Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane. Along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Farrell and Lisa Brownowitz Jay Lee, we bring
Speaker 1: you insight from the best and economics, finance, investment, and
Speaker 1: international relations. To find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple podcast, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot Com, and of course on the Bloomberg terminal.
Speaker 1: It is a jobs report that is always economic in
Speaker 1: about our lives, and because of that, always political as well.
Speaker 1: And this has become a wonderful tradition at Bloomberg to
Speaker 1: give pause to look at the data and then to
Speaker 1: speak to the Secretary of Labor of the United States
Speaker 1: former Mayor of Boston John Farrell, with Murty Walsh, the
Speaker 1: US Labor Secretary Marty while she joined us from Washington.
Speaker 1: Secredy Welsh. Fantastic to catch out with you, Sarah. Happy
Speaker 1: New Year to you. Let's get straight into the Job's Report.
Speaker 1: I remember a few months back asking you how can
Speaker 1: we get in ancient dawn without unemployment climate? Well, I
Speaker 1: think it's Jelf's report is just for you, sir. Can
Speaker 1: you tell me what's in this that you think makes
Speaker 1: it sustainable? Well, I hope we continue the steady growth
Speaker 1: that we're seeing, uh, seeing the unemployment number come down,
Speaker 1: I think we have room to grow in communities of color,
Speaker 1: particularly the black community. Let's, you know, community get those
Speaker 1: numbers down a little bit. We've seen, you know, wages
Speaker 1: are still year over year up four point one percent.
Speaker 1: We went down about one tenth of a percent. I think,
Speaker 1: you know, I think, well, we're in a very interesting
Speaker 1: economic time and I don't think that a recovery that
Speaker 1: that we used to coming out of recession and going
Speaker 1: intercession is compatible to what we're experiencing today. So I
Speaker 1: hope we can continue to see these job numbers moving forward.
Speaker 1: We saw good greens and construction, hospitality, leisure, education, and
Speaker 1: health those areas in the last couple of months. We
Speaker 1: haven't seen the growth we've seen today, so we just
Speaker 1: want to see it across the board. I think companies
Speaker 1: realize it too, that it's important for us to continue
Speaker 1: move our economy forward. They're bringing people on and we
Speaker 1: need to keep bringing inflationary pressures down. It's not just
Speaker 1: the numbers today, it's the jumps numbers we've seen a week.
Speaker 1: The job openings numbers still elevated, the quicksrate elevated, indicating
Speaker 1: some confidence. I'm looking at this at the moment. Secondy
Speaker 1: Wolst and I listened to the tech companies who are
Speaker 1: making these massive layoffs. How do you distinguish between what's
Speaker 1: happening there and what you see in the official data. Well,
Speaker 1: I think the tech companies are actually looking the way
Speaker 1: their business models are. They're looking at how inflict the
Speaker 1: inflation rate impacts their business. And a lot of these
Speaker 1: folks that are being laid off in the tech industry
Speaker 1: are finding jobs in areas that quite honestly, people looking
Speaker 1: for tech experts all across the country. But these tech
Speaker 1: companies had garbled up so much talent. Certainly I would
Speaker 1: like to see a lot short tracking in the near
Speaker 1: future these tech companies rehiring folks back. We don't want
Speaker 1: to see any industry in the United States of America
Speaker 1: going through a process of laying large amounts of people off.
Speaker 1: We want to see them are being successful. A lot
Speaker 1: of people arguing that we have still a tight labor market,
Speaker 1: and with that secondary worlsh You and I have been
Speaker 1: talking about the return of labor power, So let's touch
Speaker 1: on that a little bit. Can you give us an
Speaker 1: update on the West Coast sports situation. We've gone back
Speaker 1: and forth on this for I think about nine months now.
Speaker 1: Secondary WOLVESH what's coming on and how close are we
Speaker 1: to deal? Yeah, I went out there. I was out
Speaker 1: there a lot this week. Actually, Monday, I went out
Speaker 1: to the West Coast Ports. I had a meeting. I
Speaker 1: walked the port in in l A and uh in
Speaker 1: Long Beach, and we had good conversations. I asked both sides,
Speaker 1: the union and the company. Uh, they're back at the table.
Speaker 1: They're moving forward. UH, and they're having conversations and dialogues
Speaker 1: and UM. You know the one thing I did ask them,
Speaker 1: they didn't give me a date. I'd like to see.
Speaker 1: You know, the quicker week can get this resolved, the
Speaker 1: better because it will bring a little peace of mind
Speaker 1: to people, particularly in industries of shipping. And I think that,
Speaker 1: you know, I think both sides are committed to getting
Speaker 1: it done. I'm not concerned. This is a very different
Speaker 1: situation than the rails. The rails were a situation where
Speaker 1: both sides, in the beginning of the conversation weren't having conversations.
Speaker 1: In this particular case, the shipping companies and the unions
Speaker 1: have been talking all consistently all along. What would make
Speaker 1: you concerned? Um, if if we don't. It made me
Speaker 1: concerned if they have a breakdown and conversation. Uh, this
Speaker 1: contract like the like, like the rail contracts, the massive contract.
Speaker 1: There's lots of different pieces to it. But but if
Speaker 1: if one side indicate to me that they felt they
Speaker 1: would be in there was an obstacle in the way.
Speaker 1: And that's not the case, at least not as yet.
Speaker 1: I was you know, when we started talking about this
Speaker 1: in the very beginning, I was hoping that we'd have
Speaker 1: a contract by labor Day, but clearly I was very wrong. Well,
Speaker 1: we've gotta wait, and hopefully don't have to wait too long.
Speaker 1: Another story that involved the union movement secredy WLS. So
Speaker 1: you're also involved in Conico Phillips. You're aware of this
Speaker 1: situation with its Alaska operations, this eight billion dollar all
Speaker 1: project in the Arctic. On the one hand, you've got
Speaker 1: huge union support for the project. On the other hand,
Speaker 1: the environmentalist hates it. And what more involvement from the administration.
Speaker 1: Where are you won this? Secretary Wals Do you have
Speaker 1: a side in this one? No? I haven't in neittially
Speaker 1: had to sign this one, but I was asked earlier,
Speaker 1: and you know that the labor unions are certainly putting
Speaker 1: lots of pressure in calling me on this all the
Speaker 1: side because they're concerned about it. So we're kind of
Speaker 1: seeing as we move forward here, what's going to happen.
Speaker 1: Is there a compromise and what does that compromise look like.
Speaker 1: I'm not I'm not dead involved in the conversation, so
Speaker 1: I can't I can't answer that question if there's a compromise.
Speaker 1: Final question to you, then, on the situation in Washington
Speaker 1: struggle to vote a House speaker. Secondly, Welsh is someone
Speaker 1: who works in the administration. I think it's important. I
Speaker 1: saw some criticism of the situation in the United States
Speaker 1: from Chinese state media, and I asked the question at
Speaker 1: the time when I saw that criticism, what would we
Speaker 1: prefer some of the features of democracy where you get
Speaker 1: some chaos or what takes place in dictatorships. And I
Speaker 1: want to understand from you, do you see the situation
Speaker 1: in the House right now? Secondly, well, she's a feature
Speaker 1: of democracy or something worse, not yet, but but I
Speaker 1: do hope that the Congress can get a speaker of
Speaker 1: the House, even something that that I might not agree
Speaker 1: with completely, but we need to get we need to
Speaker 1: get our government up and running fully. Uh, certainly. And
Speaker 1: I think that you know that there the Republicans are
Speaker 1: going through some challenges right now and they're trying to
Speaker 1: figure out what's going to happen there and hopefully it
Speaker 1: will be worked out shortly. Secondly, Welsh, we appreciate your time,
Speaker 1: so happy New Year. We'll catch up soon, no doubt.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Right now, let's go to Randall Crossner. He
Speaker 1: is a former FED governor. I want to take this
Speaker 1: big green broaders Mike Gains Lisa says, massages the data.
Speaker 1: This with an equity lift in the market, bonds and determinant.
Speaker 1: Right now we have curb a little bit of curbing version.
Speaker 1: I don't want to oversell that. Randa Krasner to me,
Speaker 1: this is an Elizabeth Warren jobs report. We are employing
Speaker 1: America's Americans. These are good numbers. We need to revisit this.
Speaker 1: Why does the FED want unemployment? Why do they want
Speaker 1: us to have less jobs? I think that's a huge
Speaker 1: confusion for our listeners and viewers. I think that's right.
Speaker 1: It's an important point to make because it's not that
Speaker 1: the FED wants fewer jobs. What they want is lower
Speaker 1: wage growth more because they're worried about persistent inflation. Ument
Speaker 1: of all of the costs of UH of of our
Speaker 1: production in the US is related to jobs and wages,
Speaker 1: and so if that's going up really fast, that can
Speaker 1: make it very difficult for inflation to come down on.
Speaker 1: This is the immaculate disinflation report. UM that you're starting
Speaker 1: to get lowered wage growth, but um lower unemployment rate,
Speaker 1: continued high growth in jobs. As I had said before,
Speaker 1: this has never happened before where we've been able to
Speaker 1: bring the growth of wages down and the inflation rate
Speaker 1: down without having the unemployment rate go up. This is
Speaker 1: one of those new theories we're talking about before that
Speaker 1: the FED is putting forward. It would love to see
Speaker 1: this happen, that the the wage rate growth comes down
Speaker 1: without a significant increase in the unemployment rate. This is
Speaker 1: just one month's number, So let's not say that we've
Speaker 1: got that victory here, but it's consistent with this very
Speaker 1: optimistic view that that people have that potential, or that
Speaker 1: some people have that maybe we could get through this
Speaker 1: without a significant procession. Ready, let's say that this is
Speaker 1: the science of the immaculate disinflation that should talk about.
Speaker 1: And let's say we get another read like this next
Speaker 1: month and the month after. How many does it take
Speaker 1: for the FED to adjust given the balance of risks
Speaker 1: that this is not actually an accurate picture and that
Speaker 1: inflation is still strong and that the labor market is
Speaker 1: too strong for the Fed's wishes. So they're certainly going
Speaker 1: to continue to buy buy insurance. They're not gonna say, oh,
Speaker 1: h the the inflation wage inflation is coming down, just
Speaker 1: like overall inflations coming down, We're done. They're not going
Speaker 1: to say that at all. They're certainly going to continue
Speaker 1: to to raise rates at the end of this month,
Speaker 1: likely continue to do that in uh in in March,
Speaker 1: but it may make it more likely that they go
Speaker 1: twenty five basis points rather than fifty basis points at
Speaker 1: these meetings. I think that's really where it's going to be.
Speaker 1: But there's gonna be buying some inflation because they know
Speaker 1: that this is sort of a new and untested hypothesis. Um,
Speaker 1: maybe it'll work, but they're not going to take the
Speaker 1: risk that AH declare victory and then the wage rates
Speaker 1: start to go up. Inflation rates start to go up,
Speaker 1: and then they've really got to move in uh interest
Speaker 1: rates up because they worry about using credibility. And Randy,
Speaker 1: thank you, just wonderful converis from you as always lucky
Speaker 1: to catch up with Randy Cruiser that the University of
Speaker 1: Chicago and of course fullmerly the Federal saf Right now,
Speaker 1: Jeff Rosenberg joins his portfolio manager of the Conundrum Fund
Speaker 1: at black Rocker Thrill you could join us this morning, Jeff,
Speaker 1: I want to ask you the question I was gonna
Speaker 1: ask Professor Krassner, but instead I'll go to Professor Jeff Rosenberg,
Speaker 1: and that is, can you substitute a duration or a
Speaker 1: stasis in FED policy for going up to a higher rate?
Speaker 1: Can you actually get away with that shell game? Uh?
Speaker 1: You know, it depends on what we're looking at today
Speaker 1: in in the data and what it implies about inflation
Speaker 1: today is about you know, wage inflation, and you know,
Speaker 1: can the Fed get away with a pause is really
Speaker 1: about whether they're making good on the inflation uh trajectory
Speaker 1: as the market is expecting it to decline. So they'll
Speaker 1: pause if inflation is declining, but they won't be able
Speaker 1: to if they're not achieving their inflation objectives. Uh. You know,
Speaker 1: I just want to comment second on the report is
Speaker 1: mixed between the unemployment rate and the and the and
Speaker 1: the wages. As we have seen for a number of reports,
Speaker 1: the payroll report has really become kind of the stepchild
Speaker 1: of of economic reports relative to next week's cp I.
Speaker 1: So what's really important here is what can we look
Speaker 1: through into this report as to what it says about inflation.
Speaker 1: And obviously the headline on that is average hourly earnings
Speaker 1: and that's a little bit positive. But what I want
Speaker 1: to highlight out of this report is something we haven't
Speaker 1: talked about yet. You know, the big expectations in inflation
Speaker 1: is that you have this persistent expectation that goods deflation
Speaker 1: is going to support the consensus expectation for declining inflation.
Speaker 1: One thing out of today's payroll report I think that's
Speaker 1: interesting to highlight is that if you look at the
Speaker 1: goods components whosale, trade, retail transportation, those are up total
Speaker 1: twenty six k in terms of UH. In terms of
Speaker 1: UH the monthly payroll gains. That's a significant change relative
Speaker 1: to the pace of about a three month average of
Speaker 1: negative four six month average of around six, and if
Speaker 1: you look through and you squint a little bit, it
Speaker 1: is worth noting that this is a little bit of
Speaker 1: a different story that we've had an expectation that the
Speaker 1: good side is deflating. If you look into today's payroll report,
Speaker 1: it tells you a little bit of a different story
Speaker 1: that that maybe you're seeing some signs of life in
Speaker 1: the goods. If we see that into next week's pay
Speaker 1: CPI report, that's gonna be a big change relative to
Speaker 1: market expectations. I think that's one of the interesting takeaways
Speaker 1: from today's payroll report. People don't do nuance well, JEF,
Speaker 1: especially after living under the Fed's thumb for so long
Speaker 1: in terms of don't fight the Fed. So there is
Speaker 1: a question of as you pass through the nuances of
Speaker 1: this data, what do you do? How does it shift
Speaker 1: what you actually do in the markets which you buy?
Speaker 1: What your thesis is, Yeah, well, this is the thesis
Speaker 1: for the market consensus. Thesis is that goods deflation is
Speaker 1: supporting the p inflation expectations. That supports the bed pause
Speaker 1: and really feeds into the market the bond market expectation
Speaker 1: that the FED can can pivot, so you have the
Speaker 1: tension is really on the services inflation today. On the headline,
Speaker 1: you get a little bit of support for that because
Speaker 1: you see average eily earnings coming down. But this is
Speaker 1: still a strong labor report. It's still a strong labor market,
Speaker 1: and we are not yet seeing a significant tightening in
Speaker 1: labor markets from the significant tightening and interest rates. That
Speaker 1: maybe lags, but it may also point to a lack
Speaker 1: of interest rate sensitivity in the broader economy outside obvious
Speaker 1: candidates like real estate. I'm looking right now at the
Speaker 1: market reaction as market participants passed through this, you could
Speaker 1: see yields significantly lower on the front end. This to
Speaker 1: me is interesting. Down to four point four percent, it's
Speaker 1: something to write home about considering some of the follow
Speaker 1: toty we've seen. But would you lean against this, Jeff,
Speaker 1: would you actually say this labor market report is nothing
Speaker 1: particularly shocking in order to go against what people think
Speaker 1: in terms of a hawkish FED and that they're going
Speaker 1: to hold rates at five percent for much longer than
Speaker 1: currently priced into markets. I think you can't read too
Speaker 1: much into today's report. As as I said, it's it's mixed.
Speaker 1: It's got a little bit of everything, or a little
Speaker 1: bit of something for every point of view. Uh. And
Speaker 1: then I think if if you stare really closely at
Speaker 1: some of the data, there is a suggestion here that
Speaker 1: this consensus view on the good side, you know, maybe
Speaker 1: undermined a little bit. I wouldn't read too much into that,
Speaker 1: And I think the kind of mixed messages reflective in
Speaker 1: a relatively muted bond market reaction to the report so far,
Speaker 1: if you're joining us on radio and television, Jeffrey Rosenberg,
Speaker 1: where this black rock? We continue here with a nice
Speaker 1: lift of the market's features up down, features up two
Speaker 1: forty seven. The vix comes in nicely, so it is
Speaker 1: a better equity market off the report. A bit of
Speaker 1: disinversion in the two stents spread. We are on negative
Speaker 1: seventies six basis points, a less inversion here, uh seen
Speaker 1: by the report. Michael McKee calls it a conundrum, jeff F. Rosenberg,
Speaker 1: How do you allocate here? The hallmark of what we've
Speaker 1: seen the last two days in surveillance and conversation is
Speaker 1: everyone extending out their view. It doesn't matter which shops
Speaker 1: sell side by side, everybody's is reaching out. How do
Speaker 1: you allocate a portfolio given all this uncertainty? Right now,
Speaker 1: where the safety maybe just to take a stasis bet,
Speaker 1: not a dynamic bet out into two thousand three. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, there's a there's a lot of sort of
Speaker 1: false changing in positions that associated with you know, year
Speaker 1: ahead outlooks in the turn of the calendar. We haven't
Speaker 1: really changed much in terms of the arrative from where
Speaker 1: we left off at the end of last year. This
Speaker 1: is a market that is is split between kind of
Speaker 1: soft landing and hard landing scenarios. But where the consensus
Speaker 1: expectation around declining inflation, you know, leads the ability for
Speaker 1: the FED to pivot. And what's interesting and what we saw,
Speaker 1: you know, in the minutes earlier this week, is the
Speaker 1: tension that that creates with this financial conditions component of
Speaker 1: monetary policy transmission. That is, you know, the FED wanting
Speaker 1: to push back on markets getting too far ahead of
Speaker 1: of a FED pivot. And I think that means for
Speaker 1: portfolio positioning, you've got to take what the market gives you,
Speaker 1: and I think you've got to be pretty cautious going
Speaker 1: into that uncertainty. What the markets giving you right now
Speaker 1: in the fixed inco market is an inverted yield curve.
Speaker 1: Your best yields are found with the least amount of risk,
Speaker 1: and I think that's what you've got to take here
Speaker 1: until some of the clarity around hard soft landing, consensus
Speaker 1: views around inflation being realized start to get validated in
Speaker 1: the data. F Rosenberg, thank you so much with black rockets.
Speaker 1: So I'm let's talk about the explosion of hiring. The
Speaker 1: numbers out of Amazon, it just they're unimagined, just where
Speaker 1: airplanes are trucks. It's unamagine the tomp to add a
Speaker 1: million people to the workforce, and my single company and
Speaker 1: in what three is it's just phenomenal. We're gonna do this.
Speaker 1: I just used my fancy new iPhone to take an
Speaker 1: expanded shot here of Lisa Brand. What's Jonathan fair on?
Speaker 1: Our guest Dan ives he has senior equity research channelists
Speaker 1: Wedbush Securities. And we're supposed to talk Apple, except Tesla's
Speaker 1: not cooperating, So we will go over to Tesla printing
Speaker 1: on one or three point zero zero? Do you have
Speaker 1: in your head a price of Tesla where ms Mr
Speaker 1: Musk's world unravels. Look, I don't think we're there yet,
Speaker 1: I mean, but I will say that, look about sixties
Speaker 1: seventy hours of the sell off has been must Twitter driven.
Speaker 1: Now now, clearly this part is the demand story, the
Speaker 1: price cuts that we're seeing in China. Know, but I
Speaker 1: believe a look at a hundred hours, we're getting to
Speaker 1: a point that I believe this is starting to get
Speaker 1: to just a massive risk ward to own despite going
Speaker 1: into a Q four where clearly that they're gonna lower
Speaker 1: guide into and I think that's really the fear. Can
Speaker 1: you help me understand the demand backdrop, particularly in China,
Speaker 1: specifically in China, do you think I was off the
Speaker 1: back of the lockdowns just a lack of spending more
Speaker 1: broadly in that economy, or off the back of competition.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to work out what lasts here and what fights. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think about thirty to view is COVID driven in
Speaker 1: terms of the lockdowns and really what we've seen in country.
Speaker 1: But but no doubt. I mean it's an arms race
Speaker 1: that's happening in China from from Neo X being to
Speaker 1: you know called twenty and thirty other o e M
Speaker 1: s that are really going after Tesla. But when I
Speaker 1: look at the e V market in China, we're still
Speaker 1: in the second third inning I just view this as
Speaker 1: the market going from hyper growth two more moderated growth
Speaker 1: incession when they've reopened. I think a lot of people
Speaker 1: would make the argument right now that this is a
Speaker 1: more actionalistic Chinese consumer when they reopen it, they've got
Speaker 1: the spare cash to spend and buy a vehicle and
Speaker 1: they buying Tesla's or they go in local. Well, that's
Speaker 1: been the being. Ultimately, the brand of Tessla continues to
Speaker 1: really be unmatched, and I think that's why if you
Speaker 1: look at the Chinese consumer, especially on the higher end,
Speaker 1: if they're going for E v s, I'd say two
Speaker 1: of every three is going for a Tesla. And now
Speaker 1: the problem is competition price. Competition was I due to
Speaker 1: margins and that's why the clock struck midnight for TESTSA
Speaker 1: in terms of hyper growth, and that's what you're seeing
Speaker 1: reflecting the stock. Although the as we said, seventy of
Speaker 1: the sell off we believe has been musk Twitter driven
Speaker 1: all right, well, and not to get into the whole
Speaker 1: drama there, but there is this question, if you strip
Speaker 1: out that isn't related to that, how much Tesla is
Speaker 1: representative of a bigger story within the text sphere in
Speaker 1: particular that you're seeing with a lack of demand, a
Speaker 1: saturation after so much buying of certain types of electronics
Speaker 1: during the pandemic. How much have we already seen a
Speaker 1: right sizing some of the tech companies if they do
Speaker 1: layoffs versus they're more to be going more to more
Speaker 1: room to actually cut. First of all tech companies, if
Speaker 1: you looked the last four or five years, and they
Speaker 1: were spending money like rock stars, so at that pace,
Speaker 1: if you look at it, that was not sustainable clearly,
Speaker 1: and then now going into a recessionary environment and will
Speaker 1: call a hangover post COVID from a growth perspective, you're
Speaker 1: gonna see the cuts. But I look, I view the
Speaker 1: cuts similar to as I view him in O. Nine
Speaker 1: and No. One oh two. It's ultimately the start of
Speaker 1: a right sizing that weeds the next up cycle. Is
Speaker 1: this Silicon Valley adulthood upon them given crisis and they
Speaker 1: saved us all with the cardboard boxes when we couldn't
Speaker 1: go out, just as one example. But is it now
Speaker 1: finally Silicon Valley, with cost cuts, with shocks financially finds
Speaker 1: a new adulthood, a new sobriety to act like other
Speaker 1: American companies. I think they're transitioning toward that, towards that
Speaker 1: adulthood because I think they have learned from their mistakes,
Speaker 1: and I think all Microsoft never had this problem. Well
Speaker 1: look if you look at Redmon and how Microsoft did ultimately,
Speaker 1: they've been tacticians as long as i'd say with Apple
Speaker 1: in terms of everything that cooks done. But I think
Speaker 1: when you look at the rest attack, I mean it
Speaker 1: was really an arms race to really outspend because of
Speaker 1: the talent level and what demand looked like. And now
Speaker 1: it's really happening. I think we go into this Q
Speaker 1: four earnings numbers get cut. I believe Texas under owned
Speaker 1: today's two thousand nine. The New York City cab drivers
Speaker 1: barrash on Tech, and then I think we sit here
Speaker 1: in February March, April to spend. Also what happens on macro.
Speaker 1: I think tech stocks ripped higher from here despite sentiment,
Speaker 1: which you know, many yelling fire in a crowd theater,
Speaker 1: but you think we've got a guy through the kitchen
Speaker 1: sinking moment the kitchen we has to happen the last
Speaker 1: two weeks of January across the board, and that in
Speaker 1: my opinion, marks what I view as a core bottle
Speaker 1: to the real question for a lot of people then
Speaker 1: is how much more down side is they're off the
Speaker 1: back of that kitchen sinking moment or do you think
Speaker 1: that kitchen sink leads to a roundy Because you get
Speaker 1: this release whisper numbers usually or i'd say eight tim
Speaker 1: percent above street. Today they're probably eight to ten percent
Speaker 1: below the street. And I think that's the difference from
Speaker 1: institutional perspective. You've alreadys these byside numbers come down across
Speaker 1: the board, a lot of bad news baked in here
Speaker 1: and look fundamentally, especially on enterprise software cybersecurity across the board.
Speaker 1: I mean we're seeing nine deals still get done. And
Speaker 1: also remember if you look at Apple, given everything we
Speaker 1: saw with COVID in terms of China, all the supply
Speaker 1: chain issues, you would be like, Okay, they're gonna pre
Speaker 1: announce negive, not even a question. They already announced their date.
Speaker 1: So again it just goes to a point demand. Despite
Speaker 1: what I think you know in terms of the clock
Speaker 1: striking midnight in the eyes of many, I think it's
Speaker 1: holding up better than expected. Specifically in Cupertino. The story
Speaker 1: of two thousand twenty two is a real bifurcation of
Speaker 1: big tech. It was no longer big tech. It was
Speaker 1: specific industries that they're catering to. With technology is a
Speaker 1: preeminent business. Are there any big tech companies that you
Speaker 1: don't think will revive, that you don't think will be
Speaker 1: under priced, that you think kitchen sink it and then
Speaker 1: have to kitchen sink it again later on this year. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that's really more on the social media. I mean,
Speaker 1: like when you look as where a meta play is
Speaker 1: that they have significant headwinds because of what's happening on
Speaker 1: Apple iOS and just digital advertising, and obviously more money
Speaker 1: spend to a metaverse. But it goes back that they
Speaker 1: cut costs. Look at that stocks in Zuckerberg actually peeled
Speaker 1: back spending. John, Let's look at this. This is the reality.
Speaker 1: Take a photo, run it to forty eight mega petzels,
Speaker 1: which is a new magnificent resolution, edited in another app,
Speaker 1: Throw it out to tree and house sitting in the studio.
Speaker 1: She nails it, gets it done, and we get it
Speaker 1: up in twelve seconds. That's the Dana I's world. You
Speaker 1: love this camera, don't you? I do? I do? I
Speaker 1: love the chip. No, no, let me rephrase this. This
Speaker 1: has helped me here. The chip is what matters. Nobody
Speaker 1: in the financial media talks about the A this or
Speaker 1: the A chip in whichever toy you're talking. It's the
Speaker 1: biggest innovation to a matter of Apple in the last
Speaker 1: six or seven years in terms of chips. They they're
Speaker 1: basically being intel at their own game. I've fantastic to
Speaker 1: see you just brilliant shares your stylus tkah looking great.
Speaker 1: I mean loving the jacket. But it kind of for
Speaker 1: New Year's great. This is all right, tom fordy yesterday
Speaker 1: from Davidson and Dan Eves today. These peaks are encyclopedic
Speaker 1: on this stuff. It's not a lot of blah blah.
Speaker 1: But for somebody's take first, think about how long they've
Speaker 1: been around. They've never had to live with five percent
Speaker 1: interest rates. Yes, And I'd also make the argument in
Speaker 1: the United States they've never really faced truly a cychnical test,
Speaker 1: because the pandemic for some industries, of course, was a
Speaker 1: cygnical test. For these tech firms, it was. Now they've
Speaker 1: got an acceleration of demand for many of these firms
Speaker 1: in their current form, this year could well be if
Speaker 1: we do get that recession, the first cychnical test they faced.
Speaker 1: That's a new sobriety I'm talking about. And the other
Speaker 1: side of it is and you know, we'll talk to
Speaker 1: Dan about this in the coming weeks. We're gonna go
Speaker 1: to earnings. I believe February second for Apple seven. I
Speaker 1: think January. It's February. We at the end of January,
Speaker 1: the big we Amazon, We're gonna go to earnings and
Speaker 1: they're gonna go, hey, we're selling all these stupid phones
Speaker 1: through the mobile phone companies for next to no money.
Speaker 1: John Parrell needs one of these, don't you think. I
Speaker 1: think Pharren needs and iPhone. I think I'm rocking it.
Speaker 1: I think I'm rocking a twelve. I don't want to
Speaker 1: change this down. I'm not ready to do that just yet.
Speaker 1: We'll see what am I waiting for? The fifteen six? Yes,
Speaker 1: the sixteen Okay, keep going. This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening. Join us live weekdays from seven to
Speaker 1: ten AMI Eastern. I'm Bloomberg Radio and I'm Bloomberg Television.
Speaker 1: Each day from six to nine am for insight from
Speaker 1: the best in economics, finance, investment, and international Relations and
Speaker 1: subscribe to the Surveillance podcast on Apple podcast, SoundCloud, Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot com, and of course on the terminal. I'm Tom
Speaker 1: keene In. This is Bloomberg. H