WEBVTT - Supreme Court to Hear TikTok Challenge 0:00:02.400 --> 0:00:06.760 Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. 0:00:08.240 --> 0:00:12.119 You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence podcast. Catch us live 0:00:12.200 --> 0:00:15.280 weekdays at ten am Eastern on Apple Card playing Android 0:00:15.280 --> 0:00:18.400 Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever 0:00:18.440 --> 0:00:22.280 you get your podcasts, or watch US live on YouTube. 0:00:22.680 --> 0:00:23.400 Matt shutting home. 0:00:23.440 --> 0:00:25.320 He joins us here covers all the litigation for the media, 0:00:25.360 --> 0:00:28.480 telecoms space for Bloomberg Intelligence and Nathan Deane senior policy 0:00:28.520 --> 0:00:31.760 channels to Bloomberg Intelligence, both here in New York City. Matt, 0:00:31.840 --> 0:00:34.239 let's start with you. I was surprised to see that 0:00:34.320 --> 0:00:37.839 headline that the Supreme Court will hear the TikTok challenge 0:00:37.880 --> 0:00:39.640 to the US ban. Give us your thoughts. 0:00:39.760 --> 0:00:43.400 This is amazingly fast for the US Supreme Court. At 0:00:43.400 --> 0:00:46.280 this point, only TikTok had filed a single brief, just 0:00:46.320 --> 0:00:49.520 filing an application. Usually there's a process before the court 0:00:49.560 --> 0:00:52.680 grants review. None of that happened here. The Court immediately 0:00:53.080 --> 0:00:56.080 entered in order, saying, Okay, the deadline is January nineteenth. 0:00:56.120 --> 0:00:59.120 We'll hear argument nine days before that January tenth. We 0:00:59.160 --> 0:01:01.640 grant reviewed just on the stay, not just on the 0:01:01.680 --> 0:01:04.080 pause of the law. We grant review on the whole case. 0:01:04.120 --> 0:01:06.639 We're going to take this up, this big First Amendment question, 0:01:06.959 --> 0:01:08.080 first thing in January. 0:01:08.360 --> 0:01:09.399 So what do you make of that? 0:01:09.920 --> 0:01:10.800 I mean it's a good thing. 0:01:10.880 --> 0:01:14.000 I think it's a positive sign for TikTok that the 0:01:14.040 --> 0:01:15.440 superme why was it so fast? 0:01:15.800 --> 0:01:17.560 What does that tell us about something? 0:01:18.120 --> 0:01:21.759 I think the Supreme Court sees a very serious legal 0:01:21.800 --> 0:01:24.600 issue that needs to be resolved quickly. You have the 0:01:24.600 --> 0:01:28.480 President weighing in on this question and a deadline that's 0:01:28.520 --> 0:01:33.200 looming January nineteenth of whether the ban is going to 0:01:33.200 --> 0:01:35.360 take effect or not. So I think the Supreme Court 0:01:35.480 --> 0:01:37.759 said we need to take this, we need to take 0:01:37.800 --> 0:01:40.720 it fast. I don't think it necessarily means that TikTok 0:01:40.760 --> 0:01:45.560 will prevail, though. I continue to think TikTok probably has 0:01:45.560 --> 0:01:49.720 an uphill battle in persuading the justices that it's correct 0:01:49.760 --> 0:01:53.000 on the First Amendment. But at least we know TikTok 0:01:53.000 --> 0:01:55.480 will get the chance to present an oral argument. 0:01:55.200 --> 0:01:55.960 To the justices. 0:01:56.040 --> 0:01:59.640 Now in January, January tenth, they will present their argument. 0:02:00.560 --> 0:02:03.080 How long do you think the Supreme Court will take 0:02:03.120 --> 0:02:03.559 to then. 0:02:03.480 --> 0:02:03.920 Rule on it? 0:02:03.960 --> 0:02:07.840 Presumably before the nineteenth All of this is very unusual 0:02:07.880 --> 0:02:10.480 for the Supreme Court. We are in strange territory here, 0:02:10.520 --> 0:02:12.760 so I can't look at my statistics from all the 0:02:12.840 --> 0:02:15.760 other cases. I do think the Court is going to 0:02:15.800 --> 0:02:18.760 try to address this by January nineteenth. What they could 0:02:18.800 --> 0:02:21.519 do is say, look, will lease you an administrative stay 0:02:21.639 --> 0:02:25.359 to delay that January nineteenth deadline until we rule. But 0:02:25.400 --> 0:02:28.440 I wouldn't expect a major delay on that front. I 0:02:28.480 --> 0:02:30.440 think I think the Court will try to resolve this 0:02:31.360 --> 0:02:33.160 close to the January nineteenth deadline. 0:02:33.360 --> 0:02:36.079 Wow, I don't think I've ever ever heard of this 0:02:36.200 --> 0:02:39.280 for a court that moves quickly, that's Supreme This is. 0:02:39.240 --> 0:02:40.040 Like truly shocking. 0:02:41.440 --> 0:02:43.960 It's unfair question, but like what's your best guess, like 0:02:44.080 --> 0:02:46.919 knowing who's on the court, where they think, and how 0:02:46.919 --> 0:02:48.240 they think about the First Amendment. 0:02:48.639 --> 0:02:52.760 Yeah, So I continue to think TikTok faces an uphill 0:02:52.880 --> 0:02:55.720 battle with this Supreme Court when you look at how 0:02:55.720 --> 0:03:00.280 the DC Circuit decided this on a unanimous basis, where 0:03:00.320 --> 0:03:04.799 two of the three judges were Republican appointed, and now 0:03:04.840 --> 0:03:08.640 you take that same decision to this Supreme Court. This 0:03:08.760 --> 0:03:12.120 Supreme Court tends to nod its head in agreement with 0:03:12.200 --> 0:03:15.639 the rulings of Naomi Rau and Douglas Ginsburg who decided 0:03:15.639 --> 0:03:20.960 this case in overwhelming fashion against TikTok. So does it 0:03:21.040 --> 0:03:25.480 mean TikTok has an impossible case? No, there's a chance 0:03:25.520 --> 0:03:28.760 it could prevail here. This is a novel First Amendment question. 0:03:28.919 --> 0:03:31.320 Lots of ways for the Supreme Court to rule for TikTok, 0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:34.520 but I think it's uphill for TikTok. I think most 0:03:34.639 --> 0:03:36.240 likely the Supreme Court says, you know what, the d 0:03:36.320 --> 0:03:37.360 C Circuit got it right. 0:03:37.680 --> 0:03:37.880 Yep. 0:03:37.880 --> 0:03:39.640 All right, Matt, thank you so much for coming in 0:03:39.640 --> 0:03:42.280 the last second here on this breaking news Matt Shelton 0:03:42.280 --> 0:03:44.880 Helmy covers all the litigation across the Median telecommon industry, 0:03:44.880 --> 0:03:48.360 which is a highly regulated set of industries. 0:03:49.800 --> 0:03:53.680 You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live 0:03:53.760 --> 0:03:57.280 weekdays at ten am Eastern on applecard Play and royd 0:03:57.320 --> 0:03:59.960 Otto with a Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen 0:04:00.080 --> 0:04:03.000 and live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York 0:04:03.040 --> 0:04:06.440 station Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty. 0:04:07.000 --> 0:04:09.360 All right, it's D Day, so therefore we have the 0:04:09.400 --> 0:04:11.560 expert on to give her take on what's going to happen. 0:04:11.600 --> 0:04:15.080 Danielle de Martino Booth, the CEO and chief strategistict QI Research, 0:04:15.320 --> 0:04:16.480 and she joins us now live. 0:04:16.520 --> 0:04:18.160 All right, so what are the key points that you're 0:04:18.160 --> 0:04:18.560 looking for? 0:04:19.400 --> 0:04:22.120 So I'm going to be looking to see how measured 0:04:22.440 --> 0:04:26.960 Powell's comments are and how enthusiastic or not he is 0:04:27.160 --> 0:04:30.600 about the economy. I'm not so sure that we're going 0:04:30.640 --> 0:04:33.360 to see as much bravado as. 0:04:33.200 --> 0:04:34.120 We've seen lately. 0:04:34.160 --> 0:04:37.440 The last time he was at the podium preceded the 0:04:37.520 --> 0:04:40.239 latest release of the quarterly Senses of Employment in Wages, 0:04:40.240 --> 0:04:44.039 which took down wage growth quite a bit. The last 0:04:44.040 --> 0:04:46.680 time we made a dot plot in September, Powells said 0:04:46.680 --> 0:04:49.680 the Fed is mentally adjusting payroll numbers. 0:04:49.640 --> 0:04:51.080 Based on QCW. 0:04:51.160 --> 0:04:54.480 I'm reading at Bloomberg headline there, and now we know 0:04:54.640 --> 0:04:57.040 from the Philadelphia Fed after they crunched through the numbers 0:04:57.040 --> 0:05:00.919 just degrees with Anna Wong's analysis, actually that pay losses 0:05:00.960 --> 0:05:04.480 started in the second quarter of twenty twenty four. 0:05:05.080 --> 0:05:06.760 We're in the weeds here. This is kind of our 0:05:06.800 --> 0:05:07.480 cane stuff. 0:05:07.680 --> 0:05:11.320 However, if the FED is going to be attentive to 0:05:12.160 --> 0:05:15.640 what the Cleveland Fed is presenting, they expect shelter inflation 0:05:15.760 --> 0:05:18.360 to decline from five percent. That process has already begun 0:05:18.400 --> 0:05:20.760 to two percent year over year by the end of 0:05:20.800 --> 0:05:23.520 twenty twenty five. If you pile on the fact that 0:05:23.600 --> 0:05:27.560 it looks like payroll losses began in the second quarter 0:05:27.640 --> 0:05:32.120 of twenty twenty four, these are elements that are going 0:05:32.160 --> 0:05:36.960 to have been incorporated into many, many presentations around that 0:05:37.000 --> 0:05:40.360 big oval table in the Echos building. These aren't things 0:05:40.360 --> 0:05:44.960 that they can ignore. And economists, lifelong economists, they're used 0:05:45.000 --> 0:05:47.200 to having to look into the rear view mirror. It 0:05:47.240 --> 0:05:50.159 was five quarters before we knew that the first quarter 0:05:50.160 --> 0:05:52.160 of two thousand and one or the first quarter of 0:05:52.160 --> 0:05:54.640 two thousand and eight were actually negative GDP prints. 0:05:55.040 --> 0:05:57.080 The GDP is the last to reflect these. 0:05:57.480 --> 0:05:59.359 But if we know we're losing jobs as of April 0:05:59.360 --> 0:06:02.000 of twenty twenty for the fed's talking about it. 0:06:02.120 --> 0:06:04.360 So that would suggest to me your commentary that you 0:06:04.400 --> 0:06:06.800 would think the Fed would be cutting into twenty twenty five, 0:06:06.839 --> 0:06:08.680 because I think the market's been moving away from that. 0:06:08.640 --> 0:06:09.159 A little bit. 0:06:09.240 --> 0:06:10.640 The market has been moving away. 0:06:10.680 --> 0:06:13.400 Bond traders have been moving in the opposite direction as 0:06:13.400 --> 0:06:15.799 Bloomberg's been reporting here over the last twenty four hours 0:06:15.880 --> 0:06:19.320 or so, And I think that he is going I 0:06:19.320 --> 0:06:23.840 think Powell is going to really lean on we are 0:06:23.960 --> 0:06:27.720 data dependent. Even with the positive revisions that we saw 0:06:27.920 --> 0:06:30.200 come out of the latest non farm pay report, we 0:06:30.320 --> 0:06:33.960 still had private job losses in the month of October, 0:06:34.320 --> 0:06:37.400 despite the comeback that we saw after the Boeing strike. 0:06:37.480 --> 0:06:40.080 Of course, those Boeing workers are all being let go 0:06:40.520 --> 0:06:42.360 in the first quarter. We're seeing the same thing from 0:06:42.400 --> 0:06:47.839 Stilantis and a lot of blood letting coming out of 0:06:47.880 --> 0:06:50.640 the manufacturing sector that really has yet to let up. 0:06:50.680 --> 0:06:53.440 We saw backlogs. 0:06:54.520 --> 0:06:58.200 In S and P Global manufacturing in disees really fall 0:06:58.240 --> 0:07:03.160 to their lowest level. Backlogs their a gauge of future demand. 0:07:03.200 --> 0:07:06.400 That means that there's going to be more layoffs in. 0:07:06.360 --> 0:07:07.000 The coming year. 0:07:07.240 --> 0:07:09.960 The industrial recession is definitely starting to bleed into the 0:07:09.960 --> 0:07:12.520 service's economy. We saw that with yesterday morning's New York 0:07:12.600 --> 0:07:13.720 Services survey. 0:07:14.400 --> 0:07:16.520 Sir, I thought the services were really good. 0:07:16.880 --> 0:07:21.400 What I'm missing the headline SMP Global Services was good, 0:07:21.400 --> 0:07:23.880 but if you look again, I refer back to the QCEW. 0:07:24.480 --> 0:07:28.120 What SMP Global does not include in their services, which 0:07:28.160 --> 0:07:34.160 is what ISM does, is construction, retail, mining, and wholesale 0:07:34.200 --> 0:07:38.760 sales so once you cut those four critical cyclical sectors out, 0:07:38.840 --> 0:07:40.800 you understand that you really are looking at apples and 0:07:40.840 --> 0:07:43.160 oranges when you compare SMP Global. 0:07:42.800 --> 0:07:45.280 Services to the United States. 0:07:44.760 --> 0:07:47.400 To what ism is, which is a much more holistic read, 0:07:47.440 --> 0:07:49.600 and it's been appreciably weaker, especially. 0:07:49.240 --> 0:07:50.440 On that employment side. 0:07:50.520 --> 0:07:53.760 But again, where have we seen weakness in services? That 0:07:53.800 --> 0:07:55.360 would be construction, that would be retail. 0:07:56.360 --> 0:08:00.080 Dot pots, we get some dots, dock dots go for 0:08:00.280 --> 0:08:02.600 Bloomberg terminal users out there. I can see where the 0:08:02.600 --> 0:08:04.880 dot pots, the dots are actually plotting out over the 0:08:04.960 --> 0:08:07.800 next several periods. What should we look for there? 0:08:07.960 --> 0:08:10.960 Well, I'll be looking for whether or not we're going 0:08:11.000 --> 0:08:15.440 to stay at an anticipated potential for rate cuts in 0:08:16.120 --> 0:08:17.040 twenty twenty five. 0:08:17.200 --> 0:08:18.400 Of course, the question is going. 0:08:18.240 --> 0:08:19.920 To be or there's going to be front loaded or 0:08:19.960 --> 0:08:22.160 are they going to be trickled out across the year 0:08:22.600 --> 0:08:26.360 one per every meeting with the summary of economic projections, 0:08:26.880 --> 0:08:30.000 or will we see something possibly by January twenty ninth. 0:08:30.600 --> 0:08:33.080 What I'm trying to understand is what would be a 0:08:33.080 --> 0:08:35.880 good result for the market, so and how do we 0:08:35.920 --> 0:08:38.320 categorize that? So like what decision today or what dot 0:08:38.360 --> 0:08:41.160 plot gives us. I don't know a higher equity market 0:08:41.240 --> 0:08:42.640 gives us lower yields. 0:08:43.080 --> 0:08:44.000 If we call that a win. 0:08:44.720 --> 0:08:46.920 I don't know that we necessarily call it a win 0:08:47.160 --> 0:08:50.559 if we walk away after Powell's pressed this afternoon and say, 0:08:50.679 --> 0:08:51.320 maybe they are. 0:08:51.160 --> 0:08:53.319 Going to be lowering rates at the end of January. 0:08:53.840 --> 0:08:55.760 So it's a kind of like, oh, data is not 0:08:55.800 --> 0:08:57.800 so great. Therefore they're actually going to have to cut 0:08:57.840 --> 0:08:59.439 more than now we were thinking. So it's like a 0:08:59.520 --> 0:09:01.920 catch twenty Now it pretty. 0:09:01.600 --> 0:09:04.600 Much is what the market has priced in is all 0:09:04.600 --> 0:09:07.120 of a sixteen percent probability for that for another twenty 0:09:07.160 --> 0:09:08.000 five basis point. 0:09:07.920 --> 0:09:09.240 Cut at the end of January. 0:09:10.360 --> 0:09:13.640 I think to the extent that Powell is reticent to 0:09:13.640 --> 0:09:16.640 talk about things like tariffs, things like the national debt, which. 0:09:16.440 --> 0:09:19.120 He has not wanted, he wanted he won't. 0:09:20.280 --> 0:09:23.640 But given the twenty eighteen twenty nineteen playbook, we know 0:09:23.880 --> 0:09:27.600 that that inflation didn't show up for a good twelve months, 0:09:27.679 --> 0:09:30.960 and that incoming Treasury Secretary Scott Bessentt has said he 0:09:31.000 --> 0:09:34.920 wants to go more slowly than the first than Trump 0:09:35.000 --> 0:09:39.680 one point oh tariffs in terms of how they're pushed 0:09:39.679 --> 0:09:41.679 into the economy There's so. 0:09:41.720 --> 0:09:44.719 Many things that remain to be seen, and you. 0:09:44.679 --> 0:09:48.280 Can never tell whether or not it's bestent we can 0:09:48.280 --> 0:09:50.439 take for his word or not, because you just need 0:09:50.480 --> 0:09:52.600 a hot mic, you know, and a Trump. 0:09:53.320 --> 0:09:55.720 Yeah, that's how it could go. Daniel, thank you so 0:09:55.840 --> 0:09:58.440 much for joining us. Daniel di Martino Booth, she's the 0:09:58.480 --> 0:10:02.200 CEO and chief strategist at QI Research. Joining us here 0:10:02.200 --> 0:10:03.679 in our Bloomberg Inarrector Brokers TD. 0:10:05.200 --> 0:10:09.080 You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live 0:10:09.160 --> 0:10:12.280 weekdays at ten am Eastern on Apple Car playing Android 0:10:12.280 --> 0:10:15.400 Auto with the Bloomberg Business app, Listen on demand wherever 0:10:15.440 --> 0:10:19.280 you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube. 0:10:20.040 --> 0:10:21.760 There's a ton of car news, so we wanted to 0:10:21.800 --> 0:10:23.280 dive into that a little bit more. We just had 0:10:23.280 --> 0:10:27.040 a headline the Cross that California gas car ban actually 0:10:27.080 --> 0:10:30.199 wins Biden's blessing, which really sets California up in a 0:10:30.280 --> 0:10:35.400 clash with President alike Donald Trump. California has rules that 0:10:35.440 --> 0:10:38.080 require the sale of zero mission vehicles and ultimately ban 0:10:38.160 --> 0:10:41.480 the sale of ice cars by twenty thirty five. At 0:10:41.480 --> 0:10:44.160 the same time, we've a possible tie up from Honda 0:10:44.200 --> 0:10:48.200 and Nissan, a tremendous earthquake that we heard really throughout 0:10:48.200 --> 0:10:52.440 the auto industry. Steve Man is Bloomberg Intelligence Senior autos analyst. Hey, Steve, 0:10:52.520 --> 0:10:55.800 let's just start with the Nissan Honda news. What's your biggest. 0:10:55.440 --> 0:10:56.040 Takeaway on this? 0:10:57.440 --> 0:11:01.400 Wow, I'm not too surprised that this is happening, you know, 0:11:01.520 --> 0:11:05.400 given the seismic shifts in the auto industry in the 0:11:05.440 --> 0:11:09.480 last five years, with you know, these startups Tesla, Riva 0:11:09.480 --> 0:11:12.439 and Lucik coming on board here locally in the US 0:11:13.000 --> 0:11:15.440 and globally, and then you have you know, the eight 0:11:15.559 --> 0:11:20.040 hundred pound gorilla, the Chinese automakers, you know, really growing fast, 0:11:20.200 --> 0:11:24.720 not just in their own markets but globally. So you know, 0:11:24.840 --> 0:11:28.120 it's it's posing a lot of challenges to legacy automaker 0:11:28.640 --> 0:11:32.439 and somebody like Nissan, which saw sales on a global level, 0:11:32.600 --> 0:11:35.080 you know, drop as much as fifty percent over the 0:11:35.080 --> 0:11:38.080 past five to six years. Uh, they're going to have 0:11:38.120 --> 0:11:40.640 to do something to kind of pair costs down. 0:11:41.200 --> 0:11:43.720 Would this be enough, Steve, for the combined company to 0:11:43.800 --> 0:11:45.880 compete on a global scale. 0:11:46.960 --> 0:11:48.800 It's it's tough to say. 0:11:49.000 --> 0:11:54.679 I think initial thought is no, because you know, Nissan 0:11:54.880 --> 0:11:57.840 over the past few years have really cut back the 0:11:58.000 --> 0:12:02.760 number of models in the market place. They are over capacitized. 0:12:02.840 --> 0:12:05.280 There's a lot of work that needs to be done. 0:12:05.600 --> 0:12:08.840 So I'm not sure if it really helps Honda UH 0:12:09.000 --> 0:12:11.800 in this type of merger. You know, I think the 0:12:11.840 --> 0:12:14.559 till is towards you know, it could be a drag 0:12:14.640 --> 0:12:15.160 to Honda. 0:12:15.679 --> 0:12:17.839 Well, that was my question, is that I was reading 0:12:17.840 --> 0:12:19.560 that there might not be a ton of synergies in 0:12:19.640 --> 0:12:22.120 this that it's just really all about scale. So can 0:12:22.200 --> 0:12:24.640 this scale be enough to offset that lack of synergy? 0:12:25.760 --> 0:12:29.120 Well, I think that's the UH. I think that's it's 0:12:29.160 --> 0:12:32.800 going to be the ongoing trend, and every automaker and 0:12:32.960 --> 0:12:36.000 supplier as well will have to kind of revisit their 0:12:36.040 --> 0:12:40.360 long term strategy because, you know, you were saying earlier 0:12:40.520 --> 0:12:45.200 California is actually moving away or more moving towards all electric. 0:12:45.679 --> 0:12:49.720 You know, automakers and suppliers are continuably being face or 0:12:49.760 --> 0:12:53.720 facing you know, increasing R and D expenditure. As the 0:12:53.760 --> 0:12:59.400 propulsion investment diversifies away from gas and more towards other 0:13:00.360 --> 0:13:04.920 other powertrain system that's gonna be really costly for the 0:13:04.960 --> 0:13:07.600 automakers and the suppliers. 0:13:07.640 --> 0:13:08.480 So they're going to have. 0:13:08.440 --> 0:13:12.640 To revisit how they're gonna, you know, and make those 0:13:12.679 --> 0:13:13.760 investments going forward. 0:13:15.000 --> 0:13:18.320 Stee, how much do the Japanese awnomakers have to compete 0:13:18.320 --> 0:13:20.959 against China? It just feels like it would be more 0:13:21.000 --> 0:13:22.559 than maybe the US awnmakers do. 0:13:23.960 --> 0:13:27.040 I think so because if you look at the Japanese automakers, 0:13:27.080 --> 0:13:30.559 they're really prevalent in emerging markets. Toyota is all of 0:13:30.600 --> 0:13:35.319 the place, Honda and Nissan as well, They really those cars. 0:13:35.960 --> 0:13:39.960 Japanese cars were considered low costs, so they resonate within 0:13:40.000 --> 0:13:44.880 emerging markets. And that's where the Chinese automakers are actually entering. 0:13:45.160 --> 0:13:49.640 The smaller markets in South America, Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe 0:13:49.960 --> 0:13:54.520 really challenging head to head with the Japanese automakers as 0:13:54.520 --> 0:13:56.520 well as the South Korean automakers. 0:13:57.120 --> 0:13:59.120 Really good stuff, Steve. There's just so much to break 0:13:59.160 --> 0:14:01.840 down through all of this. Appreciate it. Steve Man joining 0:14:01.880 --> 0:14:04.720 US senior aunors reporter for Bloomberg Intelligence. 0:14:04.720 --> 0:14:06.000 I should say analysts, not reporter. 0:14:06.080 --> 0:14:06.440 My bad. 0:14:06.559 --> 0:14:09.200 And there's the foxcom thing like Boss come aunts in 0:14:09.320 --> 0:14:10.280 it's so confusing. 0:14:10.320 --> 0:14:12.559 Well, think about Japan, which I learned early in my career, 0:14:12.600 --> 0:14:15.880 is there's a lot of cross investment between companies that 0:14:15.920 --> 0:14:17.920 you know, if they're out of industry, just different. I 0:14:17.920 --> 0:14:19.840 think it's just I can't remember the reason for it 0:14:19.880 --> 0:14:23.440 other than we're all in it together, and let's have 0:14:23.720 --> 0:14:25.720 close relationships between. 0:14:25.520 --> 0:14:27.800 Companies and management teams, and you know that type of. 0:14:29.360 --> 0:14:33.200 You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live 0:14:33.280 --> 0:14:36.400 weekdays at ten am Eastern on Apple Card playing Android 0:14:36.400 --> 0:14:39.520 otto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever 0:14:39.560 --> 0:14:43.160 you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube. 0:14:43.760 --> 0:14:46.680 All right, joining us the man He is fantastic. He 0:14:46.760 --> 0:14:49.600 knows the things about everything, his opinions on everything, and 0:14:49.680 --> 0:14:50.360 really good insight. 0:14:50.400 --> 0:14:53.000 And he's the kind of guy where you only you 0:14:53.040 --> 0:14:54.240 don't hear what he says. 0:14:54.080 --> 0:14:56.920 Anywhere else, and that's really special in this kind of business. Peter, 0:14:57.000 --> 0:15:00.480 Chair of Academy Securities, is joining us in studio. Peter, 0:15:01.400 --> 0:15:04.640 how are you going to be reading the FED today 0:15:04.680 --> 0:15:06.520 and then the market reaction to the Fed today? What's 0:15:06.520 --> 0:15:07.920 going to be your takeaway come tomorrow? 0:15:08.320 --> 0:15:11.280 You know, I'm really expecting a fairly hockey FED. I 0:15:11.280 --> 0:15:13.040 think they are a little bit worried about the economy, 0:15:13.080 --> 0:15:14.520 but it's not showing up in the data, so I 0:15:14.560 --> 0:15:16.240 think they're going to have to come across. Hey, we're 0:15:16.280 --> 0:15:18.720 potentially on hold. We've done one hundred bases points. Let's 0:15:18.720 --> 0:15:21.040 see where this plays out. I think that will disappoint 0:15:21.040 --> 0:15:22.960 the market a little bit, only because we are up 0:15:22.960 --> 0:15:25.520 so high since the election. Everything's run. I think people 0:15:25.560 --> 0:15:28.240 got very comfortable rates are coming down. I think that stops. 0:15:28.560 --> 0:15:31.760 I think I'll be paying close attention to the summary 0:15:31.800 --> 0:15:34.080 of economic projections are more likely the dot plot. 0:15:34.280 --> 0:15:36.240 Where where do they take the terminal rate? 0:15:36.280 --> 0:15:38.280 And does that move closer to four percent, which would 0:15:38.280 --> 0:15:40.520 signal that, yes, they are very close to being done. 0:15:41.000 --> 0:15:43.560 If the Fed is going to be slower than expected 0:15:43.800 --> 0:15:48.080 in lowering rates, if not coming to a pause here 0:15:48.160 --> 0:15:51.000 for maybe all of twenty twenty five, Can a stock 0:15:51.000 --> 0:15:52.160 marker work in that environment? 0:15:52.720 --> 0:15:53.080 I think so. 0:15:53.160 --> 0:15:54.880 I think the stock market has really moved on to 0:15:55.240 --> 0:15:57.520 what is Trump going to do? What's joje you going 0:15:57.560 --> 0:15:59.160 to do? Where do we head from there? And I 0:15:59.160 --> 0:16:00.840 think there's a lot of op I think, you know, 0:16:01.080 --> 0:16:02.840 once you move past some of the fears about terrorists, 0:16:02.880 --> 0:16:04.880 which I think people have kind of fallen into this 0:16:05.120 --> 0:16:06.680 maybe a bit of a false sense of scurity right 0:16:06.720 --> 0:16:09.480 now that they're negotiating points. I think this is really 0:16:09.480 --> 0:16:11.800 going to be about can he do something about the 0:16:12.040 --> 0:16:14.680 rules and regulations? Can we revisit twenty years of rules 0:16:14.680 --> 0:16:16.600 and regulations that have been put in place when they 0:16:16.640 --> 0:16:19.120 add the luxury of being the sole superpower and now 0:16:19.160 --> 0:16:21.840 that we're really competing economically with China in the world, 0:16:22.320 --> 0:16:25.480 do all those make sense? And you know, we've talked 0:16:25.600 --> 0:16:27.960 more recently we went from drill baby drill to refine 0:16:28.000 --> 0:16:30.480 baby refine, And I think the one thing this economy 0:16:30.480 --> 0:16:34.120 really needs is to process rare Earth's critical minerals energy 0:16:34.160 --> 0:16:35.280 products ourselves. 0:16:36.040 --> 0:16:38.440 So to that point, do we need to rethink a 0:16:38.480 --> 0:16:41.200 reaction function to the FED when we don't know what 0:16:41.240 --> 0:16:42.440 those policies are going to be? 0:16:42.880 --> 0:16:44.640 Yeah, so I think the Fed's actually the reaction is 0:16:44.640 --> 0:16:45.200 probably going to be. 0:16:45.200 --> 0:16:46.960 Fairly mooted one way or the other. Day, Like we'll 0:16:46.960 --> 0:16:47.680 get a bit of movement. 0:16:47.680 --> 0:16:49.480 We always take the bite anything that has to do 0:16:49.560 --> 0:16:50.720 with DC, right, and. 0:16:50.680 --> 0:16:52.360 He's going to you know, we have to wait and see. 0:16:52.400 --> 0:16:54.400 And again, I think, as the last guests just point out, 0:16:54.440 --> 0:16:56.320 we don't know what's actually going to get implemented day 0:16:56.320 --> 0:16:57.960 one or day two or day three, what's going to 0:16:57.960 --> 0:17:00.280 be a priority, what falls through the cracks. You know, 0:17:00.320 --> 0:17:03.400 when I look at it, I think immigration. They're going 0:17:03.440 --> 0:17:05.840 to go after some highly visible targets that probably most 0:17:05.840 --> 0:17:07.600 people are in favor of. I think you've already seen 0:17:07.640 --> 0:17:09.879 New York City Mayor Adams start talking down. So I've 0:17:09.880 --> 0:17:12.760 always thought the Roosevelt Hotel, that type of situation is 0:17:12.760 --> 0:17:14.239 going to be the first thing they crack down on. 0:17:14.280 --> 0:17:17.040 But it's not going to bleed into this wholesale you know, 0:17:17.240 --> 0:17:19.880 knocking on doors, kicking indoors, pulling out people and sending 0:17:19.920 --> 0:17:21.080 them away from the country. 0:17:21.240 --> 0:17:22.480 So I think that'll be fine. 0:17:22.640 --> 0:17:25.760 I think in terms of energy, he's going to start 0:17:25.840 --> 0:17:28.800 enforcing some of the sanctions against both Russia and Iran, 0:17:28.960 --> 0:17:31.120 partly to force them to some sort of peace deal, 0:17:31.320 --> 0:17:33.800 also to support our own energy industry, and from there, 0:17:33.840 --> 0:17:35.280 we'll just see what he comes up. 0:17:35.920 --> 0:17:38.000 When he comes up with, yeah, that'll be interesting. It 0:17:38.000 --> 0:17:39.800 always is, those us in the news business. 0:17:39.880 --> 0:17:41.040 Yeah, keeps us on our toes. 0:17:41.240 --> 0:17:43.320 Okay, so what do you do? So what do you like? 0:17:43.440 --> 0:17:45.560 So we're looking at the risk of higher yields over 0:17:45.640 --> 0:17:48.240 next year. I'm reading between your lines. We're still talking 0:17:48.280 --> 0:17:50.639 about that bad breath in the market and the leaders 0:17:50.640 --> 0:17:52.600 from the Nasdaq one hundred, what do you do? 0:17:53.080 --> 0:17:54.760 So I really like him, you know, they've been selling 0:17:54.760 --> 0:17:57.200 off again, But I do like all the commodity players, 0:17:57.440 --> 0:18:00.360 all the industries that enable commodity. I really think there's 0:18:00.400 --> 0:18:02.600 going to be this massive push for some sort of 0:18:02.640 --> 0:18:05.280 you know, let's call it security broadly, where we need 0:18:05.320 --> 0:18:08.639 to produce and refine our own rare earth critical minerals 0:18:08.640 --> 0:18:10.439 and energy. So I think we talked about energy. So 0:18:10.440 --> 0:18:11.600 I don't think it's really going to be good for 0:18:11.600 --> 0:18:13.440 the commodity prices because I think you're going to see 0:18:13.480 --> 0:18:15.240 more supply come on. But I think you're going to 0:18:15.359 --> 0:18:17.280 see these companies embrace it. I think you're going to 0:18:17.320 --> 0:18:21.240 see a big push to create some regulatory, you know, opportunities. 0:18:21.320 --> 0:18:23.120 And one thing one of our generals is really keen 0:18:23.160 --> 0:18:24.959 to point out on he was very involved in Trump's 0:18:24.960 --> 0:18:28.800 first negotiations with G on Terras, and Trump feels a 0:18:28.800 --> 0:18:30.920 little bit cheated by G because G had promised to 0:18:30.920 --> 0:18:33.120 buy a bunch of agricultural products. 0:18:32.800 --> 0:18:33.880 And never followed through. 0:18:34.200 --> 0:18:35.560 So if there is a deal this time, and I 0:18:35.640 --> 0:18:38.719 assume there will be one, watch for AG to really benefit, right, 0:18:38.760 --> 0:18:41.520 he is really going to force g to buy it 0:18:41.600 --> 0:18:43.440 and deliver on that purchases this time. 0:18:43.600 --> 0:18:45.439