WEBVTT - Bloomberg Surveillance TV: March 18, 2025

0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:06.760
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.

0:00:11.600 --> 0:00:15.440
<v Speaker 2>This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along

0:00:15.440 --> 0:00:18.680
<v Speaker 2>with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordern. Join us each day

0:00:18.720 --> 0:00:22.239
<v Speaker 2>for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics

0:00:22.400 --> 0:00:24.880
<v Speaker 2>from our global headquarters in New York City. We are

0:00:24.920 --> 0:00:27.680
<v Speaker 2>live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine

0:00:27.680 --> 0:00:31.280
<v Speaker 2>am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or

0:00:31.280 --> 0:00:33.919
<v Speaker 2>anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg

0:00:34.000 --> 0:00:37.840
<v Speaker 2>Terminal and the Bloomberg Business App. Peter cheerf Academy Securities

0:00:37.880 --> 0:00:40.839
<v Speaker 2>in the recession camp, Aliskalou of Bank of America on

0:00:40.880 --> 0:00:43.880
<v Speaker 2>a cautious global fund manager survey, and Kidjigs of salt

0:00:43.960 --> 0:00:46.920
<v Speaker 2>Gen looking for the big Euro rally to continue. We

0:00:47.000 --> 0:00:49.080
<v Speaker 2>begin this sour with stock steady as the Fed kicks

0:00:49.080 --> 0:00:52.240
<v Speaker 2>off a two day meeting. Peter cheerf Academy Securities, writing,

0:00:52.280 --> 0:00:54.360
<v Speaker 2>I don't see the Fed acting in a big enough

0:00:54.400 --> 0:00:56.680
<v Speaker 2>way to what set the risk that I see the

0:00:56.800 --> 0:01:00.200
<v Speaker 2>convergence of so many policies seems to risk a recession

0:01:00.360 --> 0:01:03.880
<v Speaker 2>before any probability of seeing the benefits. Pete joins us

0:01:03.920 --> 0:01:06.319
<v Speaker 2>now for more. Pak mourned makes me sound so various.

0:01:06.319 --> 0:01:08.679
<v Speaker 2>You've got to say you're sounding incredibly bearish. Are you

0:01:08.720 --> 0:01:09.240
<v Speaker 2>saying you're not?

0:01:09.680 --> 0:01:10.479
<v Speaker 3>No, I actually am.

0:01:10.520 --> 0:01:13.039
<v Speaker 4>I think one thing is even the prior discussion. I

0:01:13.040 --> 0:01:14.840
<v Speaker 4>think a big part of the change is we are

0:01:14.880 --> 0:01:18.440
<v Speaker 4>trading capital flows for trade benefits.

0:01:18.120 --> 0:01:19.319
<v Speaker 3>Right, so we're going after trade.

0:01:19.360 --> 0:01:21.399
<v Speaker 4>I think we're seeing capital outflows and it spent a

0:01:21.400 --> 0:01:23.440
<v Speaker 4>perfect mix for taking.

0:01:23.160 --> 0:01:24.400
<v Speaker 3>Capital outside of the US.

0:01:24.480 --> 0:01:26.199
<v Speaker 4>All of a sudden, you have yields up in Japan,

0:01:26.240 --> 0:01:28.480
<v Speaker 4>you have yields up in Germany, so you can actually

0:01:28.480 --> 0:01:30.240
<v Speaker 4>get some return on that side. And when you look

0:01:30.240 --> 0:01:33.400
<v Speaker 4>at equity valuations, all these other markets had lower evaluations.

0:01:33.560 --> 0:01:34.920
<v Speaker 3>So I think one of the big problems.

0:01:34.640 --> 0:01:37.120
<v Speaker 4>With our strategy so far has rather than having people

0:01:37.120 --> 0:01:39.640
<v Speaker 4>come to the table begging for mercy, it's actually pulled

0:01:39.640 --> 0:01:42.200
<v Speaker 4>money out of the system. It's made people rethink things,

0:01:42.400 --> 0:01:44.280
<v Speaker 4>and they're not rethinking things in a way that really

0:01:44.280 --> 0:01:46.240
<v Speaker 4>involves the US. I think people are trying to rethink

0:01:46.440 --> 0:01:48.480
<v Speaker 4>things away from the US, and that's the negative.

0:01:48.680 --> 0:01:51.880
<v Speaker 2>That was not the objective. These are unintended consequences, and

0:01:51.880 --> 0:01:54.040
<v Speaker 2>for the market, the consensus view was that some of

0:01:54.040 --> 0:01:56.400
<v Speaker 2>these policies would lead to dollar strength, they've led to

0:01:56.440 --> 0:01:58.800
<v Speaker 2>dollar weakness. That speaks to the capital flows story. Do

0:01:58.800 --> 0:02:00.640
<v Speaker 2>you see this turning around soon?

0:02:00.880 --> 0:02:02.680
<v Speaker 4>You know, yesterday was the first day we really went

0:02:02.680 --> 0:02:04.760
<v Speaker 4>the full day without any big tariff headlines. People have

0:02:04.800 --> 0:02:07.880
<v Speaker 4>seemed that maybe there is a trumpet. Maybe you realize, hey,

0:02:07.880 --> 0:02:10.920
<v Speaker 4>bashing on tariffs every single day, bashing our allies is

0:02:10.960 --> 0:02:12.840
<v Speaker 4>not a good strategy, and you keep looking at it.

0:02:12.880 --> 0:02:16.120
<v Speaker 4>We've been searching for where's all this excess capacity. So one,

0:02:16.240 --> 0:02:18.120
<v Speaker 4>there isn't a ton of access capacity. So if we

0:02:18.200 --> 0:02:21.359
<v Speaker 4>just make things more expensive coming in here, it will

0:02:21.400 --> 0:02:23.160
<v Speaker 4>flow through a little bit. And then you have China.

0:02:23.320 --> 0:02:25.800
<v Speaker 4>China's the one with access capacity. Their pricing is so

0:02:25.880 --> 0:02:28.400
<v Speaker 4>cheap that twenty percent tariffs that we've added don't really

0:02:28.440 --> 0:02:31.040
<v Speaker 4>make them uncompetitive. So I think we have to rethink

0:02:31.080 --> 0:02:33.600
<v Speaker 4>this and do some sort of holistic strategy that has

0:02:33.639 --> 0:02:35.400
<v Speaker 4>a one to sort of three year plan.

0:02:35.680 --> 0:02:37.160
<v Speaker 3>How do we build steel plants in the US.

0:02:37.200 --> 0:02:38.639
<v Speaker 4>There's so many things that need to be done to

0:02:38.680 --> 0:02:41.200
<v Speaker 4>make this effective, and we just dumped everything in day

0:02:41.200 --> 0:02:42.320
<v Speaker 4>one and it's been a mess.

0:02:42.360 --> 0:02:44.760
<v Speaker 5>There's shifts in capital flows that are easier to see

0:02:44.760 --> 0:02:45.239
<v Speaker 5>than others.

0:02:45.320 --> 0:02:46.120
<v Speaker 3>One of them is just.

0:02:46.080 --> 0:02:48.240
<v Speaker 5>Looking at the euro versus the dollar. One of them

0:02:48.280 --> 0:02:52.000
<v Speaker 5>is looking at stocklocase and shifting to the euroregion rather

0:02:52.040 --> 0:02:55.560
<v Speaker 5>than the US. You've raised a point about boycotts or

0:02:55.760 --> 0:03:00.960
<v Speaker 5>basically withdrawing from American brands overseas. Any signs of that

0:03:01.000 --> 0:03:04.400
<v Speaker 5>other than say Tesla, which is somewhat idiosyncratic, It's.

0:03:04.240 --> 0:03:06.120
<v Speaker 4>Hard to tell, but I think you are seeing a

0:03:06.160 --> 0:03:08.200
<v Speaker 4>little bit of evidence that people are okay at the

0:03:08.240 --> 0:03:11.120
<v Speaker 4>margin shifting away from American brands. And I think American

0:03:11.160 --> 0:03:14.600
<v Speaker 4>brands represented so many positive things, and I really think

0:03:14.639 --> 0:03:16.919
<v Speaker 4>the administration is at risk that there were so many

0:03:16.960 --> 0:03:20.360
<v Speaker 4>intangible benefits from what the US does, from the presence

0:03:20.400 --> 0:03:23.520
<v Speaker 4>that we had kind of this benevolent superpower, and as

0:03:23.560 --> 0:03:25.280
<v Speaker 4>that goes away, I think we lose some of the

0:03:25.320 --> 0:03:28.160
<v Speaker 4>reputation and that hurts. And unfortunately too, I think the

0:03:28.200 --> 0:03:30.560
<v Speaker 4>way we've thrown out all these tariffs, even if you

0:03:30.560 --> 0:03:32.520
<v Speaker 4>didn't like China, you kind of have to come knocking

0:03:32.560 --> 0:03:34.480
<v Speaker 4>a China's door and say, hey, maybe we should be

0:03:34.520 --> 0:03:35.120
<v Speaker 4>doing business.

0:03:35.440 --> 0:03:37.160
<v Speaker 5>Is there a risk that people are getting over their

0:03:37.160 --> 0:03:39.360
<v Speaker 5>skis with all this pessimism that if you take a

0:03:39.360 --> 0:03:41.920
<v Speaker 5>look at the actual policies. We haven't seen the more

0:03:41.960 --> 0:03:44.520
<v Speaker 5>positive sides of things. Not all of the people are

0:03:44.560 --> 0:03:47.040
<v Speaker 5>in their seats yet. In terms of executing these we

0:03:47.120 --> 0:03:49.600
<v Speaker 5>haven't been through April. Second, and if you actually look

0:03:49.640 --> 0:03:52.119
<v Speaker 5>at growth, it isn't that bad. Even the airlines, which

0:03:52.120 --> 0:03:55.320
<v Speaker 5>everyone uses the example of a slowdown, are still booking

0:03:55.360 --> 0:03:56.680
<v Speaker 5>at pretty healthy rates.

0:03:56.960 --> 0:03:57.720
<v Speaker 1>What's that risk?

0:03:57.960 --> 0:03:59.680
<v Speaker 3>So I think the risk is where we're headed.

0:04:00.000 --> 0:04:02.000
<v Speaker 4>I think the things that Doge has been doing so one,

0:04:02.040 --> 0:04:04.840
<v Speaker 4>we're cutting some spending that does flow through the economy.

0:04:05.080 --> 0:04:06.920
<v Speaker 4>I think you're seeing that it's very difficult to get

0:04:07.000 --> 0:04:10.800
<v Speaker 4>jobs for those people who are getting left behind. But

0:04:10.840 --> 0:04:13.360
<v Speaker 4>then more importantly to me is there's so much uncertainty.

0:04:13.400 --> 0:04:15.880
<v Speaker 4>It's putting plans on hold. So you normally like to

0:04:15.880 --> 0:04:18.960
<v Speaker 4>do things that pull demand and you know, hiring forward.

0:04:19.120 --> 0:04:20.920
<v Speaker 4>If anything, I were pushing it further away.

0:04:21.000 --> 0:04:23.080
<v Speaker 3>Right. There's no one that we talk to really.

0:04:22.880 --> 0:04:25.040
<v Speaker 4>That's saying, well, I have to bring my construction back

0:04:25.080 --> 0:04:27.760
<v Speaker 4>to the US from say Canada or Mexico because I

0:04:27.800 --> 0:04:29.039
<v Speaker 4>don't know how long these terrafs last.

0:04:29.040 --> 0:04:30.039
<v Speaker 3>They might only last a month.

0:04:30.040 --> 0:04:31.680
<v Speaker 4>That would be silly for me, and it's going to

0:04:31.720 --> 0:04:33.480
<v Speaker 4>take months and months if not years to do this,

0:04:33.760 --> 0:04:36.760
<v Speaker 4>so I think there's a lot of hiring on you know, freeze.

0:04:36.760 --> 0:04:38.920
<v Speaker 4>So unless the Fed does something tomorrow, which they might,

0:04:38.960 --> 0:04:40.800
<v Speaker 4>but I don't think they will. When we see a

0:04:40.800 --> 0:04:43.080
<v Speaker 4>real change in messaging, I think we resume the sell

0:04:43.120 --> 0:04:44.560
<v Speaker 4>off and I think we're going to head to bear

0:04:44.600 --> 0:04:46.320
<v Speaker 4>market territory down at least twenty percent.

0:04:46.440 --> 0:04:48.800
<v Speaker 1>Are you saying that the tariff uncertainty can tip the

0:04:48.880 --> 0:04:50.760
<v Speaker 1>US into recession just that alone?

0:04:50.880 --> 0:04:54.080
<v Speaker 4>I think that combination of the spending cuts that we're doing,

0:04:54.320 --> 0:04:56.800
<v Speaker 4>the firing in that sector, it was already I think

0:04:56.880 --> 0:04:58.920
<v Speaker 4>I look at the quits rate, right, the job market

0:04:59.000 --> 0:05:01.400
<v Speaker 4>wasn't that great. I think the official data tends to

0:05:01.400 --> 0:05:04.600
<v Speaker 4>get overstated in January February because they're still miscalculating a

0:05:04.600 --> 0:05:06.839
<v Speaker 4>bunch of the seasonals. So if we tip over into

0:05:07.279 --> 0:05:11.000
<v Speaker 4>weak employment, people on hold no one quite understanding the

0:05:11.000 --> 0:05:12.000
<v Speaker 4>cost of goods, which I.

0:05:11.920 --> 0:05:13.279
<v Speaker 3>Think will go up to some degree.

0:05:13.480 --> 0:05:15.720
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, I think we tip into recession far faster than

0:05:16.320 --> 0:05:19.440
<v Speaker 4>people think, And maybe we're already at that sort of stage.

0:05:19.520 --> 0:05:21.800
<v Speaker 1>We're an inflection point. This morning. You have a bunch

0:05:21.839 --> 0:05:24.360
<v Speaker 1>of generals you consult with at the firm, What do

0:05:24.440 --> 0:05:27.360
<v Speaker 1>they make going into this phone call between Trump and Putin.

0:05:27.400 --> 0:05:29.200
<v Speaker 3>You know, so one to take a step back.

0:05:29.240 --> 0:05:31.000
<v Speaker 4>I think one thing they were all very positive on

0:05:31.200 --> 0:05:33.640
<v Speaker 4>was the actions in the Middle East to clear up shipping.

0:05:33.680 --> 0:05:36.120
<v Speaker 3>I think that's the right sort of thing. It puts pressure.

0:05:36.240 --> 0:05:39.080
<v Speaker 4>I think we've argued under the Biden administration that we

0:05:39.160 --> 0:05:42.279
<v Speaker 4>lost to terrence as a tool, and to get to terrence,

0:05:42.320 --> 0:05:44.440
<v Speaker 4>you actually have to be aggressive periodically. You have to

0:05:44.440 --> 0:05:46.160
<v Speaker 4>put some fear. So that I think we are very

0:05:46.160 --> 0:05:47.840
<v Speaker 4>positive on. I think we're all trying to figure out

0:05:47.880 --> 0:05:50.839
<v Speaker 4>what exactly the endgame is with Russia and Ukraine. I

0:05:50.839 --> 0:05:52.720
<v Speaker 4>think that's an opportunity maybe for the President to come

0:05:52.720 --> 0:05:55.680
<v Speaker 4>out looking good. I think if Putin offers a really

0:05:55.720 --> 0:05:58.000
<v Speaker 4>bad deal and the President accepts it, and I think

0:05:58.040 --> 0:06:00.640
<v Speaker 4>that will cause US further divide, see more of this.

0:06:00.960 --> 0:06:02.600
<v Speaker 4>Any sort of piece deal, though, we really think was

0:06:02.640 --> 0:06:05.240
<v Speaker 4>always going to benefit Germany and Poland. Poland is going

0:06:05.279 --> 0:06:07.160
<v Speaker 4>to continue to be the big winner in this whole

0:06:07.640 --> 0:06:10.719
<v Speaker 4>realignment of Europe. So continue to be positive for stocks

0:06:10.760 --> 0:06:12.600
<v Speaker 4>whether or not there is a deal. Right now, we're

0:06:12.640 --> 0:06:14.960
<v Speaker 4>head of that direction. And I think a bad deal though,

0:06:15.000 --> 0:06:17.800
<v Speaker 4>would really push people away from the US again.

0:06:17.920 --> 0:06:20.200
<v Speaker 2>Unfortunately, how would up pet You see a situation where

0:06:20.320 --> 0:06:22.320
<v Speaker 2>US snquities could be in a band market down twenty

0:06:22.360 --> 0:06:25.920
<v Speaker 2>percent and German equities could stay this high of twenty percent.

0:06:26.480 --> 0:06:28.840
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, I think one you look at valuations, they're so

0:06:28.960 --> 0:06:31.480
<v Speaker 4>somewhat cheap. People are pulling their money back to their

0:06:31.480 --> 0:06:33.920
<v Speaker 4>own home base. They are doing spending, They're doing things

0:06:33.960 --> 0:06:36.680
<v Speaker 4>that are going to be clearly constructive for their businesses.

0:06:36.880 --> 0:06:39.039
<v Speaker 4>I think they do have some access capacity, right VW

0:06:39.160 --> 0:06:40.840
<v Speaker 4>is trying to figure out no one wants to buy

0:06:40.839 --> 0:06:43.599
<v Speaker 4>a VWEV supposedly, what do we do with that? Okay,

0:06:43.640 --> 0:06:46.120
<v Speaker 4>can we make military equipment? And I think that's going

0:06:46.160 --> 0:06:48.800
<v Speaker 4>to be interesting And normally that sort of spending would

0:06:49.360 --> 0:06:51.799
<v Speaker 4>fall heavily into the US. Right, Germany would be spending

0:06:51.800 --> 0:06:54.559
<v Speaker 4>a lot of their money on US equipment, US things.

0:06:54.920 --> 0:06:57.280
<v Speaker 4>They feel very like them to do that given the

0:06:57.320 --> 0:06:59.880
<v Speaker 4>current term. That could change, But as long as that's going,

0:07:00.279 --> 0:07:02.680
<v Speaker 4>we're getting the separation, you get those valuations picking up.

0:07:02.720 --> 0:07:02.960
<v Speaker 3>There.

0:07:03.160 --> 0:07:05.520
<v Speaker 2>Does the great thing not concern you? Over in Europe?

0:07:05.600 --> 0:07:05.960
<v Speaker 3>Right now?

0:07:06.360 --> 0:07:10.920
<v Speaker 2>Overwhelmingly there is a huge consensus celebrating germany rearmic. Does

0:07:10.920 --> 0:07:11.720
<v Speaker 2>that not concern you?

0:07:13.880 --> 0:07:14.400
<v Speaker 3>In which way?

0:07:14.520 --> 0:07:15.960
<v Speaker 4>I don't think it's a bad thing for people to

0:07:15.960 --> 0:07:18.560
<v Speaker 4>have their own ability to defend themselves. What I do think, though,

0:07:18.560 --> 0:07:20.160
<v Speaker 4>is Trump's been pushing for this, you know, two and

0:07:20.160 --> 0:07:22.880
<v Speaker 4>a half three percent whatever spending required he wants.

0:07:23.760 --> 0:07:25.000
<v Speaker 3>But I think that was all done in the.

0:07:24.920 --> 0:07:26.560
<v Speaker 4>Way that well, we're still going to be the big

0:07:26.600 --> 0:07:28.280
<v Speaker 4>person in NATO, will still tell NATO.

0:07:28.080 --> 0:07:28.480
<v Speaker 3>What to do.

0:07:28.800 --> 0:07:31.360
<v Speaker 4>And I think this spending is now okay, we're actually

0:07:31.360 --> 0:07:33.400
<v Speaker 4>going to spend this, but maybe we don't need the

0:07:33.440 --> 0:07:33.920
<v Speaker 4>same US.

0:07:33.920 --> 0:07:36.240
<v Speaker 2>I just want to approach this logically because at the

0:07:36.280 --> 0:07:39.400
<v Speaker 2>one point earlier this year, we were confident that for

0:07:39.480 --> 0:07:41.720
<v Speaker 2>European equities it was a good story. If the United

0:07:41.800 --> 0:07:44.320
<v Speaker 2>States push for a quick peace agreement. Part of that

0:07:44.400 --> 0:07:48.640
<v Speaker 2>story's happened. But Germany rearming Europe spending on defense doesn't

0:07:48.640 --> 0:07:51.680
<v Speaker 2>screen they're pushing for a quick piece deal by the House.

0:07:51.840 --> 0:07:54.640
<v Speaker 2>They're pushing for something very different to what President Trump

0:07:54.680 --> 0:07:55.160
<v Speaker 2>is pushing for.

0:07:55.400 --> 0:07:57.400
<v Speaker 4>Well, I think this all comes down to what sort

0:07:57.440 --> 0:08:00.640
<v Speaker 4>of deal is put in place, right. I think the

0:08:00.680 --> 0:08:03.760
<v Speaker 4>fear is that if and I'm probably on the European side,

0:08:03.760 --> 0:08:05.200
<v Speaker 4>I think most of our generals would be that if

0:08:05.200 --> 0:08:06.960
<v Speaker 4>you do not put some sort of protection in place.

0:08:07.280 --> 0:08:10.000
<v Speaker 4>This is just a temporary rearming for Putin to go

0:08:10.080 --> 0:08:12.040
<v Speaker 4>back in and take a bigger bite. And I think

0:08:12.120 --> 0:08:15.400
<v Speaker 4>that's the big disconnect right now is I think when

0:08:15.440 --> 0:08:17.600
<v Speaker 4>we were looking at this and we figured we'd get

0:08:17.600 --> 0:08:19.280
<v Speaker 4>some sort of peace, we did not think would be easy.

0:08:19.440 --> 0:08:21.000
<v Speaker 4>We do believe that Ukraine's going to have to give

0:08:21.080 --> 0:08:23.560
<v Speaker 4>up some land. We do think that they will get

0:08:23.560 --> 0:08:25.680
<v Speaker 4>a lot of money from this. The whole key is like,

0:08:26.000 --> 0:08:28.320
<v Speaker 4>whether it's security agreement, how do you stop Russia from

0:08:28.360 --> 0:08:30.240
<v Speaker 4>just rearming and coming back in.

0:08:30.720 --> 0:08:32.560
<v Speaker 3>And that's I think what Europe's preparing.

0:08:32.280 --> 0:08:35.480
<v Speaker 1>For the German rearment. Basically Europe trying to set de

0:08:35.600 --> 0:08:36.600
<v Speaker 1>terms with Russia.

0:08:36.720 --> 0:08:38.280
<v Speaker 3>Yes, I think that's even if they're.

0:08:38.120 --> 0:08:40.359
<v Speaker 1>Willing to have gas deals once again.

0:08:40.480 --> 0:08:42.640
<v Speaker 3>You know they will try and do both. I think

0:08:42.760 --> 0:08:43.760
<v Speaker 3>alsode again.

0:08:43.840 --> 0:08:45.520
<v Speaker 4>It's like this is going to be this mad panic

0:08:45.520 --> 0:08:46.840
<v Speaker 4>where everyone's trying to rearm them.

0:08:47.200 --> 0:08:49.520
<v Speaker 2>He doesn't add up. Something about it doesn't add up.

0:08:49.559 --> 0:08:51.080
<v Speaker 4>Well, none of this is added up when we look

0:08:51.080 --> 0:08:53.800
<v Speaker 4>at what the US was doing with Iran, right we

0:08:53.800 --> 0:08:57.240
<v Speaker 4>were allowing Ranian oil to go through Russia continues to

0:08:57.280 --> 0:09:01.240
<v Speaker 4>sell your oil into natural gas into Europe. Right, everyone

0:09:01.280 --> 0:09:03.320
<v Speaker 4>is so scared about energy, and that's a crazy thing. Right,

0:09:03.360 --> 0:09:06.040
<v Speaker 4>If you went back five years ago, everyone's about green energy,

0:09:06.080 --> 0:09:09.679
<v Speaker 4>green energy, green energy, and even the US every energy

0:09:09.679 --> 0:09:10.360
<v Speaker 4>self sufficient.

0:09:10.520 --> 0:09:11.640
<v Speaker 3>We realize all it takes.

0:09:11.480 --> 0:09:13.280
<v Speaker 4>Is one oil price shock to realize we are not

0:09:13.400 --> 0:09:16.880
<v Speaker 4>that energy and self sufficient. Inflation is scary. So I

0:09:16.920 --> 0:09:18.600
<v Speaker 4>do think I love the energy market.

0:09:18.720 --> 0:09:19.839
<v Speaker 3>Again. My strategy for the.

0:09:19.840 --> 0:09:22.040
<v Speaker 4>US where I do like the US is I'm continuing

0:09:22.040 --> 0:09:25.679
<v Speaker 4>to invest in anything that national production and for national

0:09:25.760 --> 0:09:28.439
<v Speaker 4>security's sake, so anything that has a security element. I

0:09:28.480 --> 0:09:29.720
<v Speaker 4>do think we are going to see more and more

0:09:29.720 --> 0:09:30.280
<v Speaker 4>production that.

0:09:30.520 --> 0:09:31.160
<v Speaker 3>I think things like.

0:09:31.200 --> 0:09:34.800
<v Speaker 4>Chips are very important, medical equipment, those things are actually

0:09:34.840 --> 0:09:37.080
<v Speaker 4>going to be really part of what gets driven by this.

0:09:37.240 --> 0:09:39.959
<v Speaker 3>You'll see some growth. That's where I'm headed.

0:09:40.040 --> 0:09:42.719
<v Speaker 4>I'd like to see more done though by actual legislation.

0:09:43.040 --> 0:09:44.120
<v Speaker 3>The executive order.

0:09:43.920 --> 0:09:45.720
<v Speaker 4>Thing, I think is not going to work particularly well.

0:09:45.840 --> 0:09:47.840
<v Speaker 4>If it takes four or five years to build a plant.

0:09:48.000 --> 0:09:50.439
<v Speaker 4>No one's sitting there saying, based on some executive orders

0:09:50.480 --> 0:09:52.720
<v Speaker 4>that may be turned over in four years or may

0:09:52.760 --> 0:09:55.240
<v Speaker 4>be turned over in two months, I'm not investing.

0:09:55.800 --> 0:09:58.640
<v Speaker 2>It's going to say a parish very barrassed US sequities

0:09:58.679 --> 0:10:10.319
<v Speaker 2>paid a chant that of account of Securi. Let's talk

0:10:10.360 --> 0:10:13.160
<v Speaker 2>about the April second date. Conversation we've had around this

0:10:13.160 --> 0:10:15.280
<v Speaker 2>tangle a few times now, is how misleading that date

0:10:15.360 --> 0:10:17.880
<v Speaker 2>might be. What actually happens on April scond, How long

0:10:17.920 --> 0:10:19.960
<v Speaker 2>before these tariffs would actually.

0:10:19.640 --> 0:10:23.480
<v Speaker 6>Hit in some ways, nobody knows. But what I'm expecting

0:10:23.480 --> 0:10:26.080
<v Speaker 6>at Raymond James is that we will get some announcements

0:10:26.120 --> 0:10:29.680
<v Speaker 6>that are immediate, but will also get some announcements that

0:10:29.760 --> 0:10:32.920
<v Speaker 6>set in place a series of new kind of investigations.

0:10:33.120 --> 0:10:35.320
<v Speaker 6>And what you hear with Jamison Greer trying to take

0:10:35.320 --> 0:10:37.720
<v Speaker 6>control of this is there's a real concern within the

0:10:37.720 --> 0:10:41.240
<v Speaker 6>Trump administration on some staff that if you were to

0:10:41.280 --> 0:10:43.640
<v Speaker 6>try to do all of this on April second and

0:10:43.720 --> 0:10:47.200
<v Speaker 6>use emergency powers, there's huge legal risk and it's going

0:10:47.240 --> 0:10:48.040
<v Speaker 6>to get struck down.

0:10:48.320 --> 0:10:49.360
<v Speaker 3>And so what can you do on.

0:10:49.320 --> 0:10:51.840
<v Speaker 6>April second that goes into effect immediately, that can be

0:10:52.200 --> 0:10:54.560
<v Speaker 6>held in the courts, And what can you do that

0:10:54.679 --> 0:10:57.640
<v Speaker 6>sets in motion maybe a worldwide Section three or one

0:10:57.640 --> 0:11:01.719
<v Speaker 6>investigation that can be defe in the courts, but ultimately

0:11:01.760 --> 0:11:04.880
<v Speaker 6>still have a very high teriff rate that goes on

0:11:05.240 --> 0:11:08.640
<v Speaker 6>basically every single piece of equipment and goods that come

0:11:08.640 --> 0:11:11.199
<v Speaker 6>into the United States. That's still a very high probability.

0:11:11.280 --> 0:11:14.280
<v Speaker 1>John so Howard Lutnet, the Commerce Sectory actually outlined that

0:11:14.360 --> 0:11:16.360
<v Speaker 1>to us as well. You could see some on April second,

0:11:16.400 --> 0:11:18.400
<v Speaker 1>and then some might be weeks or months down the line.

0:11:18.480 --> 0:11:21.080
<v Speaker 1>So if they go on April second, they're likely using IEPA.

0:11:21.200 --> 0:11:24.000
<v Speaker 1>What could we see them use IEPA for and say, actually,

0:11:24.000 --> 0:11:26.320
<v Speaker 1>this will hold up in court because there's national security concerns.

0:11:26.400 --> 0:11:28.679
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, so Amory, I would say there are some IEPA stuff,

0:11:28.679 --> 0:11:32.600
<v Speaker 6>and I think that the Mexico China on IEPA probably

0:11:32.600 --> 0:11:36.000
<v Speaker 6>holds up. If there are other national security items, they

0:11:36.040 --> 0:11:40.400
<v Speaker 6>could say semiconductors, you know, clear things within our supply chains.

0:11:40.520 --> 0:11:42.480
<v Speaker 6>But I would look back to the first Trump administration.

0:11:42.720 --> 0:11:45.360
<v Speaker 6>They had a Section two thirty two investigation on autos.

0:11:45.400 --> 0:11:48.480
<v Speaker 6>They could kick that in pretty immediately. They've already done

0:11:48.520 --> 0:11:52.600
<v Speaker 6>some investigations on semiconductors. Generally under the Biden administration. Use

0:11:52.679 --> 0:11:57.360
<v Speaker 6>that there was a investigation into France on digital service taxes.

0:11:57.559 --> 0:12:00.640
<v Speaker 6>They almost put in place a set of tariffs on

0:12:00.760 --> 0:12:04.360
<v Speaker 6>France back in twenty twenty. When Trump was in office,

0:12:04.440 --> 0:12:06.840
<v Speaker 6>they could reactivate that. And there was also an investigation

0:12:06.880 --> 0:12:10.880
<v Speaker 6>into currency manipulation in Vietnam, which could go into effect immediately.

0:12:10.960 --> 0:12:13.880
<v Speaker 6>So take things off the shelf you've already done that

0:12:13.960 --> 0:12:17.560
<v Speaker 6>are legally defensible and put that into effect on April second.

0:12:17.720 --> 0:12:19.360
<v Speaker 6>Seems like a pretty reasonable expectation.

0:12:19.559 --> 0:12:23.200
<v Speaker 1>Ambassador of Jamison Greer is very methodical. He flies under

0:12:23.200 --> 0:12:26.280
<v Speaker 1>the radar. He's a lawyer. Mark Shore had this to say,

0:12:26.320 --> 0:12:27.800
<v Speaker 1>if you had people in the first one, you had

0:12:27.800 --> 0:12:30.160
<v Speaker 1>people in the first Trump white House who fundamentally disagree

0:12:30.160 --> 0:12:32.960
<v Speaker 1>with trade policy. This time around, they don't disagree with

0:12:33.040 --> 0:12:35.160
<v Speaker 1>him on trade, they disagree with the implementation.

0:12:35.600 --> 0:12:36.679
<v Speaker 3>Do you view it like that?

0:12:36.880 --> 0:12:40.640
<v Speaker 1>Who's potentially holding Trump back from potentially his most aggressive

0:12:41.080 --> 0:12:42.720
<v Speaker 1>policy proposals on tariff?

0:12:42.800 --> 0:12:44.520
<v Speaker 6>So I think they have a team of rivals again,

0:12:44.640 --> 0:12:47.960
<v Speaker 6>I think it is Team Economy versus Team Tariff. Team

0:12:48.000 --> 0:12:51.800
<v Speaker 6>Economy is Scott Besson. I think the kind of overall

0:12:51.920 --> 0:12:55.280
<v Speaker 6>kind of team Tariff is Jamison Greer is Howard Lutnik

0:12:55.720 --> 0:12:57.959
<v Speaker 6>is kind of Peter Navarro pushing.

0:12:57.600 --> 0:12:59.360
<v Speaker 3>For it as as much as possible.

0:12:59.480 --> 0:13:02.080
<v Speaker 6>And on team of Tariff right now is Donald Trump

0:13:02.400 --> 0:13:04.360
<v Speaker 6>and so and he and he alone gets to the

0:13:04.400 --> 0:13:05.640
<v Speaker 6>side exactly.

0:13:05.160 --> 0:13:07.600
<v Speaker 5>What happens there are two dueling articles I thought were

0:13:07.600 --> 0:13:09.960
<v Speaker 5>really interesting. New York Times had an article yesterday about

0:13:09.960 --> 0:13:12.199
<v Speaker 5>how Donald Trump is serious this time around plans to

0:13:12.200 --> 0:13:13.880
<v Speaker 5>put these tariffs on and how to call with some

0:13:13.920 --> 0:13:16.120
<v Speaker 5>of the auto manufacturers saying, guess what, guys, this is

0:13:16.120 --> 0:13:17.600
<v Speaker 5>for real. You need to get used to it. Twenty

0:13:17.600 --> 0:13:21.160
<v Speaker 5>five percent tariffs. There was an article by Bloomberg talking

0:13:21.160 --> 0:13:23.840
<v Speaker 5>about all the people around him saying, hold on a second,

0:13:23.880 --> 0:13:26.320
<v Speaker 5>we need to understand what the corporate concerns are, and

0:13:26.400 --> 0:13:29.720
<v Speaker 5>I actually try to mitigate this with pro growth policies, etc.

0:13:30.440 --> 0:13:33.120
<v Speaker 5>Do you have a sense of how much this White House,

0:13:33.160 --> 0:13:35.560
<v Speaker 5>and I mean everybody in the White House actually does

0:13:35.600 --> 0:13:38.040
<v Speaker 5>care about markets and what companies are saying.

0:13:38.120 --> 0:13:40.480
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, I think they care about markets, they care about

0:13:40.520 --> 0:13:42.720
<v Speaker 6>the economy. I think what I hear from them is

0:13:42.720 --> 0:13:45.480
<v Speaker 6>that this is a process that they have to do

0:13:45.559 --> 0:13:48.800
<v Speaker 6>the deregulation, get the tax cuts, do the tariffs, break

0:13:48.840 --> 0:13:52.400
<v Speaker 6>down non tariff barriers around the globe, and then you

0:13:52.480 --> 0:13:55.640
<v Speaker 6>get the positive market reaction. What I'm hearing this time

0:13:55.679 --> 0:13:58.280
<v Speaker 6>in Trump two point zero is wait for it, we

0:13:58.440 --> 0:14:00.800
<v Speaker 6>have to put this all in place. If I get

0:14:00.840 --> 0:14:03.920
<v Speaker 6>some pushback, is the process right now is too Chaotus.

0:14:03.960 --> 0:14:05.319
<v Speaker 5>Well, that's what I was going to ask. Is there

0:14:05.320 --> 0:14:08.040
<v Speaker 5>a process or is it a concept? Is it concepts

0:14:08.040 --> 0:14:09.600
<v Speaker 5>of a plan or is it actually a plan.

0:14:10.000 --> 0:14:11.840
<v Speaker 6>I think it's more concepts of a plan, and I

0:14:11.840 --> 0:14:14.480
<v Speaker 6>think that there is a lot of disagreement. Folks on

0:14:14.559 --> 0:14:17.400
<v Speaker 6>Team ECON are not okay in which the way in

0:14:17.440 --> 0:14:20.640
<v Speaker 6>which this is being put out. But Team Tariff felt

0:14:20.880 --> 0:14:23.000
<v Speaker 6>that they went too slow in Trump one point zero.

0:14:23.120 --> 0:14:25.160
<v Speaker 6>If you go back to Trump one point zero, it

0:14:25.240 --> 0:14:28.320
<v Speaker 6>was March twenty twenty before they signed the Phase one

0:14:28.760 --> 0:14:31.680
<v Speaker 6>trade deal. We've already in the first couple of months

0:14:31.880 --> 0:14:35.120
<v Speaker 6>done more on tariffs than Trump did in four years

0:14:35.120 --> 0:14:37.680
<v Speaker 6>the first time around. They say their biggest mistake in

0:14:37.720 --> 0:14:40.360
<v Speaker 6>one point zero was taking too long, so they almost

0:14:40.360 --> 0:14:40.720
<v Speaker 6>don't care.

0:14:40.800 --> 0:14:42.400
<v Speaker 2>I just want to fit in this final question some

0:14:42.480 --> 0:14:44.640
<v Speaker 2>breaking news. About five minutes ago, we know this call

0:14:44.680 --> 0:14:46.920
<v Speaker 2>was going to take place lightster on this morning at

0:14:47.040 --> 0:14:50.480
<v Speaker 2>nine Eastern time, President Putin demanding a suspension of a

0:14:50.560 --> 0:14:53.840
<v Speaker 2>weapon deliveries to Ukraine during a ceasefire that could come

0:14:53.880 --> 0:14:56.280
<v Speaker 2>up on the coal we expected to lates on this morning.

0:14:56.280 --> 0:14:58.160
<v Speaker 2>Between the two leaders, what do you think the outcome

0:14:58.320 --> 0:14:59.320
<v Speaker 2>of all of that's going to be.

0:15:00.000 --> 0:15:03.560
<v Speaker 6>I think that's a realistic goal of this. However, I

0:15:03.640 --> 0:15:06.840
<v Speaker 6>do know that Donald Trump likes to have any phone

0:15:06.840 --> 0:15:09.960
<v Speaker 6>call come with a bold announcement, so I would expect

0:15:10.040 --> 0:15:13.360
<v Speaker 6>him to talk up the opportunity of a cease fire.

0:15:13.800 --> 0:15:15.320
<v Speaker 3>But Putin is doing a good job of.

0:15:15.280 --> 0:15:18.440
<v Speaker 6>Trying to reset the goalpost, because Donald Trump always resets

0:15:18.480 --> 0:15:21.200
<v Speaker 6>the goalpost, and a lot of world leaders know if

0:15:21.240 --> 0:15:23.960
<v Speaker 6>you can get him one on one, he usually agrees

0:15:23.960 --> 0:15:26.040
<v Speaker 6>to more than what staff would agree to.

0:15:26.280 --> 0:15:28.000
<v Speaker 2>That's the question with God this morning. I guess we

0:15:28.040 --> 0:15:30.000
<v Speaker 2>got into the phone call. Will we get a one

0:15:30.000 --> 0:15:32.680
<v Speaker 2>on one mating in person? Off the back of this, my.

0:15:32.720 --> 0:15:35.880
<v Speaker 1>Reporting weeks ago was that Trump and the Trump administration

0:15:35.960 --> 0:15:38.040
<v Speaker 1>wanted a meeting with Putin and Saudi Arabia by the

0:15:38.120 --> 0:15:40.880
<v Speaker 1>end of February. Well, guess what where in March It's Ramadan,

0:15:40.960 --> 0:15:43.880
<v Speaker 1>then there's need Potentially I would say you could see one.

0:15:43.960 --> 0:15:46.120
<v Speaker 1>If this phone call goes well in the.

0:15:46.080 --> 0:15:48.760
<v Speaker 2>Next month, it's going to see you away. I appreciate it,

0:15:48.760 --> 0:16:01.080
<v Speaker 2>Thank you ed most. If Raymond James, let's send to

0:16:01.080 --> 0:16:03.720
<v Speaker 2>another Mac seven nine, let's talk about in video. Shares

0:16:03.760 --> 0:16:05.720
<v Speaker 2>slightly lower in the pre market ahead of CEO of

0:16:05.800 --> 0:16:08.840
<v Speaker 2>Jensen Wyang's keynote speech at the company's develop A conference.

0:16:08.880 --> 0:16:11.360
<v Speaker 2>We're down by zero point five percent per Pharowgho of

0:16:11.400 --> 0:16:13.960
<v Speaker 2>New Street has a by writing on the stock with

0:16:14.040 --> 0:16:16.800
<v Speaker 2>a two hundred dollars price target Perre joined just now

0:16:16.800 --> 0:16:18.640
<v Speaker 2>for more Perre. Welcome to the show. We'll get to

0:16:18.680 --> 0:16:20.880
<v Speaker 2>Tesla in just a moment. Let's start with Nvidia. What

0:16:20.920 --> 0:16:22.560
<v Speaker 2>do you expect from Jensen Wang later.

0:16:22.440 --> 0:16:27.160
<v Speaker 7>On, well, from Yensen specifically this morning, I think the

0:16:27.240 --> 0:16:30.800
<v Speaker 7>focus is going to be as always on the product proadmap.

0:16:31.400 --> 0:16:34.480
<v Speaker 7>You know, while other chips coming through there has been

0:16:34.560 --> 0:16:37.720
<v Speaker 7>like a fairly high amount of fleaks, so we have

0:16:37.840 --> 0:16:40.840
<v Speaker 7>good visibility. There is a black Well three hundred that

0:16:41.000 --> 0:16:43.640
<v Speaker 7>is going to start shipping towards the end of this year,

0:16:43.800 --> 0:16:46.360
<v Speaker 7>where like the black Well two hundred is shipping now,

0:16:46.400 --> 0:16:52.360
<v Speaker 7>so you have this shrinking you know, time between between

0:16:52.360 --> 0:16:56.040
<v Speaker 7>product and the next generation Rubin products. And as always,

0:16:56.040 --> 0:16:59.520
<v Speaker 7>what Jensen is going to do is going to showcase

0:17:00.120 --> 0:17:03.840
<v Speaker 7>on this giant screen in front of like fifteen thousand people,

0:17:03.920 --> 0:17:07.919
<v Speaker 7>like twenty five thousand people even probably this year. The

0:17:08.040 --> 0:17:11.560
<v Speaker 7>scale of the data centers these chips are going to

0:17:12.200 --> 0:17:14.760
<v Speaker 7>are going into power. You remember last year if he

0:17:14.800 --> 0:17:17.480
<v Speaker 7>presented the Envy seventy two, it was a shock to

0:17:17.520 --> 0:17:21.760
<v Speaker 7>see like a single server with seventy two GPUs with

0:17:21.880 --> 0:17:26.000
<v Speaker 7>seventy two like thirty five thousand dollars GPUs, And we

0:17:26.520 --> 0:17:28.439
<v Speaker 7>expect this year that he's going to announce like the

0:17:28.480 --> 0:17:32.160
<v Speaker 7>next stage of the super super Allaredhiluster for very high

0:17:32.240 --> 0:17:35.679
<v Speaker 7>performance in terance, the NBA two hundred and eighty eight,

0:17:35.800 --> 0:17:38.159
<v Speaker 7>So with two hundred and eighty eight GPUs that are

0:17:38.200 --> 0:17:40.440
<v Speaker 7>going to cost even more than sety five sidand dollars.

0:17:40.560 --> 0:17:43.520
<v Speaker 7>That's probably going to come with the B three hundred

0:17:43.560 --> 0:17:46.040
<v Speaker 7>dollar the Rabbi architecture, Pierre, is that enough?

0:17:46.320 --> 0:17:47.840
<v Speaker 5>And I say this at a time where people are

0:17:47.880 --> 0:17:52.159
<v Speaker 5>worried about the potential blockade on Nvidia selling chips to

0:17:52.280 --> 0:17:57.040
<v Speaker 5>China and questions about technological advancements made elsewhere, and frankly

0:17:57.119 --> 0:18:00.320
<v Speaker 5>a real existential questioning of just how much the big

0:18:00.359 --> 0:18:03.760
<v Speaker 5>tech players can keep spending on chips without showing some

0:18:03.800 --> 0:18:06.160
<v Speaker 5>real advancements that can move the needle.

0:18:07.960 --> 0:18:11.800
<v Speaker 7>Yes, you're totally right, this is what Jansen is going

0:18:11.880 --> 0:18:15.159
<v Speaker 7>to talk about. But yesterday, during the first day of

0:18:15.160 --> 0:18:17.159
<v Speaker 7>the conference, that's not what people are talking about in

0:18:18.400 --> 0:18:21.800
<v Speaker 7>you know, at the cafe and in meeting rooms and

0:18:22.160 --> 0:18:26.520
<v Speaker 7>in the corridors. People are talking a lot about China,

0:18:26.560 --> 0:18:31.960
<v Speaker 7>of course, and like on two fronts, like this idea

0:18:32.000 --> 0:18:35.280
<v Speaker 7>of a blockhead, of course, that has been lingering now

0:18:35.320 --> 0:18:37.640
<v Speaker 7>for our years. But there's also the question of how

0:18:37.760 --> 0:18:41.359
<v Speaker 7>China is contributing to AI developments. And one of the

0:18:41.400 --> 0:18:46.119
<v Speaker 7>buzz words this year in the show is distillation. You know,

0:18:46.480 --> 0:18:51.040
<v Speaker 7>how does this industry do well if Chinese players like

0:18:51.080 --> 0:18:55.000
<v Speaker 7>dipsy An com In and like produce a model that

0:18:55.160 --> 0:18:58.760
<v Speaker 7>is ten or twenty times more efficient for a similar

0:18:58.760 --> 0:19:01.439
<v Speaker 7>performance to what has been there in the US with

0:19:01.640 --> 0:19:06.639
<v Speaker 7>like multi billion dollar data centers. So that the focus

0:19:06.680 --> 0:19:09.280
<v Speaker 7>is not so much on Envygate itself. Like I think

0:19:09.359 --> 0:19:12.080
<v Speaker 7>investors understand that Nvidia has a very storm market position

0:19:12.560 --> 0:19:15.119
<v Speaker 7>and we'll probably defend it even if some of the

0:19:15.119 --> 0:19:18.159
<v Speaker 7>clients are developing their own ASICs. But the question is

0:19:18.200 --> 0:19:20.840
<v Speaker 7>more like people investing these now hundreds of billions of

0:19:20.840 --> 0:19:24.399
<v Speaker 7>dollars in data centers, are they going to make a

0:19:24.400 --> 0:19:27.119
<v Speaker 7>living if the Chinese can copy what they do or

0:19:27.480 --> 0:19:31.879
<v Speaker 7>easily with small ads. So that's that's really like the

0:19:31.960 --> 0:19:32.840
<v Speaker 7>number one focus.

0:19:32.840 --> 0:19:33.600
<v Speaker 3>So I would say.

0:19:35.160 --> 0:19:39.680
<v Speaker 7>Of investors as much as industry practitioners on the on the.

0:19:39.680 --> 0:19:42.480
<v Speaker 5>Fair today, there's a question about whether this effects in video,

0:19:42.560 --> 0:19:45.239
<v Speaker 5>but there's probably a bigger question about how this has

0:19:45.359 --> 0:19:48.080
<v Speaker 5>ramifications for the likes of Apple and Tesla. We we're

0:19:48.160 --> 0:19:51.800
<v Speaker 5>just talking about if China truly is getting to a

0:19:51.880 --> 0:19:55.640
<v Speaker 5>technologically advanced point, or they can produce products that are

0:19:55.760 --> 0:19:59.680
<v Speaker 5>competitive and even supersede the technological abilities of the United

0:19:59.720 --> 0:20:00.760
<v Speaker 5>States products.

0:20:01.000 --> 0:20:02.760
<v Speaker 3>Does that engage.

0:20:02.320 --> 0:20:04.919
<v Speaker 5>With a new paradigm which not only threatens the sales

0:20:04.920 --> 0:20:08.359
<v Speaker 5>of some of the Apple phones or Tesla cars in China,

0:20:08.680 --> 0:20:13.400
<v Speaker 5>but more broadly internationally, How does that affect the competitive landscape.

0:20:14.560 --> 0:20:18.520
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, it's not something new, to be completely honest. You know,

0:20:18.280 --> 0:20:21.160
<v Speaker 7>we could have had this conversation forty years ago about

0:20:21.240 --> 0:20:25.520
<v Speaker 7>trained technology, We could have had this conversation twenty years

0:20:25.520 --> 0:20:29.440
<v Speaker 7>ago about car technology. And today we have this conversation

0:20:29.600 --> 0:20:38.000
<v Speaker 7>about electric car technology for Tesla sheep manufacturing and cheap design,

0:20:38.040 --> 0:20:44.600
<v Speaker 7>and also algothmic design and AI AI development. So China

0:20:44.640 --> 0:20:48.119
<v Speaker 7>has always been like a very very very fierce competitor.

0:20:48.720 --> 0:20:51.639
<v Speaker 7>I think the key change today that in the past

0:20:51.760 --> 0:20:56.120
<v Speaker 7>China used to leverage US and Western technology in order

0:20:56.240 --> 0:21:00.760
<v Speaker 7>to be a competitor in the technology sphere, so they

0:21:01.160 --> 0:21:05.200
<v Speaker 7>having access to mostly like the manufacturing technology the IP

0:21:05.560 --> 0:21:08.840
<v Speaker 7>developed in the West, and now the West is kind

0:21:08.880 --> 0:21:12.320
<v Speaker 7>of like throttling access to that technology. So it's very

0:21:12.400 --> 0:21:17.240
<v Speaker 7>visible on manufacturing the Chinese can't access like the most

0:21:17.320 --> 0:21:21.000
<v Speaker 7>leading edge manufacturing tools and they're lagging behind still very much.

0:21:21.040 --> 0:21:24.879
<v Speaker 7>So today we see that now with chips where the

0:21:24.960 --> 0:21:29.200
<v Speaker 7>Chinese can't access like the most advanced chips Nvidia is producing.

0:21:29.800 --> 0:21:33.000
<v Speaker 7>And now the debate it is how can we protect

0:21:33.000 --> 0:21:37.000
<v Speaker 7>our IP from the Chinese leveraging it's to compete against us.

0:21:37.320 --> 0:21:39.639
<v Speaker 7>And you know that in the in the terms and

0:21:39.680 --> 0:21:42.280
<v Speaker 7>conditions of the use of use of charge DIPTY, you

0:21:42.280 --> 0:21:44.919
<v Speaker 7>can't use churgipety to develop a competitor to charge repty.

0:21:45.280 --> 0:21:46.560
<v Speaker 3>And so now the question mark.

0:21:46.520 --> 0:21:49.040
<v Speaker 7>Is, okay, can we enforce that kind of protection to

0:21:49.080 --> 0:21:53.199
<v Speaker 7>protect Western grown AI. So the way forward is that

0:21:53.240 --> 0:21:56.080
<v Speaker 7>it's very very difficult to know how things are going

0:21:56.119 --> 0:22:00.320
<v Speaker 7>to evolve. It's a balancing act between keeping the market

0:22:00.880 --> 0:22:05.639
<v Speaker 7>open because of course US and Western technology companies like

0:22:05.720 --> 0:22:10.359
<v Speaker 7>to sell in China, and also limiting sales to China

0:22:10.480 --> 0:22:15.120
<v Speaker 7>in order to prevent China from making progress, and it's

0:22:15.160 --> 0:22:17.760
<v Speaker 7>you know, I just talked about the past forty years.

0:22:17.800 --> 0:22:19.960
<v Speaker 7>It's going to keep playing over the next forty years

0:22:19.960 --> 0:22:23.560
<v Speaker 7>because for China to catch up on advanced chip manufacturing,

0:22:23.560 --> 0:22:26.440
<v Speaker 7>for instance, we're talking about projects that are probably going

0:22:26.480 --> 0:22:28.679
<v Speaker 7>to take decades. It is going to take decades for

0:22:28.800 --> 0:22:31.840
<v Speaker 7>China to be able to develop their own tools and.

0:22:33.920 --> 0:22:34.520
<v Speaker 3>Things like that.

0:22:34.560 --> 0:22:37.080
<v Speaker 7>So we'll be here in a year from that still

0:22:37.080 --> 0:22:39.480
<v Speaker 7>talking talking about it. It's not going to be another

0:22:39.600 --> 0:22:45.359
<v Speaker 7>night change. That competition is mounting. And of course what

0:22:45.440 --> 0:22:50.359
<v Speaker 7>we see is, you know, the risk of polarization of

0:22:50.359 --> 0:22:52.240
<v Speaker 7>the world. Like that's what we call in our research

0:22:52.720 --> 0:22:57.240
<v Speaker 7>the silicon world, this idea that if the West becomes

0:22:57.280 --> 0:23:01.120
<v Speaker 7>more and more protective with their technology and China is

0:23:01.160 --> 0:23:05.199
<v Speaker 7>becoming more and more like driven towards developing independent and

0:23:05.200 --> 0:23:08.960
<v Speaker 7>competing technology at all levels of the supply chain, then

0:23:09.200 --> 0:23:13.399
<v Speaker 7>what you'll see potentially is like this market polarizing and

0:23:13.520 --> 0:23:17.879
<v Speaker 7>the China being dominants on the area of inter in

0:23:17.960 --> 0:23:21.720
<v Speaker 7>the West keeping China out of their area of dominance.

0:23:21.760 --> 0:23:25.760
<v Speaker 7>That's that's really you know, one of the direction of

0:23:25.760 --> 0:23:27.800
<v Speaker 7>evolution of the situation that you want to watch.

0:23:27.800 --> 0:23:30.000
<v Speaker 2>Shop for Pierre it's one for the catch up with

0:23:30.000 --> 0:23:31.600
<v Speaker 2>the next time you're on, and it spends more time

0:23:31.600 --> 0:23:34.840
<v Speaker 2>on Tesla. Pierre Fardagud of New Street Research talking about

0:23:34.960 --> 0:23:38.800
<v Speaker 2>Nvidia Tesla for Pierre Farago still has a buy, writing

0:23:39.080 --> 0:23:51.439
<v Speaker 2>on the nine four sixty five price target. It's definitely.

0:23:51.520 --> 0:23:54.240
<v Speaker 2>Roth of Wolf Research joins us now. She says Washington

0:23:54.560 --> 0:23:57.400
<v Speaker 2>is shaking up our economic forecast, writing, we revised down

0:23:57.400 --> 0:23:59.800
<v Speaker 2>our US growth forecast from two point two percent to

0:24:00.000 --> 0:24:02.840
<v Speaker 2>one point six on the back of three surprises out

0:24:02.840 --> 0:24:06.520
<v Speaker 2>of the White House. Those cuts early tariff implementation and

0:24:06.680 --> 0:24:10.200
<v Speaker 2>economic uncertainty. Stephanie joins us now for more. Stephanie Goimnic,

0:24:10.320 --> 0:24:12.960
<v Speaker 2>Good morning. That is quite a cut to GDP growth

0:24:13.000 --> 0:24:15.600
<v Speaker 2>from two point two to one point six. Is the

0:24:15.600 --> 0:24:18.760
<v Speaker 2>federalser of easing in that world or standard pat in

0:24:18.760 --> 0:24:20.040
<v Speaker 2>that world they are that they're.

0:24:19.880 --> 0:24:22.080
<v Speaker 8>Not using for good reasons or using this growth is

0:24:22.160 --> 0:24:24.639
<v Speaker 8>weakening and then they have to restart. But that's not

0:24:24.720 --> 0:24:27.240
<v Speaker 8>something that they're going to to their forecasts right now.

0:24:27.280 --> 0:24:29.800
<v Speaker 8>There are base cases that they're gonna call for two

0:24:29.840 --> 0:24:32.840
<v Speaker 8>cuts in their dot plot, and we'll try to get

0:24:32.880 --> 0:24:34.720
<v Speaker 8>out of that meeting as quickly as possible as you.

0:24:34.640 --> 0:24:37.199
<v Speaker 5>Said, how much are they can really signal that they

0:24:37.240 --> 0:24:39.680
<v Speaker 5>can provide some sort of ballast to the time when

0:24:39.680 --> 0:24:43.600
<v Speaker 5>people think some sort of economic downturn that induces job

0:24:43.680 --> 0:24:49.160
<v Speaker 5>loss has a sort of prolonged scarring effect on the economy.

0:24:49.440 --> 0:24:51.160
<v Speaker 8>I think they'll say what they typically say is they're

0:24:51.160 --> 0:24:52.960
<v Speaker 8>going to respond to respond to the data, and of

0:24:53.040 --> 0:24:55.040
<v Speaker 8>the data weekend, then of course they're going to respond,

0:24:55.080 --> 0:24:57.439
<v Speaker 8>but they can't really promise that much more in advance,

0:24:57.520 --> 0:24:59.800
<v Speaker 8>especially because this is an environment where they're likely to

0:24:59.800 --> 0:25:03.359
<v Speaker 8>take the growth numbers tomorrow, but they're likely to take up.

0:25:03.240 --> 0:25:04.199
<v Speaker 3>Their inflation numbers.

0:25:04.480 --> 0:25:07.080
<v Speaker 8>So this is a really difficult environment for them because

0:25:07.080 --> 0:25:09.520
<v Speaker 8>they're going to have to wait until unemployment rates starts

0:25:09.520 --> 0:25:11.720
<v Speaker 8>to rise more materially for them to actually be able

0:25:11.760 --> 0:25:13.359
<v Speaker 8>to cut, as opposed to the idea of them being

0:25:13.400 --> 0:25:14.840
<v Speaker 8>able to cut because inflation is low.

0:25:14.920 --> 0:25:17.359
<v Speaker 5>You know, I'm always struck by sort of the mass

0:25:17.400 --> 0:25:19.760
<v Speaker 5>moves on Wall Street. Everyone seems to be downgrading their

0:25:19.760 --> 0:25:24.000
<v Speaker 5>growth expectation to the US for the US GDP over

0:25:24.040 --> 0:25:26.199
<v Speaker 5>the past couple of weeks, and part of it is

0:25:26.200 --> 0:25:28.560
<v Speaker 5>this belief that this uncertainty isn't going to go away,

0:25:28.600 --> 0:25:31.240
<v Speaker 5>and that tariffs are here to stay. Is there anything

0:25:31.280 --> 0:25:33.400
<v Speaker 5>that could make you revise it back? Is there any

0:25:33.480 --> 0:25:35.720
<v Speaker 5>kind of caveat to that that you're waiting for.

0:25:36.560 --> 0:25:38.760
<v Speaker 8>Yeah, So the April second deadline is a big one.

0:25:38.800 --> 0:25:41.400
<v Speaker 8>So this is where we're expected to get the sectoral

0:25:41.440 --> 0:25:44.680
<v Speaker 8>tariff information as well as reciprocal tariffs. Our base case

0:25:44.760 --> 0:25:47.520
<v Speaker 8>is that he'll do something country bay country and he

0:25:47.520 --> 0:25:50.920
<v Speaker 8>won't incorporate a significant VAT. But if he does just that,

0:25:51.119 --> 0:25:52.639
<v Speaker 8>then at least that's a positive sign. And if he

0:25:52.680 --> 0:25:55.200
<v Speaker 8>doesn't do some significant thing on the sectoral side, then

0:25:55.240 --> 0:25:57.120
<v Speaker 8>that provides a little bit less of the GDP head

0:25:57.119 --> 0:26:00.440
<v Speaker 8>when then we're forecasting. But base cases, he's not gonna

0:26:00.440 --> 0:26:02.480
<v Speaker 8>go light on on on that day. He's been talking

0:26:02.480 --> 0:26:04.480
<v Speaker 8>about tariffs in a big way. If he wants to

0:26:04.480 --> 0:26:06.480
<v Speaker 8>do this sectoral things, he believes that that's gonna help

0:26:06.560 --> 0:26:10.240
<v Speaker 8>us manufacturing and wants some right size trade from a

0:26:10.280 --> 0:26:12.720
<v Speaker 8>country by country perspective, and has been talking about that

0:26:13.440 --> 0:26:15.560
<v Speaker 8>if they incorporate that, that could be a one point

0:26:15.560 --> 0:26:18.720
<v Speaker 8>four percent GDP headwind in addition to w to to

0:26:18.880 --> 0:26:20.920
<v Speaker 8>all the the sort of the the negative numbers that

0:26:20.920 --> 0:26:21.600
<v Speaker 8>we've talked about.

0:26:21.760 --> 0:26:24.760
<v Speaker 1>You think that April second is a key risk event

0:26:24.920 --> 0:26:26.879
<v Speaker 1>that investors aren't a paying enough attention to. We have

0:26:27.040 --> 0:26:31.159
<v Speaker 1>reporting that Jamison Greer, Uh, President Trump's new USTR chief

0:26:31.280 --> 0:26:34.040
<v Speaker 1>is trying to really drive the narrative when it comes

0:26:34.080 --> 0:26:36.400
<v Speaker 1>to April second. This is someone who is a thoughtful

0:26:36.480 --> 0:26:39.240
<v Speaker 1>trade lawyer. It's pretty calm, cool, collective compared to some

0:26:39.280 --> 0:26:42.240
<v Speaker 1>other individuals. Let's say, in the Trump orbit, does that

0:26:42.320 --> 0:26:44.320
<v Speaker 1>make you more encourage about what we can see?

0:26:44.840 --> 0:26:46.080
<v Speaker 8>I mean, I think it all comes down to what

0:26:46.080 --> 0:26:48.040
<v Speaker 8>Trump wants to do. Trump believes that the tariffs are

0:26:48.080 --> 0:26:50.760
<v Speaker 8>gonna be beneficial. He's gonna do what he wants to do.

0:26:50.880 --> 0:26:54.600
<v Speaker 8>And if that means doing sectoral tariffs, which find there's

0:26:54.680 --> 0:26:57.080
<v Speaker 8>arguments to do it and country by country, that's fair.

0:26:57.480 --> 0:26:59.960
<v Speaker 8>But what we've gotten so far has been a substant

0:27:00.520 --> 0:27:03.800
<v Speaker 8>headmund on GDP and that's fine. If this is the

0:27:03.840 --> 0:27:06.679
<v Speaker 8>direction of travel, it's just a negative GDP shock and

0:27:06.720 --> 0:27:09.159
<v Speaker 8>one point six growth is you know, if we end

0:27:09.240 --> 0:27:10.680
<v Speaker 8>up with that, that would be a decent scenario.

0:27:10.720 --> 0:27:11.560
<v Speaker 3>Realistically, at the.

0:27:11.560 --> 0:27:13.080
<v Speaker 1>End of the day, Trump will make the decision. It's

0:27:13.080 --> 0:27:16.320
<v Speaker 1>an individual that's been speaking about tariff since the nineteen eighties,

0:27:16.400 --> 0:27:19.800
<v Speaker 1>let alone before he entered politics. If that's the case

0:27:19.840 --> 0:27:22.119
<v Speaker 1>and it's such a hit to GDP, what does the

0:27:22.160 --> 0:27:24.520
<v Speaker 1>Fed look like do it one time inflationary shock of

0:27:24.520 --> 0:27:27.160
<v Speaker 1>tariffs are actually growth slowing.

0:27:27.480 --> 0:27:29.920
<v Speaker 8>So back in twenty eighteen, if you look back to

0:27:29.960 --> 0:27:32.879
<v Speaker 8>their tuebook, they said there were two scenarios that they

0:27:32.880 --> 0:27:34.679
<v Speaker 8>could go about. This one would be exactly what they

0:27:34.680 --> 0:27:36.920
<v Speaker 8>did was looking through the tariffs. They ultimately cut because

0:27:36.920 --> 0:27:39.399
<v Speaker 8>it hurt growth. Scenario two is where they have to

0:27:39.480 --> 0:27:42.160
<v Speaker 8>hike and cause a recession, and the deciding factor between

0:27:42.160 --> 0:27:44.320
<v Speaker 8>the two is inflation expectations. So this is gonna be

0:27:44.359 --> 0:27:46.040
<v Speaker 8>the main thing that they're gonna be looking at is

0:27:46.080 --> 0:27:48.840
<v Speaker 8>INFLA if inflation's expectations stay anchored, and as of now

0:27:49.320 --> 0:27:51.000
<v Speaker 8>it's a little bit mixed. Some of the surveys are

0:27:51.000 --> 0:27:52.600
<v Speaker 8>showing them to king up, some of them are a

0:27:52.600 --> 0:27:55.080
<v Speaker 8>little bit more noisy than others. So this is gonna

0:27:55.080 --> 0:27:57.399
<v Speaker 8>be the main thing. If inflation expectations and people feel

0:27:57.600 --> 0:27:59.760
<v Speaker 8>okay about the inflation backdrop, and the Fed can look

0:27:59.800 --> 0:28:01.800
<v Speaker 8>through it and ultimately cut as a result. If not,

0:28:01.840 --> 0:28:03.680
<v Speaker 8>they're gonna have their plain threshold is going to be

0:28:03.720 --> 0:28:05.800
<v Speaker 8>a lot higher in order to do so. The main

0:28:05.880 --> 0:28:08.640
<v Speaker 8>driver of inflation expectations, at least over the long term

0:28:08.800 --> 0:28:11.280
<v Speaker 8>is past inflation. So this is different than where we

0:28:11.280 --> 0:28:13.920
<v Speaker 8>were in twenty eighteen because twenty eighteen people don't really

0:28:13.920 --> 0:28:18.080
<v Speaker 8>remember inflation, most semesters didn't really experience it. This time

0:28:18.200 --> 0:28:21.000
<v Speaker 8>is very different. Our inflation expectations over the past ten

0:28:21.080 --> 0:28:24.640
<v Speaker 8>years are very have been shaped over the COVID pandemic,

0:28:24.680 --> 0:28:28.000
<v Speaker 8>where it's been a different backdrop, so expectations might react

0:28:28.040 --> 0:28:30.720
<v Speaker 8>differently this time. Plus the terraphy likely be a lot bigger.

0:28:30.880 --> 0:28:33.359
<v Speaker 5>You were talking about the statement of economic projections and

0:28:33.359 --> 0:28:36.199
<v Speaker 5>whether they'll signal a greater willingness to look at the

0:28:36.200 --> 0:28:39.520
<v Speaker 5>weakness and growth versus something that we have seen with

0:28:39.600 --> 0:28:43.280
<v Speaker 5>inflation expectations. How much do you see as sort of

0:28:43.280 --> 0:28:46.720
<v Speaker 5>an increase in worries about inflation at the same time

0:28:47.120 --> 0:28:48.200
<v Speaker 5>of potential weakness.

0:28:48.560 --> 0:28:50.160
<v Speaker 8>Yeah, So what's gonna be There's a couple things that

0:28:50.200 --> 0:28:52.240
<v Speaker 8>are gonna be interesting. One, what do they do with

0:28:52.240 --> 0:28:54.760
<v Speaker 8>their GDP forecast for twenty twenty five, What do they

0:28:54.760 --> 0:28:57.720
<v Speaker 8>do with inflation? What do they do with the Fed funds?

0:28:57.760 --> 0:28:59.560
<v Speaker 8>Right at the end of the year, so base cases,

0:28:59.560 --> 0:29:01.600
<v Speaker 8>they take down on their GDP something like one to

0:29:01.600 --> 0:29:05.000
<v Speaker 8>eight take up inflation to something like two seven, and

0:29:05.040 --> 0:29:07.480
<v Speaker 8>then what we're going to look for is within the

0:29:07.880 --> 0:29:10.360
<v Speaker 8>SEP you're going to see the risks around growth, growth

0:29:10.360 --> 0:29:12.520
<v Speaker 8>and inflation, and they're both going to be to higher

0:29:12.520 --> 0:29:15.440
<v Speaker 8>inflation and lower growth. So that's a back job where

0:29:15.840 --> 0:29:18.240
<v Speaker 8>you know, it's a very tough situation for them. And

0:29:18.640 --> 0:29:20.120
<v Speaker 8>right now I think they're probably going to keep the

0:29:20.160 --> 0:29:23.600
<v Speaker 8>two cuts and kind of see how this plays out. Ultimately,

0:29:23.600 --> 0:29:26.120
<v Speaker 8>they'll probably be forced to cut a little bit more

0:29:26.280 --> 0:29:27.600
<v Speaker 8>than you know within the in the.

0:29:27.560 --> 0:29:29.560
<v Speaker 5>Dots, you know, I keep getting struck by what Tom

0:29:29.600 --> 0:29:32.240
<v Speaker 5>Becker of Black Rock said, which I thought was really interesting,

0:29:32.280 --> 0:29:34.720
<v Speaker 5>this idea that everyone's exceptional in this new era where

0:29:34.720 --> 0:29:37.680
<v Speaker 5>fiscal spending is taking off in places like Europe and

0:29:37.760 --> 0:29:40.360
<v Speaker 5>places like China at the same time that, yeah, on

0:29:40.400 --> 0:29:42.480
<v Speaker 5>the margins fiscal straight in the US, but not really

0:29:42.520 --> 0:29:44.960
<v Speaker 5>later on where you're gonna get further fiscal expansion as well.

0:29:45.360 --> 0:29:48.560
<v Speaker 5>How much are you looking at a structural shift upward

0:29:48.640 --> 0:29:52.360
<v Speaker 5>in inflation globally that's going to also rebound on the

0:29:52.440 --> 0:29:54.920
<v Speaker 5>United States in a new way with a lot of

0:29:54.960 --> 0:29:57.959
<v Speaker 5>debt slashing around and a lot of debt financed funding.

0:29:58.520 --> 0:30:01.200
<v Speaker 8>You know what they all plays out the way it works,

0:30:01.480 --> 0:30:03.480
<v Speaker 8>we're sort of forecasting for this year, you're gonna end

0:30:03.560 --> 0:30:04.880
<v Speaker 8>up with a FED funds right that was lower than

0:30:04.920 --> 0:30:08.160
<v Speaker 8>would otherwise be the case. That is, we have a

0:30:08.160 --> 0:30:11.520
<v Speaker 8>material slow down in the economy because you know, it's

0:30:11.520 --> 0:30:13.800
<v Speaker 8>more about growth and inflation, and then you ultimately have

0:30:13.960 --> 0:30:16.440
<v Speaker 8>lower rates as a results. So I don't necessarily believe

0:30:16.440 --> 0:30:20.880
<v Speaker 8>in this big structural shift up in inflation temporarily, of course,

0:30:20.960 --> 0:30:24.720
<v Speaker 8>because of tariffs and some of the fiscal Perhaps you're

0:30:24.760 --> 0:30:26.840
<v Speaker 8>one slightly above two percent, but I don't think we're

0:30:26.840 --> 0:30:28.719
<v Speaker 8>talking about anything two and a half to three percent.

0:30:29.160 --> 0:30:31.600
<v Speaker 2>It's definitely free share, it's definitely Roth there of WOLD

0:30:31.640 --> 0:30:36.080
<v Speaker 2>three search. This is the Bloomberg Sevenance podcast, bringing you

0:30:36.320 --> 0:30:39.800
<v Speaker 2>the best in markets, economics, angiopolitics. You can watch the

0:30:39.800 --> 0:30:42.840
<v Speaker 2>show live on Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from six am

0:30:42.960 --> 0:30:46.120
<v Speaker 2>to nine am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple,

0:30:46.400 --> 0:30:49.240
<v Speaker 2>Spotify or anywhere else you listen, and as always on

0:30:49.280 --> 0:30:51.720
<v Speaker 2>the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.