Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg P and L Podcast. I'm Pim
Speaker 1: Fox along with my co host Lisa Bramowitz. Each day
Speaker 1: we bring you the most important, noteworthy, and useful interviews
Speaker 1: for you and your money, whether you're at the grocery
Speaker 1: store or the trading floor. Find the Bloomberg P M
Speaker 1: L Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and Bloomberg dot Com.
Speaker 1: I want to bring in Oliver Redneck. He has our
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Stocks Reporter, and he joins us right now. I
Speaker 1: want to just get a lay of the land. There
Speaker 1: are a bunch of deals that came out. What's catching
Speaker 1: your eye today. I think that today, at least from
Speaker 1: the market's perspective, is just it's it's quiet still, it's
Speaker 1: low volume, it is a sort of stand still that
Speaker 1: it's kind of gripped equity markets at least when we
Speaker 1: look at risk assets, I think it's probably a little
Speaker 1: bit more interesting, sort of your neck in the woods.
Speaker 1: It's just what's happening with bonds, what's happening with yields?
Speaker 1: And I think that also spells a story for stocks
Speaker 1: as well, because in the past week there's a little
Speaker 1: bit of reversals. Our story that our team put out
Speaker 1: on Friday that kind of took the week in recap
Speaker 1: and that I think says the stage for this week
Speaker 1: is large about some of the rotations that have occurred
Speaker 1: within the market. This is largely been a story of
Speaker 1: the past year, which is changing perspectives on what's going
Speaker 1: to work, what's going to work based on Washington, what's
Speaker 1: going to work based on economic growth? Um, right now,
Speaker 1: I've got a few interesting notes in my inbox that
Speaker 1: our story of homing in on the idea of a
Speaker 1: potential value stock rebound based on higher rates and what
Speaker 1: happens when the rest of the market starts to view
Speaker 1: higher rates and the likelihood of that beginning to happen.
Speaker 1: What kind of companies do go in? And there are
Speaker 1: a little bit of different types of companies well, and
Speaker 1: I think that a lot of the muted volatility that
Speaker 1: we're seeing in markets is partly because we're just getting
Speaker 1: so much noise from Washington, d c UH and the
Speaker 1: latest I want to uh have some insight from Porter Bibb,
Speaker 1: who's managing partner at Media Tech Capital Partners, which is
Speaker 1: based in New York and and Porter bib is known
Speaker 1: as being the first publisher of Rolling Stone Magazine reporter
Speaker 1: Um we Over the weekend, President Trump diverted attention away
Speaker 1: from his tax plan and put it toward whether or
Speaker 1: not NFL players stand for the national anthem. He absolutely
Speaker 1: limbasted some for kneeling in protest of the pervasive racial
Speaker 1: discrimination in the country. He was saying that that's disgraceful.
Speaker 1: As a result, the team's kneeled even more. What's your
Speaker 1: take on this and at what point our advertisers going
Speaker 1: to have to weigh in on this? Uh sort of
Speaker 1: odd controversy on. On top of criticizing the activists who
Speaker 1: were kneeling, he also criticized the referee referees for taming
Speaker 1: down the game and taking away some of the violent
Speaker 1: hits that he demonstrated by banging his fist together in
Speaker 1: a typical Trumpian manner. But the reality is, after he said,
Speaker 1: the ratings of the NFL are way way down. Last
Speaker 1: year was the highest NFL rating in for the season
Speaker 1: in history, and except for the two hurricane weekends of
Speaker 1: Harvey and Irma, they're running ahead right now of last year.
Speaker 1: So it looks like NFL ratings and viewership is going
Speaker 1: to be very very strong and not way way down.
Speaker 1: Advertisers are sitting tight because two thirds are more of
Speaker 1: the NFL most advocate uh strongest fans are basically in
Speaker 1: the Trump camp in terms of activism, mixing with with
Speaker 1: their their sports, and advertisers are going to stay very silent,
Speaker 1: but pay attention to the ratings, and the ratings, as
Speaker 1: I suggested, are holding. So NFL advertising is going to
Speaker 1: be very bulliant this year. Is your sense that viewership
Speaker 1: will go down? I don't think so. I think it's likely.
Speaker 1: Yesterday they had an all time record rating viewership because
Speaker 1: everybody wanted to see what was going to happen with
Speaker 1: the with the kneelings. It started with the Jaguars and
Speaker 1: Ravens in London and Saturday Sunday morning and continued um
Speaker 1: right through the evening. Um ratings are are holding, and
Speaker 1: advertisers respect the ratings more than they respect politics. You know.
Speaker 1: One thing that has struck me is that a number
Speaker 1: of billionaire donors to President Trump who are also owners
Speaker 1: of these teams have come out against him, albeit not
Speaker 1: necessarily in some cases as strongly as someone would hope.
Speaker 1: I mean, at what point will they have to take
Speaker 1: more aggressive stances? Will they will sort of widen the
Speaker 1: divide between some of his base, at least the wealthier
Speaker 1: part of his base. Well, the NFL is a business,
Speaker 1: and and these owners, even the ones who are very
Speaker 1: very close to Trump, and some of them who have
Speaker 1: given millions of dollars to Trump, really are protecting their
Speaker 1: business more than anything else. And they they have said
Speaker 1: their pieces. Um. Only one, Mike Brown, the Cincinnati Bengal owner,
Speaker 1: was the only one among all of the NFL owners
Speaker 1: who came out in support of the comments that Trump
Speaker 1: had made on Friday and then again on Saturday and Sunday.
Speaker 1: So I think that they want to respect the value
Speaker 1: of their team and the profitability that that the team
Speaker 1: can engender. And it's a team sport. They have to
Speaker 1: hold everybody together or else the whole business falls apart.
Speaker 1: And it's not likely to happen anytime soon. What's the
Speaker 1: history of advertisers actually getting political. They really have stayed away.
Speaker 1: I mean, you had just a week ago to my
Speaker 1: hill at ESPN, UM was sanctioned by by Trump's UH
Speaker 1: communications director and said she should be fired. UH. Advertisers
Speaker 1: did not flinch, They didn't budge from ESPN, and ESPN
Speaker 1: just moved on. Well, the reason why I asked that
Speaker 1: is because I remember during the Super Bowl there were
Speaker 1: there were a couple of controversial advertisements that actually lead
Speaker 1: did get political and make messages, uh that that you know,
Speaker 1: took a stand. It's it's more difficult for the advertiser
Speaker 1: to cross over the line than it is for team
Speaker 1: owners or players or even the NFL. Roger Goodell came
Speaker 1: out very strongly against the comments and the and the
Speaker 1: substance of what the President said about the activists kneeling um.
Speaker 1: But it's still a business, and both sides, the advertisers,
Speaker 1: the NFL and the team owners have to make a
Speaker 1: profit or else the whole system falls apart. It's just amazing.
Speaker 1: As I was seeing on Twitter, it's sort of the
Speaker 1: rival teams we're coming together, the fans were coming together
Speaker 1: with this united cause. So it's sort of amazing what
Speaker 1: what President Trump can do to bring unity up. Port
Speaker 1: Bit thank you so much for joining us part of
Speaker 1: BIT managing partner at Media Tech Capital Partners in New York.
Speaker 1: And of course our thanks to Oliver Rennick Bloomberg Stocks reporter.
Speaker 1: And as we were saying, a lot of this controversy
Speaker 1: took attention away from the tax plan that Republicans are
Speaker 1: pulling together. Over the weekend, GOP Congressman announced a draft
Speaker 1: of a tax plan that has a pretty aggressive schedule
Speaker 1: to get through Congress and get into practice. I want
Speaker 1: to bring in Laura Davison, Capital Hill, reporter for Bloomberg
Speaker 1: B and A. And Laura, can you just give us
Speaker 1: an overview of what the main tenants are that are
Speaker 1: being proposed. Yes, So this plan is expected to be
Speaker 1: officially released later this week, and sort of the headline
Speaker 1: numbers are that the corporate rate would drop to you know,
Speaker 1: it's now, and there would be a special rate for
Speaker 1: pass through entities. So that's everything from you know, doctor's practices,
Speaker 1: law firms, private equity funds that would have a special rate.
Speaker 1: Of those taxes are almost at now. So these are
Speaker 1: the big numbers, and the whole point of this is
Speaker 1: to get support from Republicans and Congress to buy onto
Speaker 1: this plan. What it won't have, however, is sort of
Speaker 1: what how it's going to be paid for. You know,
Speaker 1: what are the deductions, the credits, the other tax breaks
Speaker 1: that they're going to get rid of, uh, in order
Speaker 1: to make those those deep rate cuts. So, in other words,
Speaker 1: this is really a corporate tax cut rather than a
Speaker 1: tax reform plan. Correct. You know, that's still to be
Speaker 1: seen a little bit. And they're also playing around with
Speaker 1: whether these changes will be temporary or be be permanent. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, there's some rules in the Senate that they
Speaker 1: have to to work with to make sure all the
Speaker 1: numbers add up. Um. But right now, the emphasis is
Speaker 1: on sort of what are the rate reduction is going
Speaker 1: to be, and then on the tax cut side of it.
Speaker 1: If they're able to get a lot of buy in
Speaker 1: and they're able to kind of move the process quickly,
Speaker 1: they may they may be able to do some simplification
Speaker 1: type reforms and overall cleaning up the tax code, but
Speaker 1: they're on a really time tight schedule to do that,
Speaker 1: and if there's any hiccups in the process, more of
Speaker 1: the emphasis will shift to the tax cut side versus
Speaker 1: the reform side. So just how tight is the schedule
Speaker 1: going forward? Um? Basically every single card needs to fall
Speaker 1: exactly where it needs to for this to to move
Speaker 1: by the end of the year. Uh. You know, they
Speaker 1: they have to get this to the House, get it
Speaker 1: through committee. The plan is to go through regular orders,
Speaker 1: So unlike the health care bill, UM on both sides,
Speaker 1: it will go through committee, get approved, go to the
Speaker 1: House floor, get approved, and then the same side over
Speaker 1: on the Senate. UM. And we're already seeing some divisions
Speaker 1: between the House and the Senate. Or In Hatch, who's
Speaker 1: the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, had said, Look,
Speaker 1: we're just not going to rubber stamp anything that the
Speaker 1: House does. We want to have our own input shape
Speaker 1: the plan ourselves, and that can really slow down the process. Laura,
Speaker 1: how much will President Trump himself pose an obstacle simply
Speaker 1: because he's come out, uh and sort of cast a
Speaker 1: little bit of shade on the proposal for not getting
Speaker 1: down to the rate that he was hoping for. That's
Speaker 1: that's the big question, right because the President has been
Speaker 1: a little bit unpredictable in some of these policy discussions.
Speaker 1: You know, he's really pushed for a fifteen percent rate. UM.
Speaker 1: That looks like that's not going to happen, and there's
Speaker 1: been a lot of recognition among law makers that that
Speaker 1: was probably unrealistic. Um. You know, but as the close
Speaker 1: at the end of the year, especially if healthcare falls through,
Speaker 1: especially if some of these other um priorities appear to
Speaker 1: be allusive to Republicans, there will be a push to
Speaker 1: get this done sort of no matter what that rate is.
Speaker 1: What about the Democrats? Do you expect there to be
Speaker 1: any support for the plan in its current incarnation at
Speaker 1: least uh the rough sense that we've gotten, will ever
Speaker 1: be any support from the Democrats? Um, that is on
Speaker 1: the House side. There will probably be very limited House
Speaker 1: support from for Democrats. On the Senate side though, you know,
Speaker 1: Trump is courting UM some some Democrats who are from
Speaker 1: states where he wants the Heidi Height camp in North Dakota,
Speaker 1: Joe Donnally and Indiana, UM, Joe Manson uh from from
Speaker 1: West Virginia. You know, he's been taking them out with
Speaker 1: as he's going to give speeches in their states, and
Speaker 1: you know, we'll we'll see. But they've sort of left
Speaker 1: the door open to UM to be available uh potentially
Speaker 1: to vote for this, especially if the bill gets moderated
Speaker 1: in the Senate, which it which it typically does. That's
Speaker 1: the kids for pretty mu any sort of legislation. UM.
Speaker 1: You know, you could see some pressure on them to
Speaker 1: vote yes, and Republicans maybe really heavily relying on their
Speaker 1: vote especially if you know, they only have two members
Speaker 1: on their side that they can lose in the Senate
Speaker 1: for this bill the past. So what's the likelihood that
Speaker 1: this proposal will end up bleeding into household tax rates
Speaker 1: as well? So there there is much talk about also
Speaker 1: reducing rates on me on the individual side as well.
Speaker 1: You know, the top rate for individuals may be going
Speaker 1: down to about thirty percent. You know, that's from about
Speaker 1: thirty nine percent where it is now. Um, though, what
Speaker 1: they're looking at is really doing big reductions on the
Speaker 1: mid to lower income side of the scale, because there's
Speaker 1: been some criticisms that, look, this is just a tax
Speaker 1: cut for the wealthy. So they're looking at, you know,
Speaker 1: doubling the standard deduction so fewer people would have to
Speaker 1: itemize would be simpler for them. Um. You know, they
Speaker 1: could also you know, lower that bottom rate to about
Speaker 1: ten percent and have that include more people, and that
Speaker 1: would be very helpful for um, especially sort of this
Speaker 1: populous message of uh, you know how actually for for
Speaker 1: middle and lower income people, although it could potentially affect
Speaker 1: the wealthier people in New York and New Jersey particularly hard,
Speaker 1: right exactly, Well, so the one pay for that they
Speaker 1: seem to have sort of agreed on is that they're
Speaker 1: going to get rid of that state and local tax deduction.
Speaker 1: So in states where there are low taxes, you like
Speaker 1: think Tennessee, that's not as big of a deal. But
Speaker 1: in New York, New Jersey, where you have state and
Speaker 1: local tax rates that exceed you know, ten percent in
Speaker 1: some cases, that would be a huge tax increase. And
Speaker 1: you know that's not only people in New York City,
Speaker 1: that's people in upstate New York to that also says
Speaker 1: high taxes. So uh and what about business leaders? Are
Speaker 1: they excited about this so far? They're could of holding
Speaker 1: their judgment until more details roll out. There's a lot
Speaker 1: of sort of um, you know, sort of hoping for
Speaker 1: the best, but anticipating that it might not be as
Speaker 1: much as they've wanted. You know, I think after seeing
Speaker 1: lu Way Healthcare went, and you know, they're they're really
Speaker 1: pushing for for rates to go as low as possible,
Speaker 1: But no one's really making any strategic decisions based on
Speaker 1: what this plan could. Everyone's sort of in a wait
Speaker 1: and see mode at the moment. Laura Davison, thank you
Speaker 1: so much for this great insight. Laura Davison, as Capital
Speaker 1: Hell reporter for bloom b n A talking about the
Speaker 1: tax plan that is expected to be unveiled later this week. Well,
Speaker 1: we are starting to talk a little bit more concretely
Speaker 1: about a possible tax plan coming out of Congress. Here
Speaker 1: to give us a sense of just too much optimism
Speaker 1: there is that there will be something passed and it
Speaker 1: will give a boost to stock markets beyond where they
Speaker 1: are now. Is John Augustine He chief investment officer of
Speaker 1: Huntington National Bank, which overseas about seventeen and a half
Speaker 1: billion dollars in Columbus, Ohio. John, always a pleasure to
Speaker 1: speak with you. Um, thanks for coming in. What's your impression.
Speaker 1: Does the plan that was unveiled over the weekend by
Speaker 1: GOP Congressman give you hope that there will be some
Speaker 1: sort of plan past in the near term that will
Speaker 1: be a boon to stocks. Yeah, good morning, Lisa. And
Speaker 1: the tax package is represented, we would say fifty fifty
Speaker 1: odds of some implementation. It will likely be in our view,
Speaker 1: targeted implementation around corporate tax rates. We would say, if
Speaker 1: we're looking at the end of this year into the
Speaker 1: fourth quarter. It seems like that was the emphasis of
Speaker 1: the administration. It seems like whatever comes out will likely
Speaker 1: be targeted versus broad based reform. Well, how much of
Speaker 1: that is already baked into valuations? Right? I mean some
Speaker 1: people will would say, well, if we do get tax
Speaker 1: reform or tax changes, uh, then you will expect bond
Speaker 1: yields to go up just because growth expectations would go
Speaker 1: up and stock prices would also go up. But what
Speaker 1: they or is it all baked in? The interesting thing
Speaker 1: to us is we thought this would play out the
Speaker 1: entire second half of this year and the FED would
Speaker 1: actually be more aggressive in the face of economic agenda
Speaker 1: coming at it. Now the Fed seems to have kind
Speaker 1: of played its hand. We do wonder about pemotibles around that. However,
Speaker 1: what we would say is maybe it's worth five dollars
Speaker 1: to share to the SMP next year, which could have
Speaker 1: an appreciable impact on stocks next year as this earnings
Speaker 1: recovery continues. You know, we were talking before the segment
Speaker 1: and you were saying that you still do like stocks
Speaker 1: of re bonds, but you really did not sound particularly bullish.
Speaker 1: You were saying that our earnings expectations for next year
Speaker 1: seemed like they're probably too high. Um, what are your
Speaker 1: what are your highest convictions right now amid such a
Speaker 1: dearth of information and ongoing uncertainty out of Washington. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so October is going to be a very interesting month.
Speaker 1: You know, our equity teams are going to be looking
Speaker 1: at looking at those earnings because they're low expectations now
Speaker 1: and getting lower expectations because their earnings in the third quarter. Yeah,
Speaker 1: in general, and who all is that going to affect?
Speaker 1: And who all might not in effect, but says it
Speaker 1: affected them. That's something our equity teams are going to
Speaker 1: be looking at now. Evaluation perspective. You know, the pe
Speaker 1: of the SMPS about times trailing. We had thought that
Speaker 1: would come down to the eighteen or nineteen range by
Speaker 1: year end with a more aggressive FED. Now we're starting
Speaker 1: to question that. So our point here is maybe there's
Speaker 1: a little bit more support for stocks going into the
Speaker 1: end of this year that we stay at the undred level. However,
Speaker 1: we don't see what our equity team and Randy Hair
Speaker 1: do not see is multiple expansion. So now it's more
Speaker 1: about earnings. So that's where when when we discussed it,
Speaker 1: that's where some hesitancy came. We're probably done with multiple expansion.
Speaker 1: In this cycle, but maybe we get to keep the
Speaker 1: multiple we thought they would pull back. It's something on
Speaker 1: our mind. So that sort of speaks to some of
Speaker 1: the stocks that you're looking at in particular as high conviction, Microsoft,
Speaker 1: Crowncastle International, x On Mobile. These aren't exactly undervalued, but
Speaker 1: they're sort of mainstays that will keep their value. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they're consistence, you know, they're kind of ruler stocks, and
Speaker 1: and those stocks represent their represented and all three of
Speaker 1: our internal portfolios that we do for clients. That's what
Speaker 1: caught our attention. Um, there's conviction around those from a
Speaker 1: growth team, a core team, and in a dividend income team.
Speaker 1: And so when we see that consistency, we like it,
Speaker 1: and we obviously like that for our customers. So one
Speaker 1: other thing that you were talking about is that you
Speaker 1: cannot recommend your clients to invest in treasuries right now
Speaker 1: with a ten year yield at about two and a quarter,
Speaker 1: given the fact that inflation rates and growth rates are
Speaker 1: about one point nine? What how I would yield have
Speaker 1: to go for you to say, you know what, take
Speaker 1: some profits off the table going back into bonds. Our
Speaker 1: fixed income team at Huntington the numbers about two six
Speaker 1: right now, So that much the ten years been in
Speaker 1: a to one percent to to six percent range really
Speaker 1: since the election, and it's had trouble obviously holding over
Speaker 1: to two point six percent. So without some big adjustments
Speaker 1: to inflation or economic expectations, to six, you know, as
Speaker 1: unbelievable as that may be, to six seems to be
Speaker 1: a place of demarcation for the bond market right now.
Speaker 1: So this is interesting because there was actually a jp
Speaker 1: More Morgan UH analyst note out this morning saying that
Speaker 1: they didn't expect that there was room for benchmark yields
Speaker 1: to rise before it really affected equities. They said there
Speaker 1: was room about UH for for yields to rise about
Speaker 1: a hundred hundred and fifty basis points one percent to
Speaker 1: one percentage points. This seems like it's much less than
Speaker 1: that before it starts affecting equities. Well, you asked about
Speaker 1: valuations so to speak, or wanting to go into bonds.
Speaker 1: It's when they get out of the range that's when
Speaker 1: we start to look at them now, equity valuations. Yeah,
Speaker 1: maybe maybe it's the next round number at three percent.
Speaker 1: That's what we all thought would be this year, and
Speaker 1: we were trying to base the future on three percent.
Speaker 1: It looks like the bondmark is going to be foiled
Speaker 1: once again this year to get to three. So two
Speaker 1: six is an area we're watching to see if he
Speaker 1: can get above. The expectations are it only goes to
Speaker 1: two four this year. Three. Maybe that affects stock market valuations.
Speaker 1: So we're operating in these ranges because we're on such
Speaker 1: low numbers in the bond market. Is now the FEDS
Speaker 1: trying to normalize, and inflation is trying to come back up.
Speaker 1: You know, I have to wonder on the macroeconomic sphere.
Speaker 1: I mean, we just see so many alarming headlines about
Speaker 1: nuking each other and whatever else. I mean, at what
Speaker 1: point do you care about this stuff? If we would
Speaker 1: have invested on those over the past, let's stay starting
Speaker 1: with Brexit, we'd be about oh for four for our
Speaker 1: customers trying to handicap political events and other headline events.
Speaker 1: So what we mean by that is the global economy
Speaker 1: has picked up some speed in the summer. The U
Speaker 1: S seems to be staying around two. Profit growth is recovered,
Speaker 1: inflation stay and calm, and each changes to that environment
Speaker 1: would make us reconsider allocations. We're just not seeing any
Speaker 1: changes to that environment right now, right so you have
Speaker 1: to look at the actual data. You have to look
Speaker 1: at the actual numbers. But as far as Twitter wars
Speaker 1: or even ongoing you know, military threats, no headlines haven't
Speaker 1: affected any of those as as much as they catch
Speaker 1: our attention, as bad as they could be, they just
Speaker 1: haven't caught the market's attention because they don't seem to
Speaker 1: affect the global economy. Thank you so much for joining us,
Speaker 1: Thanks for having me. John Augustine is chief investment officer
Speaker 1: of Huntington National Bank, which oversees about seventeen and a
Speaker 1: half billion dollars and it's based in Columbus, Ohio, and
Speaker 1: he was talking about how a lot of his clients
Speaker 1: still have a lot of cash and that you just
Speaker 1: can't justify pouring that cash into something that has a
Speaker 1: real yield of nearly nothing at a time of relatively
Speaker 1: good economic expansion. Definitely an interesting conversation. I want to
Speaker 1: pick up and what John was talking about with respect
Speaker 1: to Apples shares being among the most actively traded today
Speaker 1: and being down for a fourth day. This comes as
Speaker 1: reports are coming in pretty much everywhere from everywhere that
Speaker 1: new orders and new purchases of the latest iPhone addition
Speaker 1: are below expectations. Alex web joins us now. He's a
Speaker 1: tech reporter for Bloomberg News and joins us from our
Speaker 1: Bloomberg nine sixties studio in San Francisco. So Alex, can
Speaker 1: we talk a little bit about just the color that
Speaker 1: we've been hearing about the disappointing orders. How significant is
Speaker 1: this and why is there some kind of uh decline
Speaker 1: in the desire for this phone? So you gotta taken
Speaker 1: into account here that there are two phones coming out.
Speaker 1: We've got the iPhone eight, which is already on sale,
Speaker 1: and then the iPhone tan is coming in about six
Speaker 1: weeks time, and that suggests that a lot of people
Speaker 1: might be waiting for the second phone. The wrinkle that
Speaker 1: we've heard this morning is that Apple has told suppliers,
Speaker 1: um this is a report from Digit Times in Asia,
Speaker 1: that it's told suppliers to reduce their the components they're
Speaker 1: going to deliver for the iPhone ten. That could just
Speaker 1: be inventory management. Apple doesn't want to have millions of
Speaker 1: phones sitting around and not be able to get them
Speaker 1: to market quickly enough. But it could also suggest they're
Speaker 1: wary about the levels of demand for the iPhone ten um.
Speaker 1: But I don't think we want to read too much
Speaker 1: into the iPhone eight because it could just be it
Speaker 1: could actually in some way to be good news for Apple.
Speaker 1: People are going to go for the later, more expensive
Speaker 1: phone instead. Well, Alex, can you give a little bit
Speaker 1: more color about the suppliers that you were talking about
Speaker 1: that have been asked to dial back the production of
Speaker 1: the components. Who are they and how much do they
Speaker 1: rely on Apple for their business? So the support didn't
Speaker 1: name suppliers. I think it's probably on their on their part,
Speaker 1: it's an effort to protect their sources, I would imagine.
Speaker 1: But you see the big names and like hon High,
Speaker 1: peg Atron, these guys are the contract manufacturers who actually
Speaker 1: make the iPhone. Then going deeper into the supply chain,
Speaker 1: there are hundreds of companies who have little widgets in
Speaker 1: the iPhone. Everything from companies in Germany like like Osraum
Speaker 1: actually Osram does like LEDs for the Apple Watch, and
Speaker 1: then um in you have Phillips doing perhaps the light
Speaker 1: on the back of your phone. Then you have Bosch
Speaker 1: doing your sensors which detect whether phone's moving. It's vastly
Speaker 1: varsity complex supply chain. There are some smaller companies who
Speaker 1: get you know, about half their revenue from Apple. They
Speaker 1: are trying very hard to diversify. Companies UM like Dialogue Semiconductor,
Speaker 1: for instance, they have a huge exposure to Apple and
Speaker 1: the the extent to which they're able to stay in
Speaker 1: each subsequent generation the phone is therefore very important for them.
Speaker 1: You know, there was a good story written by Alex Webb.
Speaker 1: I think you've heard of him about this one company
Speaker 1: in particular, Universal Display Corps, that really focuses on this
Speaker 1: high definition screen that will be used to the new iPhone.
Speaker 1: How much it's benefiting. Can you tell us a little
Speaker 1: bit of at the yes. So, Universal Display is actually
Speaker 1: a company which owns almost all of the intellectual property
Speaker 1: or a lot of the significant intellectual property related to
Speaker 1: organic light emitting diodes. This is the new display which
Speaker 1: is going to be in the iPhone ten UM. They've
Speaker 1: been toiling away on this stuff for almost twenty about
Speaker 1: twenty years, and finally, um it's set for a big
Speaker 1: pay day. They've really seen a spike in the stock
Speaker 1: over the past year as the reporting gradually seats out
Speaker 1: that Apple's likely to have or was like to have
Speaker 1: led in the news in the new phone. Um and
Speaker 1: there are a number of other companies as well who
Speaker 1: have been betting on technology for years. Think about the
Speaker 1: three D censor in the next iPhone. There are companies
Speaker 1: who they used to make three D sensors for bombs,
Speaker 1: for tracking, um, you know, bombs for Iraqa or Afghanistan,
Speaker 1: wherever it might be. And now that technology, the three
Speaker 1: D sensing technology is going into into phones. So that's
Speaker 1: a huge potentially growth driver for them, Alex I wonder
Speaker 1: how much the innovation in an iPhone comes from the
Speaker 1: company dreaming up what it potentially could look like, versus
Speaker 1: suppliers coming up to them and saying, look at this
Speaker 1: incredible feature of this new technology that we have. Maybe
Speaker 1: if you incorporate it into your phone, it will be
Speaker 1: more appealing and we could provide we could provide it all. Two.
Speaker 1: Of course, I think it is very much. It is
Speaker 1: that way around. Yes, the Apple is very very good
Speaker 1: at taking technologies and fine tuning them and making them
Speaker 1: perhaps work better than some of the other competitors. But
Speaker 1: my predecessor on the Apple beat, Adam Satriano, wrote a
Speaker 1: really great story perhaps eighteen months ago where he looked
Speaker 1: at the relative R and D spend of Apple versus
Speaker 1: IT suppliers. Now, while Apple's R and D spend has
Speaker 1: increased significantly, it's more than doubled over the past five years.
Speaker 1: They're proportionately they spend a lot less than than their
Speaker 1: biggest suppliers, and that's because the spend is done by
Speaker 1: the suspires to fight to get into the phone, and
Speaker 1: that then delivers them a big payday. That's not to
Speaker 1: say that Apple doesn't suggest tweaks and particular direction and
Speaker 1: work with suppliers. We we've heard that they may be
Speaker 1: working with a company that works on some three D
Speaker 1: and sorry, some inductive charging and wireless charging, but um,
Speaker 1: that's coming out of that company and Apple substance. We
Speaker 1: approaches them, not the other way around. It's like winning
Speaker 1: the jackpot when Apple says, you know what, we're going
Speaker 1: to use your next next technology on our phone, and
Speaker 1: all of a sudden someone's been made a billionaire. Alex Web,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for joining us alex Web as
Speaker 1: a tech reporter for Bloomberg News, coming to us from
Speaker 1: our Bloomberg nine sixties studio. Thanks for listening to the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg p and l podcast. You can subscribe and listen
Speaker 1: to interviews at Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whatever podcast platform
Speaker 1: you prefer. I'm pim Fox. I'm on Twitter at pim Fox.
Speaker 1: I'm on Twitter at Lisa Abramoids One Before the podcast,
Speaker 1: you can always catch us worldwide on Bloomberg Radio