WEBVTT - Daybreak Weekend: U.S Retail, ECB Meeting, TSMC Earnings

0:00:00.280 --> 0:00:07.720
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.

0:00:10.360 --> 0:00:12.640
<v Speaker 2>This is Bloomberg day Break Weekend, our global look at

0:00:12.640 --> 0:00:14.720
<v Speaker 2>the top stories in the coming week from our day

0:00:14.760 --> 0:00:17.520
<v Speaker 2>Break anchors all around the world. Straight ahead on the program,

0:00:17.520 --> 0:00:20.040
<v Speaker 2>and look at some key economic data in the US

0:00:20.120 --> 0:00:23.480
<v Speaker 2>amid and escalating tariff war between the US and China.

0:00:23.760 --> 0:00:25.400
<v Speaker 2>I'm Tom Busby in New York.

0:00:25.800 --> 0:00:28.160
<v Speaker 3>I'm Stephen Caroll in London, where we're taking stock of

0:00:28.240 --> 0:00:31.800
<v Speaker 3>the ECB's options in the face of trade tarafuncertainty.

0:00:32.360 --> 0:00:35.239
<v Speaker 4>I'm deg Prisner with a preview of next week's earnings

0:00:35.240 --> 0:00:36.800
<v Speaker 4>from Taiwan Semiconductors.

0:00:38.400 --> 0:00:42.440
<v Speaker 1>That's all straight ahead on Bloomberg Daybreak Weekend on Bloomberg

0:00:42.440 --> 0:00:46.160
<v Speaker 1>eleven to three, Yeero, New York, Bloomberg ninety nine to one, Washington, DC,

0:00:46.640 --> 0:00:50.920
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg ninety two to nine, Boston, DAB Digital Radio, London,

0:00:51.320 --> 0:00:54.520
<v Speaker 1>Sirius XM one twenty one, and around the world on

0:00:54.600 --> 0:00:57.760
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Radio, dot Com and the Bloomberg Business App.

0:01:01.840 --> 0:01:03.600
<v Speaker 2>To day to you, I'm Tom Busby, and we begin

0:01:03.640 --> 0:01:06.760
<v Speaker 2>today's program with a look at March retail sales data

0:01:06.800 --> 0:01:10.000
<v Speaker 2>in the US out this week, but it comes against

0:01:10.000 --> 0:01:13.760
<v Speaker 2>the backdrop of a chaotic and escalating global tariff war.

0:01:14.319 --> 0:01:15.760
<v Speaker 2>What will it tell us about the health of the

0:01:15.840 --> 0:01:19.119
<v Speaker 2>US consumer and the economy as we navigate a very

0:01:19.280 --> 0:01:22.320
<v Speaker 2>uncertain future. And for more we're joined by Stuart paul

0:01:22.440 --> 0:01:26.520
<v Speaker 2>Us Economists with Bloomberg Economics. Now, Stuart, looking backwards the

0:01:26.560 --> 0:01:29.959
<v Speaker 2>month of March, things were looking good. Inflation, wholesale and

0:01:30.160 --> 0:01:34.080
<v Speaker 2>consumer inflation was better than expected. We have this consensus

0:01:34.080 --> 0:01:38.160
<v Speaker 2>outlook for retail sales may surprise to the upside. Is

0:01:38.200 --> 0:01:39.160
<v Speaker 2>this all good news?

0:01:39.520 --> 0:01:41.919
<v Speaker 5>It is mostly good news. For the month of March.

0:01:42.400 --> 0:01:47.120
<v Speaker 5>As you mentioned, inflation was relatively muted. More importantly, inflation,

0:01:47.280 --> 0:01:50.320
<v Speaker 5>particularly in the items that would be affected by tariffs,

0:01:50.320 --> 0:01:54.400
<v Speaker 5>were muted. And from a consumer perspective, the behavior that

0:01:54.440 --> 0:01:58.320
<v Speaker 5>we saw was a front loading of purchases that consumers

0:01:58.360 --> 0:02:01.840
<v Speaker 5>expect to be tariffed. So not only were consumers pulling

0:02:01.840 --> 0:02:05.360
<v Speaker 5>forward their purchases of autos. Auto sales surge during the

0:02:05.400 --> 0:02:08.920
<v Speaker 5>month and that should boost retail sales. They were also

0:02:09.080 --> 0:02:13.680
<v Speaker 5>pulling forward their purchases of big durable goods as purchase

0:02:13.760 --> 0:02:18.640
<v Speaker 5>from major retailers that sell things like washing machines, coffee makers,

0:02:18.680 --> 0:02:21.400
<v Speaker 5>and so on. So we're going to get major tail

0:02:21.440 --> 0:02:27.040
<v Speaker 5>whens supporting retail sales at least temporarily in advance of

0:02:27.160 --> 0:02:29.760
<v Speaker 5>these tariffs. So we expect the March data to show

0:02:30.080 --> 0:02:35.399
<v Speaker 5>about one point three percent monthly growth in nominal retail sales. Now,

0:02:35.400 --> 0:02:39.480
<v Speaker 5>the thing is, retail sales started the year really poorly.

0:02:39.680 --> 0:02:42.919
<v Speaker 5>January was terrible. So when we think about what Q

0:02:43.120 --> 0:02:46.960
<v Speaker 5>one GDP growth is going to look like, real consumer

0:02:47.000 --> 0:02:49.359
<v Speaker 5>spending growth for the first quarter is just going to

0:02:49.440 --> 0:02:53.240
<v Speaker 5>run at an annualized pace of about zero point six

0:02:53.320 --> 0:02:57.040
<v Speaker 5>to zero point eight percent. That's compared to four percent

0:02:57.400 --> 0:02:59.920
<v Speaker 5>in Q four of last year. So as good as

0:03:00.120 --> 0:03:04.840
<v Speaker 5>March looked, as the tariff threat became real, uncertainty is

0:03:04.919 --> 0:03:07.080
<v Speaker 5>really the name of the game here, and it's going

0:03:07.120 --> 0:03:09.760
<v Speaker 5>to show up in the Q one data, but probably

0:03:09.800 --> 0:03:11.680
<v Speaker 5>not the March data specifically.

0:03:11.800 --> 0:03:14.560
<v Speaker 2>Okay, and again that was then, because now we have

0:03:14.960 --> 0:03:18.400
<v Speaker 2>a very different reality before those tariffs went into effect

0:03:18.440 --> 0:03:21.200
<v Speaker 2>and now and we know things could change, and they do.

0:03:21.480 --> 0:03:23.720
<v Speaker 2>Boy do they change day to day, hour to hour.

0:03:23.800 --> 0:03:27.840
<v Speaker 2>It seems this tariff war really threatening consumer spending, isn't it,

0:03:27.880 --> 0:03:30.560
<v Speaker 2>and frankly threatening the economy.

0:03:31.080 --> 0:03:34.680
<v Speaker 5>That's right. It's again the uncertainty element is creating a

0:03:34.760 --> 0:03:38.840
<v Speaker 5>huge overca overhang, not just for consumers, but also for

0:03:38.920 --> 0:03:42.080
<v Speaker 5>businesses that are trying to invest and want some certainty

0:03:42.120 --> 0:03:44.560
<v Speaker 5>around what policy is going to look like, who they're

0:03:44.640 --> 0:03:47.480
<v Speaker 5>trading partners are going to be, and what their financing

0:03:47.520 --> 0:03:49.320
<v Speaker 5>costs are going to look like. As we saw the

0:03:49.360 --> 0:03:52.760
<v Speaker 5>bond market getting roiled in the last week, So you're

0:03:52.920 --> 0:03:56.400
<v Speaker 5>totally right. Quick moving policy landscape is really having a

0:03:56.440 --> 0:03:59.640
<v Speaker 5>major effect. A few rules of thumb that I typically

0:03:59.720 --> 0:04:03.040
<v Speaker 5>like to apply when we think about let's say recession risk.

0:04:03.760 --> 0:04:08.520
<v Speaker 5>An increase in the average effective tarif rate of one

0:04:08.560 --> 0:04:13.680
<v Speaker 5>percentage point creates about fifteen basis points of drag on

0:04:13.840 --> 0:04:17.640
<v Speaker 5>cumulative real GDP growth. So the entire move that we

0:04:17.760 --> 0:04:22.039
<v Speaker 5>saw in the average effective tarif rate should shave off

0:04:22.200 --> 0:04:26.920
<v Speaker 5>about three percentage points from real GDP growth. And from

0:04:26.920 --> 0:04:31.960
<v Speaker 5>the inflation perspective, an increase that in the average effective

0:04:31.960 --> 0:04:35.000
<v Speaker 5>tarifrate like we saw moving up to about twenty five

0:04:35.040 --> 0:04:38.560
<v Speaker 5>percent should add about two and a half percentage points

0:04:38.560 --> 0:04:43.599
<v Speaker 5>to cumulative core inflation. So not good, especially for the

0:04:43.640 --> 0:04:48.160
<v Speaker 5>FED that's trying to balance its dual mandate of having

0:04:48.520 --> 0:04:54.159
<v Speaker 5>maximum employment and price stability. These tariff threats de anchor

0:04:54.320 --> 0:04:59.200
<v Speaker 5>or they unanchor inflation and inflation expectations, and they also

0:04:59.320 --> 0:05:02.080
<v Speaker 5>should be creating additional slack in the economy is a

0:05:02.080 --> 0:05:04.240
<v Speaker 5>problem for the FED. Where do we think that that's

0:05:04.279 --> 0:05:05.600
<v Speaker 5>going to shake out for the Fed?

0:05:05.640 --> 0:05:05.839
<v Speaker 6>Though?

0:05:06.200 --> 0:05:09.800
<v Speaker 5>The Fed, at least outwardly is saying that they are

0:05:10.000 --> 0:05:13.400
<v Speaker 5>very much so focused on raining and inflation. While the

0:05:13.480 --> 0:05:16.360
<v Speaker 5>numbers were good in March, that's backward looking. They are

0:05:16.680 --> 0:05:20.680
<v Speaker 5>worried about inflation pressures mounting, especially in the year year

0:05:20.720 --> 0:05:21.680
<v Speaker 5>and a half ahead.

0:05:23.160 --> 0:05:25.960
<v Speaker 2>And those inflation pressures are really going to hit the

0:05:26.000 --> 0:05:28.960
<v Speaker 2>auto industry. Let's talk about that, because it is a big,

0:05:29.080 --> 0:05:29.840
<v Speaker 2>big industry.

0:05:29.880 --> 0:05:30.080
<v Speaker 7>Here.

0:05:30.160 --> 0:05:32.240
<v Speaker 2>People say US doesn't make anything. We make a lot

0:05:32.279 --> 0:05:34.159
<v Speaker 2>of cars. Of course, we import a lot of cars,

0:05:34.760 --> 0:05:38.360
<v Speaker 2>but that twenty five percent tariff on imports is still

0:05:38.400 --> 0:05:41.200
<v Speaker 2>in effect. What do you see in the auto market

0:05:41.200 --> 0:05:42.880
<v Speaker 2>coming up? I mean, like you said, there was front

0:05:42.880 --> 0:05:45.720
<v Speaker 2>loading of buying of autos. What happens now.

0:05:45.880 --> 0:05:50.000
<v Speaker 5>There should be a cooling in auto sales and auto

0:05:50.080 --> 0:05:53.320
<v Speaker 5>purchases from consumers. It's a little bit peculiar that we've

0:05:53.360 --> 0:05:58.560
<v Speaker 5>seen auto prices fading just a touch so far. You

0:05:58.600 --> 0:06:01.880
<v Speaker 5>would think that autodeal would be very slow to cut

0:06:01.920 --> 0:06:05.320
<v Speaker 5>prices given, as you say, the expectation that there should

0:06:05.400 --> 0:06:10.600
<v Speaker 5>be given the expectation that there should be higher input costs,

0:06:10.839 --> 0:06:14.680
<v Speaker 5>higher prices as it meets to consumer. So we do

0:06:14.760 --> 0:06:17.280
<v Speaker 5>expect to see auto sales fading to a pace of

0:06:17.360 --> 0:06:20.480
<v Speaker 5>about fifty an annualized pace of about fifteen and a

0:06:20.520 --> 0:06:23.400
<v Speaker 5>half to sixteen million units a year. That's even probably

0:06:23.440 --> 0:06:26.640
<v Speaker 5>a touch high. By comparison, in March, we saw over

0:06:26.720 --> 0:06:30.960
<v Speaker 5>seventeen point over seventeen point seven million annualized units sold

0:06:31.000 --> 0:06:34.080
<v Speaker 5>during the month, So it's pretty significant fading and risk

0:06:34.080 --> 0:06:37.719
<v Speaker 5>aeskewed to the downside as prices are likely going to jump.

0:06:37.839 --> 0:06:39.760
<v Speaker 2>I mean, it's hard to say what consumers are thinking.

0:06:39.839 --> 0:06:43.200
<v Speaker 2>Do you think the US manufacturers will see a benefit

0:06:43.240 --> 0:06:46.320
<v Speaker 2>from this or is that just really wishful thinking.

0:06:47.279 --> 0:06:49.520
<v Speaker 5>It's the sort of thing that if these tariffs are

0:06:49.520 --> 0:06:52.640
<v Speaker 5>maintained for a long enough amount of time, it's possible

0:06:52.640 --> 0:06:56.520
<v Speaker 5>that they can see some improvement if capacity is built out,

0:06:56.800 --> 0:06:59.919
<v Speaker 5>if we don't see major retaliation from our trading partners.

0:07:00.680 --> 0:07:02.640
<v Speaker 5>But in the interim, there are definitely going to be

0:07:02.680 --> 0:07:06.440
<v Speaker 5>some growing pains, and auto producers are really struggling with

0:07:07.160 --> 0:07:08.960
<v Speaker 5>how to source the inputs that they need.

0:07:09.640 --> 0:07:12.080
<v Speaker 2>Wow, Well, there's a lot of uncertainty ahead. We know

0:07:12.200 --> 0:07:14.640
<v Speaker 2>that US retail sales for March are out this Wednesday,

0:07:14.680 --> 0:07:17.880
<v Speaker 2>ahead of Wall Street's opening bell our thanks to Stuart Paul,

0:07:18.000 --> 0:07:21.680
<v Speaker 2>us economists with Bloomberg Economics. We turn now to the

0:07:21.760 --> 0:07:24.280
<v Speaker 2>new earning season, which kicked off on Friday with some

0:07:24.360 --> 0:07:27.240
<v Speaker 2>of Wall Street's biggest banks. What we will focus on

0:07:27.280 --> 0:07:31.320
<v Speaker 2>earnings at Netflix. This earnings report will be far different

0:07:31.360 --> 0:07:33.840
<v Speaker 2>from past postings and for more we're joined by Geitha

0:07:33.960 --> 0:07:39.080
<v Speaker 2>rangonoffin Bloomberg Intelligence Analysts on US media. Well getha, thanks

0:07:39.080 --> 0:07:41.920
<v Speaker 2>for joining us. So what will make this report from

0:07:41.960 --> 0:07:44.160
<v Speaker 2>Netflix different from past reports?

0:07:44.520 --> 0:07:47.360
<v Speaker 6>This time around is going to be really really different

0:07:47.440 --> 0:07:51.720
<v Speaker 6>because Netflix is going to stop reporting subscriber metrics. Now,

0:07:51.720 --> 0:07:54.960
<v Speaker 6>we all know that Netflix really is a subscriber story.

0:07:55.040 --> 0:07:57.320
<v Speaker 6>I mean quarter in and quarter out, we all obsess

0:07:58.000 --> 0:08:00.800
<v Speaker 6>over the number of new subscribers that they are going

0:08:00.800 --> 0:08:04.200
<v Speaker 6>to post. But they did guide last year to the

0:08:04.240 --> 0:08:07.040
<v Speaker 6>fact that they are going to stop reporting these subscriber

0:08:07.080 --> 0:08:11.080
<v Speaker 6>metrics anything connected with subscriber metrics, So both the number

0:08:11.120 --> 0:08:14.040
<v Speaker 6>of actual subscriber gains as well as what they call

0:08:14.320 --> 0:08:18.360
<v Speaker 6>average revenue per member. They're going to stop reporting both

0:08:18.400 --> 0:08:21.920
<v Speaker 6>of those starting this quarter, so it's going to be very,

0:08:22.160 --> 0:08:25.640
<v Speaker 6>i think, a very different tone around time.

0:08:25.960 --> 0:08:28.000
<v Speaker 2>And this comes after they hit a record number of

0:08:28.040 --> 0:08:30.960
<v Speaker 2>subscribers last quarter, right, I mean, wouldn't you want to

0:08:31.280 --> 0:08:32.640
<v Speaker 2>talk about if you have growth?

0:08:33.040 --> 0:08:35.840
<v Speaker 6>Exactly? This is so ironic, Tom, I mean, they've just

0:08:36.120 --> 0:08:39.720
<v Speaker 6>are coming off the best year ever in the history

0:08:39.760 --> 0:08:44.040
<v Speaker 6>of the company forty one million new subscribers added in

0:08:44.080 --> 0:08:47.600
<v Speaker 6>twenty twenty four. That is even better than it was

0:08:47.679 --> 0:08:52.160
<v Speaker 6>during COVID, and so subscriber momentum is absolutely going to continue.

0:08:52.160 --> 0:08:55.360
<v Speaker 6>I mean, this is by far the biggest streaming service

0:08:55.440 --> 0:08:58.679
<v Speaker 6>in the world that has over three hundred million subscribers,

0:08:59.120 --> 0:09:01.480
<v Speaker 6>and we actually that they are well on their way

0:09:01.480 --> 0:09:05.440
<v Speaker 6>to gain about twenty five million again this year, especially

0:09:05.440 --> 0:09:07.520
<v Speaker 6>with all of their new initiatives and I'm talking here

0:09:07.640 --> 0:09:10.440
<v Speaker 6>about the crack down on password sharing, which they call

0:09:10.520 --> 0:09:14.000
<v Speaker 6>paid sharing, as well as this new ad supported tier

0:09:14.040 --> 0:09:17.520
<v Speaker 6>which is priced very very competitively at about you know,

0:09:17.559 --> 0:09:18.920
<v Speaker 6>seven ninety nine in the US.

0:09:19.440 --> 0:09:22.000
<v Speaker 2>Now, since they won't be reporting on that growth though

0:09:22.600 --> 0:09:25.320
<v Speaker 2>let's face it, it's all about operating revenue and especially

0:09:25.640 --> 0:09:27.120
<v Speaker 2>advertising revenue.

0:09:26.720 --> 0:09:30.200
<v Speaker 6>Then absolutely so the biggest metric now, and this is

0:09:30.200 --> 0:09:33.000
<v Speaker 6>a metric that they have been kind of trying to

0:09:33.040 --> 0:09:36.320
<v Speaker 6>promote over many many quarters now kind of shifting away

0:09:36.360 --> 0:09:39.600
<v Speaker 6>from this focus on subscribers to top line growth. So

0:09:39.679 --> 0:09:44.400
<v Speaker 6>revenue growth is the big metric. They are projecting about

0:09:44.559 --> 0:09:49.560
<v Speaker 6>eleven percent revenue increase in the first quarter, and you're right,

0:09:49.640 --> 0:09:53.000
<v Speaker 6>they are, you know, expecting advertising to become a bigger

0:09:53.040 --> 0:09:56.760
<v Speaker 6>and bigger portion of the business. To remember, advertising is

0:09:56.760 --> 0:09:58.719
<v Speaker 6>something that they are very very new at. This is

0:09:58.800 --> 0:10:04.240
<v Speaker 6>primarily a subscription driven business. So advertising last year, for instance,

0:10:04.400 --> 0:10:07.640
<v Speaker 6>was less than three percent of revenue. Now, granted, that

0:10:07.840 --> 0:10:10.760
<v Speaker 6>is going to increase pretty substantially as they kind of

0:10:10.880 --> 0:10:13.199
<v Speaker 6>open up more and more ad inventory, as they kind

0:10:13.240 --> 0:10:16.599
<v Speaker 6>of add more programming that is tailor made for advertising,

0:10:16.920 --> 0:10:19.560
<v Speaker 6>but it still will be a very very small portion

0:10:19.720 --> 0:10:23.800
<v Speaker 6>off the total revenue by until maybe twenty twenty six,

0:10:23.840 --> 0:10:24.680
<v Speaker 6>twenty twenty seven.

0:10:25.080 --> 0:10:27.240
<v Speaker 2>Well, we've seen some of those. It was the boxing

0:10:27.280 --> 0:10:29.360
<v Speaker 2>match with Jake Paul and Mike Tyson that was back

0:10:29.360 --> 0:10:33.960
<v Speaker 2>in November Christmas Day, to NFL teams, to NFL games playing,

0:10:34.000 --> 0:10:38.600
<v Speaker 2>so big advertising opportunities there. Let's talk about though this

0:10:38.679 --> 0:10:42.559
<v Speaker 2>past quarter. I believe they started WWE wrestling. We had

0:10:42.559 --> 0:10:46.560
<v Speaker 2>the Screen Actors Guild, what were maybe the big revenue

0:10:46.559 --> 0:10:50.400
<v Speaker 2>owners there for advertising and what's in the pipeline.

0:10:50.200 --> 0:10:53.800
<v Speaker 6>So they really had a huge content Sladure absolutely right

0:10:53.840 --> 0:10:57.280
<v Speaker 6>in pointing out that WWE started this January and it

0:10:57.360 --> 0:11:00.160
<v Speaker 6>continues to be one of their most watched pieces of

0:11:00.320 --> 0:11:02.960
<v Speaker 6>content week in and week out, So we know that

0:11:03.040 --> 0:11:06.440
<v Speaker 6>it is doing really really well for them and obviously

0:11:06.520 --> 0:11:09.880
<v Speaker 6>kind of contributing to the subscriber growth. And I think

0:11:09.960 --> 0:11:12.360
<v Speaker 6>over time what we're going to see, Tom is we're

0:11:12.360 --> 0:11:15.880
<v Speaker 6>going to see them go more aggressively after different sports rights.

0:11:15.920 --> 0:11:18.880
<v Speaker 6>I mean, we have many different properties coming on the

0:11:18.920 --> 0:11:22.480
<v Speaker 6>market over the next few months. Formula one is a

0:11:22.520 --> 0:11:25.199
<v Speaker 6>great example, and this is something that you know, Netflix

0:11:25.240 --> 0:11:27.960
<v Speaker 6>has already had a lot of series with Drive to Survive,

0:11:28.040 --> 0:11:30.160
<v Speaker 6>So we think that the Formula one rights actually makes

0:11:30.200 --> 0:11:33.480
<v Speaker 6>a ton of sense for Netflix. You have UFC again

0:11:33.520 --> 0:11:36.200
<v Speaker 6>that kind of complements the whole you know, WWE. So

0:11:36.240 --> 0:11:38.800
<v Speaker 6>we think eventually they are going to go into sports

0:11:38.880 --> 0:11:42.400
<v Speaker 6>rights much more aggressively, which again builds their live programming

0:11:42.440 --> 0:11:47.200
<v Speaker 6>slate and again works really well for that advertising, you

0:11:47.240 --> 0:11:50.360
<v Speaker 6>know revenue base. Now in terms of content, I mean

0:11:50.400 --> 0:11:53.000
<v Speaker 6>of course, they had a really strong content lineup in

0:11:53.040 --> 0:11:55.920
<v Speaker 6>the first quarter of twenty twenty five, but you know it,

0:11:56.120 --> 0:11:59.040
<v Speaker 6>the whole year actually is just going to be one

0:11:59.120 --> 0:12:02.520
<v Speaker 6>blockbuster after the other. So, you know, just to give

0:12:02.559 --> 0:12:05.440
<v Speaker 6>you an example, you know, you have a Squid Game

0:12:05.720 --> 0:12:08.960
<v Speaker 6>the season finale, that the final season coming up. You

0:12:09.040 --> 0:12:12.000
<v Speaker 6>have Stranger Things the final season coming up this year.

0:12:12.360 --> 0:12:15.160
<v Speaker 6>You have Wednesday the next season coming up there. So

0:12:15.360 --> 0:12:18.280
<v Speaker 6>you know they have constantly referred to twenty twenty five.

0:12:18.360 --> 0:12:21.040
<v Speaker 6>Really the content state is being an embarrassment of riches.

0:12:21.440 --> 0:12:23.600
<v Speaker 6>So it is going to be a lot of good

0:12:23.679 --> 0:12:26.480
<v Speaker 6>content and a lot of titles to choose from.

0:12:26.559 --> 0:12:30.240
<v Speaker 2>Netflix's first quarter earnings out this Thursday, our thanks to

0:12:30.280 --> 0:12:34.440
<v Speaker 2>Githa raganathin Bloomberg Intelligence analyst on US media, and coming

0:12:34.520 --> 0:12:36.440
<v Speaker 2>up on Bloomberg day Break weekend, we'll look at the

0:12:36.440 --> 0:12:41.000
<v Speaker 2>ECB's options in the face of Trump tariff uncertainty. I'm

0:12:41.040 --> 0:12:59.600
<v Speaker 2>Tom Busby, and this is Bloomberger. This is Bloomberg day

0:12:59.600 --> 0:13:01.680
<v Speaker 2>Break week again, our global look ahead at the top

0:13:01.720 --> 0:13:04.880
<v Speaker 2>stories for investors in the coming week. I'm Tom Busby

0:13:04.880 --> 0:13:07.400
<v Speaker 2>and New York. Up later in our program will look

0:13:07.440 --> 0:13:10.640
<v Speaker 2>ahead to first quarter earnings from the chip maker TSMC.

0:13:11.000 --> 0:13:15.360
<v Speaker 2>But first, European Central bank officials under pressure to respond

0:13:15.480 --> 0:13:19.760
<v Speaker 2>as US President Donald Trump's tariffs wreak havoc with global markets.

0:13:20.040 --> 0:13:23.240
<v Speaker 2>But just how should policymakers react in the face of

0:13:23.280 --> 0:13:26.160
<v Speaker 2>such uncertainty. For more, let's go to London and bring

0:13:26.160 --> 0:13:29.040
<v Speaker 2>in Bloomberg Daybreak europe Banker Stephen Carroll.

0:13:29.120 --> 0:13:32.640
<v Speaker 3>Tom European Central Bank policymakers have lowered the deposit rate

0:13:32.880 --> 0:13:36.120
<v Speaker 3>six times since last June. At its current level of

0:13:36.120 --> 0:13:38.920
<v Speaker 3>two and a half percent. It's approaching territory that some

0:13:39.000 --> 0:13:43.680
<v Speaker 3>think no longer constrains demand, but economic realities have shifted.

0:13:43.960 --> 0:13:46.920
<v Speaker 3>With Trump's tariffs and the threat of an escalating trade

0:13:46.920 --> 0:13:50.160
<v Speaker 3>war between the US and China, hammering financial markets and

0:13:50.600 --> 0:13:53.920
<v Speaker 3>raising the specter of a global recession. Analysts and traders

0:13:53.920 --> 0:13:57.079
<v Speaker 3>have become increasingly convinced that the only direction for Euro

0:13:57.200 --> 0:14:01.199
<v Speaker 3>Area interest rates is down, and some key rate setters

0:14:01.200 --> 0:14:04.480
<v Speaker 3>are backing another cut this time around. Francis Fons Pavio

0:14:04.600 --> 0:14:07.360
<v Speaker 3>de Gallo says the ECB should lower interest rates soon

0:14:07.800 --> 0:14:10.880
<v Speaker 3>as the post tariff market fallout favors such a move.

0:14:11.480 --> 0:14:13.319
<v Speaker 3>He went on to argue that the trade war will

0:14:13.320 --> 0:14:16.440
<v Speaker 3>have a non negligible direct impact on the economy that

0:14:16.480 --> 0:14:19.800
<v Speaker 3>will take about a quarter percentage point of growth this year.

0:14:20.160 --> 0:14:23.560
<v Speaker 3>Nevin lad Gallo joins others, including Finland's Uli Ren who

0:14:23.600 --> 0:14:26.400
<v Speaker 3>are convinced that the current backdrop makes the case for

0:14:26.520 --> 0:14:31.040
<v Speaker 3>cutting rates stronger. Based on an assessment of inflation and growth.

0:14:31.480 --> 0:14:35.640
<v Speaker 3>Nichols for an April cut. Aside, other policymakers have restrained

0:14:35.640 --> 0:14:39.000
<v Speaker 3>from saying where rates may settle given the elevated uncertainty.

0:14:39.200 --> 0:14:42.800
<v Speaker 3>Austrian Center Bank tief Robert Holtzman maintains there's no reason

0:14:42.920 --> 0:14:45.640
<v Speaker 3>for an immediate cut. He believes the Center Bank should

0:14:45.680 --> 0:14:49.760
<v Speaker 3>allow the current trade related uncertainty to dissipate before considering

0:14:49.840 --> 0:14:53.800
<v Speaker 3>lowering rates, further arguing that tariffs and threats of countermeasures

0:14:53.800 --> 0:14:57.040
<v Speaker 3>make it next to impossible to predict if inflation in

0:14:57.040 --> 0:15:00.000
<v Speaker 3>the twenty nation Eurozone will continue to approach the ECB's

0:15:00.160 --> 0:15:04.200
<v Speaker 3>two target as planned. The Housman's hawkish point of view

0:15:04.280 --> 0:15:06.680
<v Speaker 3>are likely clash with many of those colleagues when the

0:15:06.680 --> 0:15:10.440
<v Speaker 3>Governing Council gathers in the coming days. So how much

0:15:10.480 --> 0:15:13.880
<v Speaker 3>breathing room do European policymakers really have? It's something we've

0:15:13.880 --> 0:15:17.320
<v Speaker 3>been discussing with Catherine Nice, chief European Economists at PAGIM

0:15:17.360 --> 0:15:18.000
<v Speaker 3>Fixed Income.

0:15:18.320 --> 0:15:21.320
<v Speaker 8>If we look at the euro Area, you know, I'm

0:15:21.320 --> 0:15:24.000
<v Speaker 8>not saying it's easy for them to make these changes.

0:15:24.040 --> 0:15:26.520
<v Speaker 8>I'm just saying relative to the US, they have way

0:15:26.560 --> 0:15:31.440
<v Speaker 8>more scope to ease policy to support I mean, if

0:15:31.520 --> 0:15:34.600
<v Speaker 8>we look at, for example, the tariff impact, the kinds

0:15:34.720 --> 0:15:37.920
<v Speaker 8>of goods that the Euro Area tends to import from

0:15:37.920 --> 0:15:41.080
<v Speaker 8>the US are not really final goods. They don't go

0:15:41.200 --> 0:15:45.320
<v Speaker 8>straight into the consumption basket, so the inflationary shock will

0:15:45.360 --> 0:15:49.720
<v Speaker 8>be less. You also have to factor in the you

0:15:49.760 --> 0:15:52.840
<v Speaker 8>know that global growth will be slower. The Euro Area

0:15:52.880 --> 0:15:55.560
<v Speaker 8>is a much more open economic region. There's a risk

0:15:55.600 --> 0:15:57.320
<v Speaker 8>that China is going to dump a lot of that

0:15:57.400 --> 0:16:01.320
<v Speaker 8>excess capacity. So there's all these deflationary pressures and there

0:16:01.360 --> 0:16:05.440
<v Speaker 8>isn't that big inflationary push. And the starting point for

0:16:05.480 --> 0:16:08.800
<v Speaker 8>the ECB is much cleaner than it is for the

0:16:08.920 --> 0:16:12.920
<v Speaker 8>US because inflation already is basically at target. So I

0:16:12.960 --> 0:16:15.440
<v Speaker 8>think that does other things equal make it easier. We

0:16:15.440 --> 0:16:16.720
<v Speaker 8>can then talk about the fiscal.

0:16:17.320 --> 0:16:19.920
<v Speaker 9>Well, let's talk about then maybe pause on the fiscal

0:16:19.960 --> 0:16:22.160
<v Speaker 9>on top of the bond moves here, because the yield

0:16:22.400 --> 0:16:24.280
<v Speaker 9>kind of moves that you saw in the German yield

0:16:24.280 --> 0:16:27.240
<v Speaker 9>prior to all these terror announcements was pricing in fiscal

0:16:27.240 --> 0:16:30.480
<v Speaker 9>spend over the next ten years. How believable is that

0:16:30.480 --> 0:16:33.640
<v Speaker 9>fiscal spend? How believable are yield at.

0:16:33.480 --> 0:16:34.320
<v Speaker 5>Where they are right now?

0:16:34.880 --> 0:16:39.320
<v Speaker 8>Well, who knows what they're going to announce and how

0:16:39.400 --> 0:16:43.880
<v Speaker 8>quickly you know, I, you know, I do hold out

0:16:44.440 --> 0:16:47.600
<v Speaker 8>some degree of optimism that you know with Germany haven't

0:16:47.640 --> 0:16:51.280
<v Speaker 8>taken this bold step forward, you know, breaking you know,

0:16:51.400 --> 0:16:54.320
<v Speaker 8>smashing through a couple of political red lines to get

0:16:54.360 --> 0:16:59.160
<v Speaker 8>through significantly higher defense and infrastructure spending that they're sort

0:16:59.200 --> 0:17:02.000
<v Speaker 8>of leading from the front, and we see more initiatives

0:17:02.120 --> 0:17:05.280
<v Speaker 8>like this. I think we could see perhaps you know,

0:17:05.320 --> 0:17:09.480
<v Speaker 8>we're seeing some leaks in the press around EU bond issuance,

0:17:09.640 --> 0:17:12.000
<v Speaker 8>you know, something that looks a bit more grant likes,

0:17:12.119 --> 0:17:14.440
<v Speaker 8>but perhaps just a fraction of the size of the

0:17:14.560 --> 0:17:18.240
<v Speaker 8>kind of package we saw during the pandemic. We could see,

0:17:18.320 --> 0:17:21.840
<v Speaker 8>you know, a coalition of the willing also forging together,

0:17:21.960 --> 0:17:27.320
<v Speaker 8>so you know, a European not an EU vehicle financing

0:17:27.400 --> 0:17:32.359
<v Speaker 8>vehicle to support defense. You know, we've already seen the

0:17:32.400 --> 0:17:35.920
<v Speaker 8>EU water down and ease and change some of its

0:17:36.000 --> 0:17:40.080
<v Speaker 8>fiscal spending rules to give member states more discretion. So

0:17:40.240 --> 0:17:42.800
<v Speaker 8>all of this, I think is still to play for.

0:17:43.280 --> 0:17:46.800
<v Speaker 3>That was Catherine Nice, chief European economist at PGIM Fixed Income,

0:17:46.800 --> 0:17:50.040
<v Speaker 3>speaking to Bloomberg's critic Good to Guy Johnson and Anna Edwards.

0:17:50.560 --> 0:17:54.840
<v Speaker 3>So Trump has laid his gauntlet. How should the ECB respond?

0:17:54.920 --> 0:17:58.000
<v Speaker 3>It's a question I put to ECB reporter Janna Randou.

0:17:57.960 --> 0:18:02.159
<v Speaker 7>Words is the first line off the I mean EASYB

0:18:02.280 --> 0:18:06.080
<v Speaker 7>President Christine le Gard is not known for being titled

0:18:06.119 --> 0:18:10.359
<v Speaker 7>when it comes to criticizing tariffs or Trump. But also,

0:18:10.400 --> 0:18:13.840
<v Speaker 7>of course, in order for that to be effective, that

0:18:13.960 --> 0:18:18.040
<v Speaker 7>needs somebody to listen, and I'm not so sure you

0:18:18.040 --> 0:18:21.280
<v Speaker 7>know she has. She has the right counterpart there. But

0:18:22.000 --> 0:18:25.800
<v Speaker 7>of course we need to say that uncertainty itself is

0:18:25.840 --> 0:18:29.800
<v Speaker 7>bad for the economy, for for for confidence. Uh, it's

0:18:29.840 --> 0:18:33.400
<v Speaker 7>not something the ECB will will react to. So inflation

0:18:34.000 --> 0:18:37.200
<v Speaker 7>is still the guiding staff for everything the ECB does.

0:18:37.359 --> 0:18:40.840
<v Speaker 7>And of course it's much too soon to tell what

0:18:40.960 --> 0:18:45.720
<v Speaker 7>kind of implications uh, the the events of the past days, weeks,

0:18:45.920 --> 0:18:50.480
<v Speaker 7>months have on inflation in the Aurozone. Growth for sure

0:18:50.680 --> 0:18:53.400
<v Speaker 7>is probably going to be weaker as a result of

0:18:53.560 --> 0:18:59.000
<v Speaker 7>what we've seen on inflation. The verdict is very much unclear,

0:18:59.160 --> 0:19:02.679
<v Speaker 7>and and that I think will very much complicate the

0:19:02.760 --> 0:19:06.800
<v Speaker 7>debate at the upcoming meeting and also the decision.

0:19:07.119 --> 0:19:11.520
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, indeed, because this challenge of balancing the inflationary risks,

0:19:11.600 --> 0:19:15.080
<v Speaker 3>because you know, higher tariffs could in theory boost inflation

0:19:15.240 --> 0:19:18.400
<v Speaker 3>but also hurt growth, which which makes it a difficult

0:19:18.480 --> 0:19:20.760
<v Speaker 3>balance for policymakers to try to work out.

0:19:21.400 --> 0:19:25.679
<v Speaker 7>Absolutely absolutely, I mean, it really seems that growth is

0:19:25.720 --> 0:19:30.720
<v Speaker 7>going to be lower because of uncertainty because tariffs essentially

0:19:30.800 --> 0:19:36.400
<v Speaker 7>close off export markets. You will find optimists who say, well,

0:19:36.440 --> 0:19:39.040
<v Speaker 7>but there are you know, you can explore new export markets,

0:19:39.280 --> 0:19:42.880
<v Speaker 7>you can form close trade alliances elsewhere. But that's more

0:19:42.920 --> 0:19:45.480
<v Speaker 7>of a medium to long term thing. In the short term,

0:19:45.520 --> 0:19:48.400
<v Speaker 7>it will hit growth on inflation. It very much depends

0:19:48.480 --> 0:19:51.760
<v Speaker 7>on the kind of tariffs, which kind of goods, It

0:19:51.880 --> 0:19:56.280
<v Speaker 7>very much depends on the countermeasures, It depends on the duration.

0:19:57.560 --> 0:19:59.960
<v Speaker 7>So yeah, your guess is as good.

0:19:59.760 --> 0:20:03.440
<v Speaker 3>As well a little bit less guess work coming from

0:20:03.480 --> 0:20:07.080
<v Speaker 3>markets when it comes to this upcoming decision from the CB.

0:20:07.280 --> 0:20:10.760
<v Speaker 3>They're pricing in a rate cut, but how much divergence

0:20:10.880 --> 0:20:13.720
<v Speaker 3>is there amongst policymakers. What have we heard in terms

0:20:13.720 --> 0:20:16.840
<v Speaker 3>of the views about how the ECB should act now

0:20:16.880 --> 0:20:19.240
<v Speaker 3>given all of the uncertainty that you just mentioned.

0:20:19.600 --> 0:20:22.560
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, I mean everyone will probably tell you and has

0:20:22.640 --> 0:20:29.040
<v Speaker 7>told us, that agility is needed, vigilance is needed, caution,

0:20:30.560 --> 0:20:34.080
<v Speaker 7>no pre commitment, which makes of course, you know, figuring

0:20:34.080 --> 0:20:38.640
<v Speaker 7>out what will happen very difficult. I would say that

0:20:39.200 --> 0:20:42.479
<v Speaker 7>while it was you know, you could say fifty to

0:20:42.480 --> 0:20:45.200
<v Speaker 7>fifty on whether there was going to be a cut

0:20:45.640 --> 0:20:49.720
<v Speaker 7>or not at the upcoming meeting right after the last one.

0:20:50.080 --> 0:20:55.520
<v Speaker 7>Now I would say the consensus has shifted more toward

0:20:55.560 --> 0:20:59.160
<v Speaker 7>of you know, favoring and more favoring a cut, even

0:20:59.160 --> 0:21:01.560
<v Speaker 7>though there are are still skeptics, and I spoke to

0:21:01.600 --> 0:21:04.280
<v Speaker 7>one of them just before the quiet period kicked in.

0:21:04.320 --> 0:21:08.080
<v Speaker 7>That's Austria, as Robert Holtzmann, who says there's absolutely no

0:21:08.200 --> 0:21:10.840
<v Speaker 7>reason of why the ECB should cut at this point

0:21:10.880 --> 0:21:13.600
<v Speaker 7>in time. Inflation is nearly at the target in interest

0:21:13.680 --> 0:21:17.480
<v Speaker 7>rates so low, uncertainty is incredibly high, and we should

0:21:17.480 --> 0:21:20.760
<v Speaker 7>really wait until the fog has cleared. And and that

0:21:20.840 --> 0:21:24.439
<v Speaker 7>makes sense in my ear, of course. But at the

0:21:24.440 --> 0:21:27.000
<v Speaker 7>same time, I believe people who say, well, you know,

0:21:27.040 --> 0:21:31.440
<v Speaker 7>if uncertainty is this high, that dams investment that you know,

0:21:31.520 --> 0:21:36.000
<v Speaker 7>puts in place processes that aren't easily fixed. And also

0:21:36.440 --> 0:21:42.560
<v Speaker 7>with inflation moving toward the target, we have room to yeah,

0:21:42.600 --> 0:21:45.720
<v Speaker 7>to move into a more neutral policy setting. So there's

0:21:45.840 --> 0:21:51.159
<v Speaker 7>arguments for both sides, and overall it won't be an

0:21:51.160 --> 0:21:54.920
<v Speaker 7>easy meeting. There will be disagreements and differences of opinion,

0:21:54.960 --> 0:21:59.600
<v Speaker 7>but I think a cut is what needs to be expected.

0:22:00.840 --> 0:22:04.880
<v Speaker 3>Well, just you mentioned the trajectory that inflation had been

0:22:04.880 --> 0:22:07.440
<v Speaker 3>going in as well, just remind us of where we

0:22:07.480 --> 0:22:10.840
<v Speaker 3>are in that process, because we are down dramatically from

0:22:10.880 --> 0:22:13.840
<v Speaker 3>the spike that we saw during the energy crisis a

0:22:13.840 --> 0:22:14.600
<v Speaker 3>couple of years ago.

0:22:15.160 --> 0:22:19.359
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, so we moved from a peak of just over

0:22:19.640 --> 0:22:23.639
<v Speaker 7>ten percent, so double digit inflation, to just over two

0:22:23.880 --> 0:22:27.480
<v Speaker 7>and so we are at this at this point where

0:22:27.520 --> 0:22:32.280
<v Speaker 7>inflation just over to to target. With insight, we've seen

0:22:33.119 --> 0:22:37.080
<v Speaker 7>quite some progress also on the core rate, and even

0:22:37.200 --> 0:22:40.040
<v Speaker 7>services have come down, which which has long been and

0:22:40.640 --> 0:22:44.359
<v Speaker 7>in fannas is still you know, a point where people

0:22:44.400 --> 0:22:49.800
<v Speaker 7>worry because it is still still running at very elevated levels,

0:22:49.840 --> 0:22:52.439
<v Speaker 7>but there has been movement in recent months so that

0:22:53.560 --> 0:22:56.960
<v Speaker 7>services inflation is coming down, of course, and what the

0:22:57.040 --> 0:23:01.560
<v Speaker 7>ECB is really happy about is that pages are finally

0:23:01.600 --> 0:23:06.320
<v Speaker 7>on track. Wage growth has slowed, it's it's behaving exactly

0:23:06.359 --> 0:23:09.840
<v Speaker 7>as policymakers expected. So they're taking a lot of confidence

0:23:09.840 --> 0:23:14.280
<v Speaker 7>from the fact that essentially the domestic part of inflation,

0:23:14.440 --> 0:23:17.640
<v Speaker 7>which which can which can be very dangerous because that's

0:23:17.680 --> 0:23:21.719
<v Speaker 7>where you know, yeah, that's the forceful kind of uh

0:23:22.200 --> 0:23:25.520
<v Speaker 7>infiction that's very difficult to control, and and that hinges on.

0:23:25.600 --> 0:23:28.280
<v Speaker 7>People are being convinced that the ECP can can do

0:23:28.359 --> 0:23:31.600
<v Speaker 7>its job of guaranteeing pres stability, that this is now

0:23:31.640 --> 0:23:36.160
<v Speaker 7>finally all moving in the right direction. So that's partly

0:23:36.200 --> 0:23:39.880
<v Speaker 7>what or mostly what has has driven the interest rate

0:23:39.920 --> 0:23:41.719
<v Speaker 7>cuts of of the past months.

0:23:42.160 --> 0:23:44.600
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, indeed, of course, so much could change in the

0:23:44.600 --> 0:23:46.720
<v Speaker 3>path ahead, but it's a good to remind ourselves of

0:23:47.040 --> 0:23:50.720
<v Speaker 3>where we are now going into this meeting. In terms

0:23:50.760 --> 0:23:52.840
<v Speaker 3>of the debate over the terminal rate, there's been this

0:23:52.920 --> 0:23:55.200
<v Speaker 3>has been a long running conversation, but has that now

0:23:55.280 --> 0:23:57.879
<v Speaker 3>also been thrown up in the air with the uncertainty

0:23:57.920 --> 0:23:58.840
<v Speaker 3>over tariffs.

0:23:59.440 --> 0:24:02.680
<v Speaker 7>I mean, there was no consensus before where the terminal

0:24:02.760 --> 0:24:06.920
<v Speaker 7>rate was going to be, so there's probably even less consensus. Now,

0:24:07.720 --> 0:24:10.280
<v Speaker 7>I would still say that two percent is a pretty

0:24:10.280 --> 0:24:14.840
<v Speaker 7>good guess, which would mean two more quarter point cuts,

0:24:15.200 --> 0:24:18.000
<v Speaker 7>which which also happens to be what a lot of

0:24:18.040 --> 0:24:22.919
<v Speaker 7>economists are expecting. But you know, we have to be honest.

0:24:24.560 --> 0:24:26.400
<v Speaker 7>It could be that it could be more, it could

0:24:26.400 --> 0:24:30.440
<v Speaker 7>be less. What I would be willing to bet money

0:24:30.440 --> 0:24:32.840
<v Speaker 7>on is the ECB is not yet done. But how

0:24:32.920 --> 0:24:36.760
<v Speaker 7>much further it has to go, whether it's another two cuts,

0:24:37.000 --> 0:24:38.520
<v Speaker 7>three cuts, who knows.

0:24:38.840 --> 0:24:42.320
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, You've seen the CB handle a fair number of

0:24:42.359 --> 0:24:44.919
<v Speaker 3>crises in your time covering the European Central Bank, and

0:24:45.040 --> 0:24:47.879
<v Speaker 3>I wonder what we should have learned from those past

0:24:47.920 --> 0:24:50.560
<v Speaker 3>experiences that perhaps might inform what is going to be

0:24:50.600 --> 0:24:53.399
<v Speaker 3>a very challenging time for the European economy given the

0:24:53.440 --> 0:24:54.360
<v Speaker 3>trade uncertainty.

0:24:55.160 --> 0:24:59.760
<v Speaker 7>Yeah. Absolutely, and I think we've seen Yeah, as you

0:24:59.800 --> 0:25:02.200
<v Speaker 7>said that, we've seen many crisis and we don't even

0:25:02.240 --> 0:25:05.800
<v Speaker 7>need to look back very much. And I think the

0:25:06.600 --> 0:25:10.560
<v Speaker 7>confidence I have is that the ECB has proven that

0:25:10.960 --> 0:25:14.679
<v Speaker 7>if push comes to shove, it is very very quick

0:25:14.800 --> 0:25:18.679
<v Speaker 7>in coming up with solutions and devising tools that you

0:25:18.760 --> 0:25:24.440
<v Speaker 7>wouldn't necessarily have expected and figuring out and helping where

0:25:24.520 --> 0:25:25.320
<v Speaker 7>help is needed.

0:25:25.520 --> 0:25:28.360
<v Speaker 3>My thanks to Bloomberg's Jana Randau. We'll have full coverage

0:25:28.400 --> 0:25:31.120
<v Speaker 3>of the upcoming EASV rate decision and its applications here

0:25:31.160 --> 0:25:34.280
<v Speaker 3>on Bloomberg. I'm Stephen Caroll in London. You can catch

0:25:34.359 --> 0:25:37.200
<v Speaker 3>us every weekday morning here for Bloomberg Daybreak Europe, beginning

0:25:37.240 --> 0:25:41.399
<v Speaker 3>at six am in London at one am on Wall Street, Tom, Thank.

0:25:41.320 --> 0:25:43.879
<v Speaker 2>You, Steven, And coming up on Bloomberg day Break weekend,

0:25:43.880 --> 0:25:46.040
<v Speaker 2>I'll look ahead to first quarter earnings from the world's

0:25:46.080 --> 0:25:50.359
<v Speaker 2>biggest computer chip maker. I'm Tom Busby, and this is Bloomberg.

0:26:01.560 --> 0:26:04.040
<v Speaker 2>This is Bloomberg day Break Weekend, our global look ahead

0:26:04.040 --> 0:26:06.320
<v Speaker 2>at the top stories for investors in the coming week.

0:26:06.640 --> 0:26:09.760
<v Speaker 2>I'm Tom Busby in New York. It's the biggest chip

0:26:09.800 --> 0:26:13.000
<v Speaker 2>manufacturer in the world. In this week, it'll report first

0:26:13.080 --> 0:26:15.600
<v Speaker 2>quarter earnings. For more, let's get to the host of

0:26:15.640 --> 0:26:17.920
<v Speaker 2>the Daybreak Asia podcast, Doug Krisner.

0:26:18.480 --> 0:26:23.000
<v Speaker 4>Tom. Taiwan Semiconductor is trying to navigate a shifting landscape

0:26:23.000 --> 0:26:26.040
<v Speaker 4>when it comes to US trade policy. Back in March,

0:26:26.200 --> 0:26:30.159
<v Speaker 4>TSMC announced plans to invest an additional one hundred billion

0:26:30.240 --> 0:26:34.399
<v Speaker 4>dollars in US chip factories. Now by producing chips in

0:26:34.440 --> 0:26:38.320
<v Speaker 4>the States. TSMC would avoid US tariffs, and President Trump

0:26:38.600 --> 0:26:40.680
<v Speaker 4>has repeatedly made that point.

0:26:40.920 --> 0:26:43.399
<v Speaker 10>They have to come back because the tariffs are forcing

0:26:43.440 --> 0:26:46.920
<v Speaker 10>them to come back. And remember there are no tariffs

0:26:46.920 --> 0:26:49.880
<v Speaker 10>if you build here, and that's a big factor.

0:26:50.240 --> 0:26:53.679
<v Speaker 4>Recently, there were also reports of a potential joint venture

0:26:53.760 --> 0:26:58.560
<v Speaker 4>between TSMC and Intel. This jv would operate Intel chip

0:26:58.600 --> 0:27:01.280
<v Speaker 4>foundries in the United States. So there is a lot

0:27:01.320 --> 0:27:03.639
<v Speaker 4>to consider as we look ahead to the earnings in

0:27:03.680 --> 0:27:06.800
<v Speaker 4>the week ahead from TSMC. So let's bring in Jane

0:27:06.840 --> 0:27:10.760
<v Speaker 4>Lanhi Lee North Asia, tech reporter for Bloomberg News. Jane

0:27:10.840 --> 0:27:13.520
<v Speaker 4>joins us from our bureau in Taipei. Thank you for

0:27:13.600 --> 0:27:16.680
<v Speaker 4>making time to chat with me. Until very recently, I

0:27:16.680 --> 0:27:19.960
<v Speaker 4>think it's fair to say the conversation until this market

0:27:20.000 --> 0:27:23.800
<v Speaker 4>instability had been focused very much on AI. Of course,

0:27:23.840 --> 0:27:26.080
<v Speaker 4>there was the deep Seek moment in China. We know

0:27:26.200 --> 0:27:29.200
<v Speaker 4>that was an accelerant. And when you think of AI

0:27:29.280 --> 0:27:32.760
<v Speaker 4>and AI chips, you think of Nvidia, you think of Nvidia,

0:27:32.960 --> 0:27:37.160
<v Speaker 4>you obviously think of TSMC. Are we expecting blowout earnings

0:27:37.200 --> 0:27:39.600
<v Speaker 4>this week from Taiwan semi well.

0:27:39.359 --> 0:27:44.640
<v Speaker 10>Earnings wise, yeah, Analysts are estimating fifty five percent net

0:27:44.680 --> 0:27:48.600
<v Speaker 10>income growth for the first quarter. Well, but I think

0:27:48.680 --> 0:27:51.320
<v Speaker 10>people are not going to be focused just on these numbers.

0:27:51.480 --> 0:27:56.199
<v Speaker 10>What everyone will be looking to hear is what is

0:27:56.280 --> 0:28:00.040
<v Speaker 10>going on with the tariffs, what is going on with

0:28:00.040 --> 0:28:05.560
<v Speaker 10>with pressure potentially from the Trump administration on TSMC to

0:28:06.040 --> 0:28:10.920
<v Speaker 10>help Intel, which has been struggling. So these are going

0:28:10.960 --> 0:28:14.040
<v Speaker 10>to be the things that people are looking out for. Also,

0:28:15.000 --> 0:28:18.800
<v Speaker 10>they'll want to see with the latest, you know, troubles

0:28:18.840 --> 0:28:22.399
<v Speaker 10>in AI with deep seek. You know, we saw a

0:28:22.440 --> 0:28:29.000
<v Speaker 10>big route in Nvidia prices and other AI chip related

0:28:29.040 --> 0:28:34.800
<v Speaker 10>companies because concern that maybe we don't need to invest

0:28:34.880 --> 0:28:38.000
<v Speaker 10>tens of billions of dollars, even hundreds of billions of

0:28:38.040 --> 0:28:40.480
<v Speaker 10>dollars to build out these data centers. Maybe the AI

0:28:40.560 --> 0:28:43.360
<v Speaker 10>models can be a lot smaller. In that case, would

0:28:43.360 --> 0:28:48.680
<v Speaker 10>we be buying a lot less chips, and so there

0:28:48.680 --> 0:28:51.640
<v Speaker 10>has been that concern. Now on top of that, tariffs

0:28:51.640 --> 0:28:55.760
<v Speaker 10>are bringing concerns that you know, we've all read about

0:28:55.800 --> 0:28:58.960
<v Speaker 10>how our iPhone prices in the US could be going up,

0:28:59.000 --> 0:29:03.040
<v Speaker 10>you know, something like twenty percent with the tariffs. And

0:29:03.080 --> 0:29:06.200
<v Speaker 10>in that case, would consumers be buying fewer iPhones, will

0:29:06.200 --> 0:29:08.400
<v Speaker 10>they be buying fewer laptops? Are they going to be

0:29:08.440 --> 0:29:11.880
<v Speaker 10>waiting to buy those smart TVs for a while, in

0:29:11.920 --> 0:29:16.400
<v Speaker 10>which case that will again hit companies like TSMC or

0:29:16.440 --> 0:29:19.720
<v Speaker 10>others that are making chips that go into all these devices.

0:29:20.360 --> 0:29:23.479
<v Speaker 10>And so one of the things that have come up,

0:29:24.160 --> 0:29:27.920
<v Speaker 10>in fact just this past week is whether or not

0:29:28.080 --> 0:29:34.160
<v Speaker 10>TSMC will be revising down its revenue growth outlook for

0:29:34.160 --> 0:29:37.760
<v Speaker 10>twenty twenty five. In January, it had said that it

0:29:37.880 --> 0:29:42.720
<v Speaker 10>expected sort of mid twenty percent growth in sales for

0:29:42.800 --> 0:29:46.480
<v Speaker 10>this year. So that's going to be some of the

0:29:46.520 --> 0:29:50.360
<v Speaker 10>points that investors are are going to be looking out for.

0:29:50.680 --> 0:29:53.360
<v Speaker 4>I would imagine another key data point is going to

0:29:53.360 --> 0:29:55.120
<v Speaker 4>be capex spending.

0:29:55.120 --> 0:29:55.320
<v Speaker 6>Now.

0:29:55.360 --> 0:29:58.400
<v Speaker 4>President Trump, in the last week was speaking at a

0:29:58.480 --> 0:30:02.800
<v Speaker 4>dinner event organized by the Republican National Congressional Committee. A

0:30:02.880 --> 0:30:06.280
<v Speaker 4>couple of things emerged here. One a lot of criticism

0:30:06.320 --> 0:30:09.640
<v Speaker 4>of the Chips Act. He made the point that semiconductor

0:30:09.680 --> 0:30:13.600
<v Speaker 4>companies are basically loaded. They don't need billions of dollars

0:30:13.640 --> 0:30:16.840
<v Speaker 4>in what amounts to some sort of subsidy to ramp

0:30:16.920 --> 0:30:20.680
<v Speaker 4>up production. So how is TSMC position to build out

0:30:20.720 --> 0:30:21.560
<v Speaker 4>more capacity?

0:30:22.080 --> 0:30:26.320
<v Speaker 10>They absolutely do, but it's about you know, who's going

0:30:26.400 --> 0:30:29.880
<v Speaker 10>to say no to free money and depending on how

0:30:30.440 --> 0:30:32.880
<v Speaker 10>much subsidies you get, whether it's a straight out grant

0:30:32.880 --> 0:30:36.000
<v Speaker 10>from the Chips Act, or whether it's something that's even

0:30:36.040 --> 0:30:40.320
<v Speaker 10>more important that it is, the tax credit for these investments.

0:30:41.040 --> 0:30:44.720
<v Speaker 10>It's going to really make a difference to your profitability,

0:30:44.760 --> 0:30:50.480
<v Speaker 10>which it sounds so obvious. So will they be building more?

0:30:50.800 --> 0:30:54.360
<v Speaker 10>Will you know the investors be as interested when gross

0:30:54.360 --> 0:30:58.440
<v Speaker 10>margins aren't as high? Those are sort of questions that

0:30:58.480 --> 0:31:03.520
<v Speaker 10>will come and who pace for more expensive chips when

0:31:03.560 --> 0:31:06.840
<v Speaker 10>those subsidies or tax credits go missing. So it's an

0:31:06.840 --> 0:31:09.480
<v Speaker 10>important component. Can they do it without it? Of course

0:31:09.480 --> 0:31:11.160
<v Speaker 10>they can't. They've got gobs of money.

0:31:11.560 --> 0:31:16.120
<v Speaker 4>So what about the factory that TSMC was constructing in Phoenix.

0:31:16.200 --> 0:31:18.560
<v Speaker 4>I think there were some initial delays. Do we know

0:31:18.640 --> 0:31:20.800
<v Speaker 4>the status? Are they producing chips there?

0:31:21.200 --> 0:31:21.360
<v Speaker 7>Oh?

0:31:21.400 --> 0:31:25.280
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, they've been mass product producing those chips since late

0:31:25.400 --> 0:31:31.040
<v Speaker 10>last year and the initial outcome of that. What we

0:31:31.120 --> 0:31:35.680
<v Speaker 10>talk about in chip manufacturing our yields. If I'm making,

0:31:35.800 --> 0:31:38.000
<v Speaker 10>you know, one hundred chips, how many of those are

0:31:38.080 --> 0:31:40.280
<v Speaker 10>good chips that I can use versus things that if

0:31:40.320 --> 0:31:43.920
<v Speaker 10>I used my gadget wouldn't work. And that yield rate

0:31:45.080 --> 0:31:50.000
<v Speaker 10>has been on par with their manufacturing in Taiwan. So

0:31:50.080 --> 0:31:53.360
<v Speaker 10>that's been some good news after you know, a lot

0:31:53.400 --> 0:31:56.320
<v Speaker 10>of news about delays and labor tensions and things like that.

0:31:56.800 --> 0:32:00.400
<v Speaker 10>So for what we have now in Arizona, things seem

0:32:00.480 --> 0:32:04.840
<v Speaker 10>to be doing well. And some people who I've spoken

0:32:04.840 --> 0:32:08.480
<v Speaker 10>to in Arizona are optimistic that this is just the start.

0:32:08.560 --> 0:32:11.480
<v Speaker 10>And you know, they made a lot of mistakes with

0:32:11.600 --> 0:32:15.280
<v Speaker 10>the first fab but they've learned and so that learning

0:32:15.320 --> 0:32:19.280
<v Speaker 10>curve will help them, will benefit them. And when it

0:32:19.280 --> 0:32:22.680
<v Speaker 10>comes to talent recruitment, one person who was out there

0:32:22.720 --> 0:32:28.600
<v Speaker 10>doing some recruitment in the colleges in Arizona said, you know,

0:32:28.640 --> 0:32:31.480
<v Speaker 10>when I first started doing this, nobody heard of TSMC.

0:32:31.560 --> 0:32:34.880
<v Speaker 10>That makes it harder to recruit by the time he's

0:32:35.000 --> 0:32:37.520
<v Speaker 10>now left the company. But by the time he left,

0:32:38.720 --> 0:32:41.480
<v Speaker 10>you know, which has been a couple months, now, everybody

0:32:41.520 --> 0:32:44.239
<v Speaker 10>knows TSMC. And of course, you know these announcements at

0:32:44.240 --> 0:32:46.920
<v Speaker 10>the White House of one hundred billion dollar additional investment

0:32:47.800 --> 0:32:52.280
<v Speaker 10>nay between Trump and the CEO cc way, that really

0:32:52.320 --> 0:32:55.240
<v Speaker 10>helps bring the profile of the company up. That'll help

0:32:56.080 --> 0:32:58.880
<v Speaker 10>have college students realize that, you know, this is an

0:32:58.920 --> 0:32:59.760
<v Speaker 10>important company.

0:33:00.120 --> 0:33:02.200
<v Speaker 4>Let's talk a little bit about the market in China,

0:33:02.280 --> 0:33:07.200
<v Speaker 4>where obviously those export controls from the Biden administration really

0:33:07.320 --> 0:33:11.080
<v Speaker 4>curtailed access to some of those more sophisticated AI chips.

0:33:11.320 --> 0:33:14.520
<v Speaker 4>We mentioned a moment ago that Deep Seek moment. Clearly

0:33:14.640 --> 0:33:18.200
<v Speaker 4>tech in China was not constrained by those controls. Deep

0:33:18.240 --> 0:33:21.040
<v Speaker 4>Seek was obviously, or so it would appear able to

0:33:21.200 --> 0:33:25.400
<v Speaker 4>develop a pretty sophisticated chatbot in spite of those controls.

0:33:25.760 --> 0:33:29.040
<v Speaker 4>So is TSMC going to ask anything of the Trump

0:33:29.080 --> 0:33:30.800
<v Speaker 4>administration when it comes to China.

0:33:31.520 --> 0:33:33.360
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, I don't know if there's going to be a

0:33:33.400 --> 0:33:36.680
<v Speaker 10>specific ask for that. I think Right now, the big

0:33:36.720 --> 0:33:39.640
<v Speaker 10>news with TSMC is that there was a report by

0:33:40.400 --> 0:33:45.400
<v Speaker 10>Reuters that possibly the Trump administration could find it for

0:33:45.480 --> 0:33:53.640
<v Speaker 10>a billion dollars because TSMC allegedly sold chips to one

0:33:53.680 --> 0:33:57.440
<v Speaker 10>company that then passed it on to Huawei, which makes

0:33:57.440 --> 0:33:59.800
<v Speaker 10>AI service and somehow that ship ended up in one

0:33:59.840 --> 0:34:03.280
<v Speaker 10>of them those AI servers. And so it's been in

0:34:03.320 --> 0:34:09.160
<v Speaker 10>a bit of hot water with China and with making

0:34:09.200 --> 0:34:12.719
<v Speaker 10>sure chips it makes for one customer don't end up

0:34:12.880 --> 0:34:17.400
<v Speaker 10>with another. And so a lot of focus right now

0:34:17.480 --> 0:34:21.160
<v Speaker 10>is watching whether or not the Trump administration could use

0:34:21.239 --> 0:34:25.239
<v Speaker 10>these finds, and this would be unprecedented in a sense that,

0:34:25.880 --> 0:34:30.000
<v Speaker 10>you know, a former BIS official explain that you don't

0:34:30.000 --> 0:34:34.879
<v Speaker 10>really have finds this big when companies, you know, come

0:34:35.000 --> 0:34:40.680
<v Speaker 10>clean and work together with the US government. But Trump

0:34:40.719 --> 0:34:43.160
<v Speaker 10>could use it as a bargaining chip to push for

0:34:43.239 --> 0:34:48.319
<v Speaker 10>more concessions from TSMC. So that is what people here

0:34:48.360 --> 0:34:51.040
<v Speaker 10>are watching about when it comes to China.

0:34:51.320 --> 0:34:54.000
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, that's very interesting that you made that point. It's

0:34:54.000 --> 0:34:56.880
<v Speaker 4>not unlike what we have seen play out in these

0:34:56.920 --> 0:35:02.160
<v Speaker 4>tariff negotiations. And apparently Trump told the same Republican congressional

0:35:02.200 --> 0:35:05.120
<v Speaker 4>event that I referred to earlier that he was prepared

0:35:05.160 --> 0:35:08.000
<v Speaker 4>to slap a one hundred percent tax on TSMC if

0:35:08.040 --> 0:35:10.840
<v Speaker 4>the company doesn't make its chips in the US. So

0:35:11.000 --> 0:35:15.360
<v Speaker 4>the objective here seems to be a reshoring of chip manufacturing,

0:35:15.520 --> 0:35:18.279
<v Speaker 4>and TSMC would be a partner in that process.

0:35:18.600 --> 0:35:23.360
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, and initially when that one hundred billion dollar announcement came,

0:35:24.080 --> 0:35:27.200
<v Speaker 10>I think the first few days, there was some skepticism. Yeah,

0:35:27.239 --> 0:35:30.120
<v Speaker 10>they're just paying lip service, They're not going to do it.

0:35:30.160 --> 0:35:32.960
<v Speaker 10>By the time those investments come around, Trump will be gone.

0:35:33.560 --> 0:35:36.960
<v Speaker 10>But what I'm hearing from the ground here from suppliers

0:35:37.000 --> 0:35:42.280
<v Speaker 10>of TSMC are no They're serious. This is their biggest market.

0:35:42.280 --> 0:35:47.279
<v Speaker 10>About three and four chips that are sold by TSMC

0:35:47.360 --> 0:35:50.120
<v Speaker 10>are sold to the US. Seventy five percent of their

0:35:50.160 --> 0:35:52.640
<v Speaker 10>sales is in the US. This is their biggest market,

0:35:53.239 --> 0:35:59.280
<v Speaker 10>and so it seems it is a genuine move towards

0:35:59.360 --> 0:36:02.239
<v Speaker 10>the US, and the suppliers are now saying that they

0:36:02.440 --> 0:36:04.480
<v Speaker 10>are getting ready to follow as well.

0:36:04.960 --> 0:36:06.960
<v Speaker 4>Jane, thank you so much for taking the time to

0:36:07.040 --> 0:36:10.080
<v Speaker 4>chat with us. That is Jane Lanhi Lee, Bloomberg Tech

0:36:10.120 --> 0:36:14.440
<v Speaker 4>reporter in Taipei. For another perspective on tech in Asia,

0:36:14.520 --> 0:36:18.200
<v Speaker 4>I spoke with Stephanie Leung, chief investment officer at Stashaway.

0:36:18.640 --> 0:36:20.560
<v Speaker 4>I was reading a piece in the Wall Street Journal

0:36:20.640 --> 0:36:23.920
<v Speaker 4>on Apple planning to send more iPhones to the US

0:36:23.960 --> 0:36:27.120
<v Speaker 4>from India rather than from China as a way of

0:36:27.120 --> 0:36:30.760
<v Speaker 4>offsetting the high cost of the tariffs. And I'm wondering

0:36:30.760 --> 0:36:33.520
<v Speaker 4>whether or not you expect other companies to follow suit

0:36:33.560 --> 0:36:35.560
<v Speaker 4>that Apple clearly will not be alone in this.

0:36:36.239 --> 0:36:39.719
<v Speaker 11>Yeah, I think, of course, in the short term it

0:36:39.840 --> 0:36:43.719
<v Speaker 11>is hot for companies to just kind of move the

0:36:43.800 --> 0:36:47.799
<v Speaker 11>whole supply chain overnight. But of course I think, I mean,

0:36:47.840 --> 0:36:50.279
<v Speaker 11>it makes sense for Apple to come out and sort

0:36:50.280 --> 0:36:52.200
<v Speaker 11>of you make these statements and for other companies to

0:36:52.239 --> 0:36:55.799
<v Speaker 11>make these statements as well, because I think, what's the

0:36:56.000 --> 0:37:02.319
<v Speaker 11>I guess, the kind of implication from the whole kind

0:37:02.320 --> 0:37:06.040
<v Speaker 11>of trade ward it's I mean, even if it ends,

0:37:06.200 --> 0:37:09.520
<v Speaker 11>let's say in the next few weeks, is that companies

0:37:09.600 --> 0:37:13.200
<v Speaker 11>need to rethink again about the whole supply chain right

0:37:13.400 --> 0:37:17.080
<v Speaker 11>how dependent they are on China. And also, I think

0:37:17.120 --> 0:37:20.400
<v Speaker 11>the I guess the Trump administration is often trying to

0:37:20.400 --> 0:37:22.680
<v Speaker 11>get companies to invest back in the US again by

0:37:22.680 --> 0:37:26.839
<v Speaker 11>giving tax breaks and trying the regulation. So I think

0:37:26.960 --> 0:37:31.320
<v Speaker 11>that also prompts companies to rethink whether or not they

0:37:31.440 --> 0:37:34.840
<v Speaker 11>need kind of a more diversified supply chain rather than

0:37:35.000 --> 0:37:38.440
<v Speaker 11>just rely on China itself. Now, I also spoke to

0:37:38.760 --> 0:37:42.080
<v Speaker 11>I guess some of the businesses in Hong Kong. Hong

0:37:42.160 --> 0:37:46.200
<v Speaker 11>Kong businesses have a lot of investment in China, for example,

0:37:46.239 --> 0:37:51.680
<v Speaker 11>in terms of governments exports into US, supplying to names

0:37:51.719 --> 0:37:55.359
<v Speaker 11>like Nike or Little lemon et cetera. And I mean

0:37:55.400 --> 0:37:58.279
<v Speaker 11>they said, I mean, yes, indeed, there has been some

0:37:58.400 --> 0:38:01.399
<v Speaker 11>kind of movements out of into Vietnam in the past

0:38:01.440 --> 0:38:04.560
<v Speaker 11>few years, but I mean that has been very, very slow.

0:38:04.640 --> 0:38:09.080
<v Speaker 11>And you can't just change that supply chain overnight, so

0:38:09.520 --> 0:38:13.319
<v Speaker 11>there still will be impact. But I think over time, yes,

0:38:13.400 --> 0:38:16.040
<v Speaker 11>I think the supply change will be more kind of

0:38:16.680 --> 0:38:18.480
<v Speaker 11>diversified than previously.

0:38:18.719 --> 0:38:22.600
<v Speaker 4>That was Stephanie Leung, chief investment officer at Stashaway. I'm

0:38:22.600 --> 0:38:25.400
<v Speaker 4>Doug Chrisner. You can catch us weekdays for the Daybreak

0:38:25.480 --> 0:38:29.640
<v Speaker 4>Asia podcast. It's available wherever you get your podcast. Tom.

0:38:30.120 --> 0:38:32.359
<v Speaker 2>Thank you Doug. And that does it for this edition

0:38:32.400 --> 0:38:35.120
<v Speaker 2>of Bloomberg day Break Weekend. Join us again Monday morning

0:38:35.120 --> 0:38:37.040
<v Speaker 2>at five am Wall Street Time for the latest on

0:38:37.200 --> 0:38:39.839
<v Speaker 2>markets overseas and the news you need to start your day.

0:38:40.200 --> 0:38:43.320
<v Speaker 2>I'm Tom Buzzby. Stay with us. Top stories and global

0:38:43.360 --> 0:38:45.560
<v Speaker 2>business headlines are coming up right now