't put brand messaging in his own show

14:20 Suno v. GEMA: a German court rules on AI training

15:19 Opt-out or opt-in? Who owns the default

16:46 Good Call, Bad Call: South Korea's artist basic income

20:47 The Ireland precedent and the economics of paying artists

22:24 US theaters: revenue up, tickets down

25:21 LVMH closes 84 stores

28:43 Trust has moved from brands to creators, and Rolex raises prices

32:34 The floor is yours: buy from real people

33:59 Where to find Nolan

Transcript

Yuri (00:00)

Disney is opening its world to TikTok creators. AI music is colliding with copyright. And for the first time, social video is overtaking connected TV in ad spending. This is Culturepreneur. Today my guest is Nolan Daniel White. Nolan, how are you?

Nolan (00:17)

Good, how are you?

Yuri (00:18)

I'm doing well. so today we're gonna go over a few topics, I guess the most recently news, the big news, is that Disney and TikTok are have announced a new content sharing partnership that gives select creators access to Disney IP. have you had the chance to kind of get caught up a little bit with this news?

Nolan (00:37)

Yeah, yeah, I'd read the article that you'd sent me. and I thought it was Interesting kind of reading this approach because obviously I think every everybody in the more traditional forms of media is looking for ways to incorporate short form content into what they do and into their platforms. everybody wants a piece of the pie, right? And I think it's common that we've seen platforms try and adopt whatever feature is hot, right? We saw Instagram do that with Snapchat with stories and then threads and like it's it's very commonplace nowadays. That platforms will look to other parts of the industry and try and incorporate whatever's working for them. And I think from a content series, I understand that motivation, but I don't know if I, and maybe it's because I'm not the target audience, but I don't know if I entirely understand the reasons or the motivation behind what they're doing. And I think it was interesting how in the article they also mentioned that other platforms like Tubi and like Peacock are more focused on taking the creative minds that are Being exposed through TikTok and Instagram reels and giving them the resources to make content on their platforms, right? Longer form content, whether it's a TV show or something like that. That to me makes more sense. because I don't think there's any shortage of demand for quality TV and movies, and I think the box office successes of movies like The Backrooms and Obsession are a great example of how the less typical less traditional platforms like YouTube and obviously now that we're seeing TikTok and Instagram are big hosts of talent and that I think if traditional media wants to keep their form factor alive but adapt to this new this new realm, it makes sense to put money behind those talents, not necessarily just give them access to what they already own, if you if you get what I'm saying.

Yuri (02:28)

Yeah, the first so when I saw the news, the first thing that came to mind was almost like, well, this seems to be like a backup plan for the fail of merging, not merging, but the partnership they were supposed to do with OpenAI that got canceled perhaps early in the year. And they decided, well, if we can have that, we will find a way to still have content being created for us. But then I look at the other side of the consumer and also the creator itself. Because if you are a subscriber for Disney Plus, do you want those verticals content showing up on your feed when you just kind of logging in just to watch your favorite show perhaps?

Nolan (03:05)

Yeah, on your TV or on your laptop. Yeah, that like that I don't know if I really understand and like I and again maybe it'll make more sense when we start to see this a little more, but personally I don't understand what kind of benefit this gives creators who can again if it's in the realm of like media commentary, you know, creators are already able to show clips and screenshots, like that's fair use, right? You're y it's not like someone's gonna get sued. By making a video talking about, you know, Moana or like whatever IP it is, right? Like, people are doing that already. whether it's and I also think knowing how protective Disney is over their IP, are they really going to give people the creative freedom to do what they want if th this is some kind of content that requires IP, right? and that I don't know. I think that's like a pretty common thing that you see and mi maybe some companies are learning, but there's I think not as there's typically not as much trust with this style of content creation from traditional forms of media because they don't understand it, they don't and a lot of them don't consider it to be a very legitimate form of media. Right?

Yuri (04:12)

Yeah, and it is in the early days, right? They said they're gonna put a pilot in place first and try it out. So I think that's an interesting thing. But what they did not disclaim, and perhaps something that we will find out later on, is how creators will be compensated for that. Because at the

Nolan (04:26)

Yeah, for sure.

Yuri (04:26)

end of the day, if you were someone out there, and I'm sure a lot of creators would be very excited to be able to work with some of their favorite characters and create content around that without any restriction. I mean, that would be restrictions, but without, you know, having to worry about too much. But at the end of the day, how that's gonna translate financially for them,

Nolan (04:44)

Yeah, that's that's something I've thought about too in terms of these platforms, right? Is like As time has gone on, platforms are compensating their creators less and less directly. as a Canadian, I've never received a dime for any of the content that I've made from the platform itself. I've you know, and I don't know what the numbers are, but like I'm you know, I've I've I'm sure I've generated a lot of value for TikTok and for Instagram in terms of the ability for them to run ads on my videos, right? Or write after my videos. and I don't see any compensation for that now, like even YouTube. is raising the bar right again. into what qualifies you as a monetizable creator. And I hope that we start to see that spend that pendulum start to swing back where platforms are going to have to incentivize high quality content creators to stay on their app as opposed to go to others. Obviously there's a bit of an oligopoly on the platform space right now where there's only there's really only three or four places where people consume the short form content. But as a content creator, you know. I have I would totally be willing to be like more exclusive on one platform, right? If it meant that I was going to see some actual compensation for the stuff that I put on there. because that generates value and I don't see I don't see any return for that I don't garner myself by third party partnerships and stuff like that. What I do hope we see is more traditional forms of media giving short form creators and grassroots creators more resources to be able to produce either short form or long form content, right? Like I think that's more interesting to To me personally, like access is access, but I think and again, like you said, it's it that's gonna depend a lot on how people are compensated and what this actually turns out. So it's we won't know till we see. But what I think is a more interesting trend is the fact that there are some studios and producers and production companies and streaming services who might start to give some money and some backing to these really talented short form creators to. build bigger stories and build out series and stuff like that, which is something I myself am doing self-funded right now, but I would love to be able to do it, you know, with someone else's money.

Yuri (07:02)

Good. Well, for those who are listening or watching us, let us know what you think. There's anything that we forgot about this conversation that we should mention it. A point of the deal with TikTok and Disney that you think is relevant for you, if you're a creator or you're a consumer, what you're worried about. Let us know what you think. and we would love to hear from you. Next, for the first time, The IAB is projecting the US digital video advertising to access eighty billion in 2026, with social video surpassing connected TV for the first time ever. I mean, that's big.

Nolan (07:33)

I mean yeah, I th I think it was inevitable. I think it's it's a new platform. you know, it happened to radio, you know, and then now it's happening with T V. I'll be interested to see what this 'cause there again there's always kind of these pendulum swings and platforms always develop, right? if you look at I think T V is a great example. I think we can learn a lot for from how V and TV programming change and I think it's gonna happen at a lot more of a rapid pace. But you know, the shows that first came out on TV and were very, you know, kind of like simple and episodic, and then you saw things evolve into variety shows, and then you saw an evolution into prestige TV and more drama and higher production value along with reality TV. Like there's all of these different things that kind of happen as a medium matures. And I think we're starting to see that with or we I think we've been seeing that happen with short form content where the first things that were really popular on TikTok were very simple, very rudimentary dance trends, right? And cute cat videos and you know, little jokey memes and stuff like that, but nothing of very big substance. And then now we're starting to see more and more of these individuals who are putting a lot more money and time into their into what they're creating in the production value, along with a lot more storytelling happening, a lot more political and social comment the content itself and the messages that are being delivered are I think a lot more sophisticated, and I think that is what is going to continue to drive the growth of this platform, and I think that we are maybe going to see a bit of a correction, maybe a bit of a two steps forward. Maybe we're in the two steps forward right now, and there will be a step back. Because I think I think a lot of people are a little a little tired and of being inundated with like algorithmic content and not having a lot of agency over what they see. And I think there's gonna be a little bit more I think people want more buy-in. I think people want to follow someone and then see their content, which doesn't happen right now. And that used to happen, right, on platforms like YouTube and Instagram. So I don't know, it'll be interesting to see, but yeah, it's I think there's still a lot of maturing for this platform th for short form video to do, both in the backend side in a business way and when it comes to what's actually being made.

Yuri (10:06)

for you, because I'm interested to hear your point of view. You have developed an entire new series that you said it. that your own show. When you're doing that, how are you creating opportunities for partners in advertising to team up with you and be part of the process?

Nolan (10:22)

I'll be honest I'm not right now. It's I This i the show is a passion project that I hope will reach a point where I can monetize it. but at the current moment it's it's it's R and D basically. You know? It's I'm able to make enough money off of my Substack and my short form content to fund the show. thankfully Canada is quite lucky in that we have a lot of government grants for film and TV and arts and culture, so my hope is that I'll be able to secure some funding through government grants. But besides that, I'm not really that interested in partnering with any companies unless they're willing to be a pure sponsor. You know, like in the in the true sense where companies will sponsor a five K or the ballet or something where they you know you get some visibility in terms of you know maybe being in the bottom right corner of the video. and saying this is brought to you by whoever it might be, right? But I'm not interested in including brand messaging in the show. and that is something that I think w may need to change in how we're currently operating, right? Because as we've seen With the breakdown of the traditional media model where you have a network and you have shows that exist on this network, but the network is handling all of the advertising. The people who were making the show didn't really have to consider, other than, you know, not obviously being too provocative or being or ups you know, upsetting anybody, they didn't have to consider the brand messaging of an advertiser because that would just come in breaks in between the show. And that's what YouTube still does. Does right? but unfortunately, unless you're a very successful YouTube creator, it's not super easy to monetize your content off of that. But the conveying of brand messaging has now fallen on the creators, and now it's up to them to try and work it into their content. And unfortunately, that corrupts the validity of content a lot of the times, especially depending on the subject matter of what you're making. But personally, I'm t I'm I'm doing the show on independent creators. Right, people who are who are and when I say creators I mean people who are making real things, people who make lamps, people who make furniture, people who you know, make eyewear, artisans, right? And to me it's very difficult to work that in w in the same breath, then promote, you know, a bank or Amazon or something like that, right? Th those are two very conflicting things. And normally you would be able to take this for example, right? Anthony Bourdain had his show and I'm sure in between you know, the in the ad breaks there might have been a Subway ad or a McDonald's ad or a Burger King ad, right? And nobody thought twice because that's the network doing that. And then Anthony Bourdain would go back to his show looking at local mom and pop restaurants, traveling around the world, meeting these people and sh and, you know, delivering this message that it's Food is made by real people, and then it's important that you support these independent restaurants, right? if Anthony Bourdain had to stop in the middle of his show and give a subway ad, that would completely corrupt the the message of his show, right? But because there was clearly some separation between what the network was doing and what he was doing, it allowed him to maintain the integrity of his programming. And that boundary has been dissolved. And I think that we and whether it's through the platforms, whether it's through agencies, I don't know what it is, but I think there needs to be a way for creators to receive some funding and some compensation for what they do because we want this type of programming and we want good programming that has integrity, but it also has to get paid for at the end of the day. which is a tough line to balance, right? But that was done in the past through that that boundary, that line being walked, that division between a network and its creators and the people making the programming.

Yuri (14:20)

Well, another story that kind of made headlights in the last f few days is the a German court recently ruled against Suno in a copyright case brought by Gema. whether generative AI companies should be able to train commercial models and copyrighted.

Nolan (14:37)

Yeah, yeah, I think I think it sets a good precedent and I hope that a lot of other courts follow in their footsteps, right? Because intellectual property laws are a very important foundation for what allows art to exist. And I think that in the same way that you can't just take someone's music and sample it and put it out and make money off of that, you shouldn't be able to train an AI off of it, right? Because if you're training an AI, it's using your creative output, it's using your brain power without your consent. and then using it to make money and potentially make something or contribute to something that you have no interest in your work contributing to. And that's that's a very important line that needs to be drawn in the sand.

Yuri (15:19)

they're trying to create an option that people can opt out.

Nolan (15:22)

I think it should be an opt-in, right? I don't think that the default should be these companies are able to license your music or use your music to train these things free will, unless you decide that they don't, right? The I think the onus should be on the company. to you know, reach out for that consent, you know, and p pay and pay for it if people decide that they want compensation for that, right?

Yuri (15:47)

now the thing is, do you feel perhaps creative if you they don't want to be left behind? Because if they're not participating in this conversation and AI is changing rapidly, there's so much going on that if you are not somehow Part of it, you're just gonna be left behind Do you think that's a a relatively real fear or we're not quite there yet?

Nolan (16:07)

Maybe for s maybe for some musicians, but the musicians I know in my life don't really seem that interested in it, or that worried about it because I think they're confident in their own ability to make music and that their audience has no interest in something that wasn't made by a human. And I think I think music is such a an important part of humanity. It's something that has always existed across cultures. And I think for example, like Taiga's new album that just got put out and received the first zero point zero on pitchfork is a pretty strong indicator of how people feel about AI music, right?

Yuri (16:46)

All right, so let's go ahead and move to this part of the segment that we call good call, bad call. So simply we're gonna read a couple of headlines and we're gonna try to see if we think this is a good call, what bad call? first is South Korea introduces a radical state back artist basic income model to secure stable environments for creative professionals. debate right now is this a brilliant move to protect the culture economy or a bad call that creates government dependency?

Nolan (17:19)

I think it's I think it's a great call. and my reasoning here is that Creativity and art exists in two different spheres. And typically it's been artists that perform both of these. So you have the creative sphere, creative sphere, and the commercial sphere, right? And a lot of times artists have kind of stood with one foot in either, but largely speaking, the commercial sphere is what funds the creative sphere, it funds their work, right? So this is you know a director getting hired to film a commercial for Dior. Sauvage, right? And the three million dollars they make off that allows them to make the film that they've always wanted to make, right? And that's their creative output. Or a musician making a song, they license it to PepsiCo for six years, it's their theme song, and they take all those royalties and they use that to make the album that they've always wanted to make, you know. and especially with the advent of AI, we're now seeing corporations. The reason why a lot of these AI music platforms. I think they are seeing success is not because people want to listen to AI music on in their free time and consume it as art. It's because corporations are looking for easier and cheaper ways to get music to include in their advertisements, in their marketing material. And the same thing is going for logo design and it's going for creative direction, it's going for photo shoots, right? There's photography as an art form, and then there's your e-commerce photos that you use for your products, right? And those are very expensive to produce, and you have to pay the licensing. for the models and you can usurp all of that with with the you know the use of AI and that's what these companies are doing. But And and that demand is now being met here, and you're now leaving a lot of creatives without an ability to fund their work. And all of that value, all of those dollars that were being circulated into a creative economy and funding creative work indirectly, that bridge is being broken and all of that money is being absorbed by technocrats and all of these AI companies. And as more and more people are displaced by AI, there needs to be some way for that value to be redirected to those people because otherwise they're going to be totally left behind and there will not be enough. Right? the advents of technology and AI, these are the results of not just a few individuals, but of the work of society in general, right? The the tax system that we all pay into that creates the infrastructure, the roads, the government funding for. Research that has all led to this is a collective effort. It was not, you know, Sam Altman did not single-handedly come up with open AI. He he and a small team, you know, coded it and did everything, or a medium-sized team, or whatever it was, but all of that was allowed to happen because of how we operate as a society and the fact that there are roads and there's Wi-Fi infrastructure and there's all this government research, and all of those people that are then displaced deserve to see some, you know, different. Dividends, I guess, from this technological evolution. All of the progress and all of the productivity gains should not be absorbed by the people who just have control over this means of technology. It should be, you know, distributed to the people who it displaced. And if we don't see that, then we're going to see an utter breakdown in creative output because these people are not going to have the time and money and resources to make beautiful art.

Yuri (20:47)

I agree with you. I and I also think that's a good call. I did a little bit of a digging and I was like trying to figure out what's the precedent that we have for this. And I believe South Korea is pulling same idea that Ireland created a few years ago, a

Nolan (21:02)

Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Yuri (21:03)

program very similar, that has proven to be successful. I believe every dollar they're investing they're getting a dollar and thirty back. So that's Significant. And that definitely came exactly. There's a good economic case for us.

Nolan (21:13)

Yeah, there's a good economic case for it. Yeah. Yeah. 'Cause these people will spend money, right?

Yuri (21:18)

Absolutely. That we invest, that we hired, they will find new material, they will innovate.

Nolan (21:23)

Exactly. if we look back at If you go to a museum, right, and you see all of the beautiful things that are there, the paintings, the vintage furniture that's been, you know, hand carved and inlaid and someone would have spent, you know, months or years on the single work, people forget that was the result of patronage, right? And it came from at the time it would have come from the nobility, the wealthy. There is the term noblesse oblige, right? the obligation of the nobility to contribute towards craft. and art and that's something that our current you know, largely the current technocratic class does not care about. You know, they're they're not interested largely in art. They they, you know, see it as it like an economic inefficiency. but the you know artists need to live and breathe and eat in order to do what they do. And as we get more productive, I think we should be making more room for that sort of thing, right? Rather than less.

Yuri (22:24)

100%. Well, let us know what you think. For those who are listening or watching us, we'd be curious to hear your thoughts. Okay, so next headline is the US theater attendancy is up 15% in revenue over last year. But ticket sales are down 27% compared to 2019. So theater owners are surviving largely by changing more for charging more for tickets and concessions. So the debate here is a good call for a short term survival or a bad call that risk pricing everyday families out of cinema?

Nolan (22:58)

Yeah, it's a good it's a good question. I don't know, it might just be a reflection in a change in how 'cause, you know, I think a lot of a lot of especially independent theater owners are they're at the whim of studios, right? And how long they want to do a theatrical release for. You're we're seeing more and more movies going straight to streaming. so I think theaters are becoming a little bit more of a novelty and maybe a little bit more of a luxury, but I think it's interesting I think I think it'll be really interesting to see what the And so, like good call, bad call, I I don't like the idea of people being priced out of things, so I would maybe say, like, in general, bad call, but also I know that there are independent theaters, there are a lot, you know, some around the corner for me that have to survive. so hard to say, maybe this is just what they have to do, but it'll be interesting to see what the impacts of the Odyssey are, because this is a an experience that people are seeking out in IMAX 70mm because it's something. that you can only get at the theater. And like there's right, there's a there's this aspect ratio and there's experience that will not be replicated at home. and I'm I wonder what that will do. I wonder what that will what the impact will be in terms of how movies are being made, right? And whether we're going to see more use of an X70 mil or other technologies that are, you know, that make the theater experience more immersive, right? And whether there's just gonna be more demand for that in general. I would rather it stay as accessible as possible. and I don't know, maybe there will be kind of a fork in the road, right, where we see more I'll be interested, there's a couple theaters around me that are that are operating on a subscription model. th some of the independent theaters that offer a an either a monthly or a yearly amount that you can pay and then you can see however many movies you want. and they're they're smaller, they're more independent, a little more More experimental. so they're they're usually showing you know, older movies or movies that have already been out. but it'll be interesting to see if that becomes a little bit more prominent, right? Where they can have some kind of secured guaranteed revenue. It's it's what we've been seeing even with like the ski resort business model, right, where they're trying to push more people to buy a season pass rather than rather than selling individual day tickets and making the day tickets more expensive, but then having the subscription be more affordable, it'll be It'll be interesting to see if that model becomes a little more popular with independent theaters who are looking to kind of guarantee some income in between kind of these bigger releases.

Yuri (25:21)

Next one is LVMH closed 84 stores. As it pushes for stronger productivity and tighter retail discipline while trying to return to growth? Is it shrinking the physical footprint a good call to protect margins and brand visibility, or a bad call that weakens visibility and long term customer acquisition?

Nolan (25:43)

I think in a broader sense, I th I just think that luxury's in a lot of trouble right now. and I think that's a good thing because I just think a lot of people are waking up to the fact that they've been sold a lie in terms of luxury goods, right? I think the excess cash that some people received in the pandemic, right, with s with stimulus checks in the US and Serb and Canada, and the lack of expenditures in other parts of their life allowed a lot more people to participate. participate in purchasing some of these aspirational goods that they maybe always wanted, and then all of a sudden they've spent, you know, five hundred dollars a month less on going out and received, you know, a thousand dollars or a couple thousand dollars from the government, and then all of a sudden they've got the money to buy that Louis Vuitton bag and they do. And I think a lot of these luxury retailers saw Amount of growth through the pandemic, and then afterwards, because of that, along with people who made a bunch of money off crypto or you know, participated in the stock market or whatever. I think there was there was a lot of you know people who had access to disposable income that they didn't have before and have participated in you know consuming luxury and have found themselves disappointed because that dopamine hit wears off, and a lot of times you're left with something that you realize isn't made particularly well. and I think that's the case i with a lot of these luxury brands now that they're reliant so heavily on brand perception, on their cachet, on the fact that they're associated with certain celebrities and certain you know pieces of the cultural zeitgeist and they have this hype behind them and they're coveted. But when the you actually look at the utility of the product, it doesn't really add much. and that's that's been a big focus of the show that I'm making right now, right? Is is kind of taking a step back and redefining what what is a nice thing, right? What are nice things? What what should if you have the money, what should you be spending Spending your money on if you want something nice, right? And I think people are beginning to re-evaluate what they consider worth it because it we've been very reliant on brands and brand perception, and we've trusted that. We've trusted the word of brands and their reputations. and those brands have in turn hollowed out the amount of money that they're spending on production, and they've lowered the quality and they've outsourced the things while increasing their prices at the same time. And I think you can only get away with that for so long before people start kind of looking inward and thinking, wow, is it is it really worth it for me to spend this amount of money on this handbag? Or should I get one that's made by the guy down the street from me that makes beautiful bags by hand at, you know, a similar higher quality right? So I think I think it's maybe just a result of luxury kind of Kind of seeing a contraction from its peak that we saw maybe a couple years ago.

Yuri (28:43)

Yeah, looking at it, I see it closing 84 stores. I see on the business point of view, because they are aware of this correction that you were talking about, that people are not spending or at least not really seeing luxury the same way, I think it's a good call. and it's unfortunate that it comes along with people losing their jobs and in things like that as well. And I want to touch based a little bit what you said about this correctioning and trust. Because I think a lot of this correction and luxury that people don't really trust anymore has a lot to do with it, even creators like you. They're really spending time showing people quality in different brands and different creators and crafting that you can achieve and find incredible around the world that you know is not some of the super well known brands. There are plenty of quality out there I was recently reading something that going back to the subject of trust, I believe, and again I'm paraphrasing here, I might have to be off of the numbers, but almost 70% of the audience trusts more a creators that they follow than a list celebrity, for example. So they're looking to folks like you for recommendations, for suggestions, for opinion, and taking your f your word for face value, So the trust is very much shifted that they're looking to people with knowledge, the understanding that it is speaking from a place of experience. instead of a place of just promotional or inspiration. I guess this is one could be related to you as well because I know you're a watch person. So Rolex raised retail prices again 7% this year, even as majority of its models now trade below retail price on the secondary market. I guess the conversation here is raising pricing a good call to protect prestige and Pricing power or a bad call when the resale market suggests demand is softening.

Nolan (30:36)

I think it's a bad call because I again, I think they're expecting this trend to continue, right? Where they've had this really strong aftermarket presence and a lot of the demanded, you know, for Rolex you know, in the twenty twenties has been by flippers and people who are buying it quote unquote as an investment, right? Or they're buying it with the expectation that this is going to not only hold its value but increase in value. And that might not necessarily be the case anymore, especially because they are making so many of these watches, right? and there's only so many people that can afford them. So I don't think I don't think it's a good call. I think they should be kind of focusing on satisfying the demand that's already there, right? and maybe, you know, if it were an increase in price with a decrease in production, that's one thing. right, to try and make themselves more exclusive. But even then I'm I'm not I'm I'm not a big fan of just their business strategy in general because I think it's the kind of thing that can only last so long. hype can only last so long, right? you can only maintain scarcity for so long, or artificial scarcity, right? Which is kind of what's been going on. and I just I don't know I don't know how much long that will last and this seems like an attempt at kicking the Yeah.

Yuri (31:52)

No, I agree. I agree with you. It's just trying to show strength that they're still producing and prices are going up. and a lot of people who d do like watches, they don't really buy retail. They all are very into the market

Nolan (32:02)

Course, yeah.

Yuri (32:03)

and they understand the secondary market and that's they have dealers, they have people to connect with. So I would agree with you.

Nolan (32:07)

Yeah, there's more and more trust for that, right? Like that's that's the thing that used to keep r you know, brands like Rolex so strong is that there was a heavy distrust of the secondary market. and there are now more and more e even Rolex, right, is getting into the secondary market and there's more and more trust over dealers and there's more established bases to buy an authentic an authentic piece. And you have to compete with that now.

Yuri (32:34)

Well, now is that time that we ask you, Nolan, to take the floor anything that you wanna bring up to speed and share with everybody else. So this is the segment that we call the floor is yours.

Nolan (32:47)

Well thank you. yeah, I just I think it's really important to remember and consider the fact that the things that you buy can make a difference and that they're made by real people, right? And that if you have the means to Purchase something that is, you know, a little more expensive and maybe would have been made by an individual in your community or nearby or by a friend that you should really consider supporting that person because those dollars then circulate within your own community. And I think it's easy to forget a lot of that, and I think it's also easy to be swayed by all of the higher-end luxury brands that are out of Similar price point, but then offer this brand cachet, and that can be very tempting. but I think I think those brands have done a very good job at making us forget that you know true craft and true beauty is made by individuals who have a lot of control and mastery over the entirety of their craft. And that's something I'm exploring. a lot on my YouTube show in-house. So if you want to learn a little more about it, check it out. Second episode comes out this Sunday. And yeah, that's that's pretty much my piece.

Yuri (33:59)

Nolan, thank you for joining us. I really appreciate it. Now, for those that want to learn more about you, can you tell us how they can find you and be involved?

Nolan (34:08)

Yes, Nolan Daniel White on Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, Substack. all all together, no caps, Nolan Daniel White. And yeah, I talk about fashion, watches, design, craftsmanship, all things that I'm interested in and that I think are, you know, worth learning more about.