I can’t believe I’m going to defend Bling. It’s absurd for him to dismiss these guys entirely and not even include them in his top 50. I can’t defend that part. He’s gone overboard to prove his point and needs to self correct as usual. But I do think the risk is maybe greater than what we often consider in our rankings. He’s mostly right to say that what they are doing that makes them effective is also what makes them hurt. And if they change to keep themselves healthy, the results will also very likely change. That’s not true 100% of the time, but I’d be surprised if it’s not over 80% true. Some of these guys are huge risks. That’s why I have Hence at 7 where most have him top 3. But maybe he should be more like 10 or 12 because of the extreme risk? I get what he’s saying even if he’s being hyperbolic.