Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. This is the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Surveillance Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at seven am Eastern
Speaker 1: on Apple CarPlay or Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App.
Speaker 1: Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch
Speaker 1: us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: We efforted Richard Haas yesterday we are unable to get him.
Speaker 2: We have him today and we extend out here commercial
Speaker 2: free for you. In a conversation with the President Emeritus,
Speaker 2: the consun Foreign Relations and of course senior counselor. Was
Speaker 2: someen of you partners with Paul Far.
Speaker 3: More than that.
Speaker 2: The single best clarity before the attack I put out
Speaker 2: on Twitter in LinkedIn Ambassador Has's essay in the Financial Times.
Speaker 2: It's forever ago.
Speaker 3: Richard. It was three or four days ago.
Speaker 2: You wrote a jewel of short clarity of what to do,
Speaker 2: what to hope for. If you wrote that essay now,
Speaker 2: how would you change it?
Speaker 4: Well, good morning, Tom, and thank you. Look, the United
Speaker 4: States faced difficult decisions in the aftermath of the Israeli actions.
Speaker 4: We chose the path of acting in this case to
Speaker 4: do an intense but idealistically or optimally narrow, military strike
Speaker 4: against Iran. What's so interesting to me if I had
Speaker 4: to say one thing at this point. If you think
Speaker 4: about this crisis over the last ten or so days,
Speaker 4: the first week was dominated by Israel, it deciding in
Speaker 4: the aftermath of October seventh, the weakening of Iran's proxies,
Speaker 4: it was going to act against the Iranian nuclear program
Speaker 4: and more broadly against the Iranian political leadership. Then the
Speaker 4: United States decided this was the moment to set back
Speaker 4: the Iranian nuclear program. But now initiative has passed to
Speaker 4: Iran for the first time in this crisis. It's the
Speaker 4: Iranian leaders who control as much as anybody. How this
Speaker 4: unfolds from this point on, And that's what's different. If
Speaker 4: I were writing today, indeed I will be writing later today.
Speaker 3: That's what's different.
Speaker 4: For the first time since this phase of the crisis began,
Speaker 4: decision making, if you will, is in the hands of
Speaker 4: Iran more than Israel, more than the United States.
Speaker 2: Investor has and I want to make clear here that
Speaker 2: Richard Hass redefined the international relations debate with the invention
Speaker 2: of the Internet. At the Council Unfeigned Relations John Bellinger
Speaker 2: at CFR, Richard Has writes a blistering essay with his
Speaker 2: legal expertise. Does President Trump have the authority to strike Iran?
Speaker 2: From where you sit with all your work back to
Speaker 2: Northern Ireland. Did the president have the ability to act
Speaker 2: from the executive branch? Or did you need to use
Speaker 2: a different process with Congress?
Speaker 4: And the president had the authority like all of his
Speaker 4: predecessors if you look at the history of a modern
Speaker 4: American foreign policy initiative, and foreign policy has decidedly passed
Speaker 4: to the executive I mean, Tom, what was it sixty
Speaker 4: years ago Arthur Slessinger Junior wrote his essay and book
Speaker 4: about the impurial presidency. This is nothing new. Congress virtually
Speaker 4: never ever fulfills its constitutional obligation to declare war, and
Speaker 4: we have used military force hundreds of times in the
Speaker 4: absence of anything so formal. So I just flat out
Speaker 4: disagree with that kind of a narrow legalist interpretation. That said,
Speaker 4: if I had been advising President Trump, I would have said,
Speaker 4: take a page out of the book of President Bush,
Speaker 4: the father push forty one. Do things with the internationally
Speaker 4: with building on the International Atomic Energy Agency skating report
Speaker 4: of Iran, Do things with the Congress, do things with
Speaker 4: the American public if you're going to use military force,
Speaker 4: people should come to conclude that you tried to do
Speaker 4: diplomacy and at the end of the day you reluctantly
Speaker 4: had to use it. But also, by the way, would
Speaker 4: have helped this president with his magabase. So I think
Speaker 4: he should have gone about this differently. But did he
Speaker 4: under American political tradition? Did he possess the authority to
Speaker 4: do what he did?
Speaker 3: Absolutely, Richard.
Speaker 5: As the world awaits some type of response to moren
Speaker 5: do we have any good information as to their capabilities
Speaker 5: today from just their military capabilities into their leadership because
Speaker 5: Israel has dealt a blow to their leadership, what should
Speaker 5: we expect.
Speaker 4: No, they're both good points. I actually think they're unlikely
Speaker 4: to retaliate. My reading of the Iranians is they're focused
Speaker 4: on regime survival. In some ways. This is the second
Speaker 4: great difficult period crisis for Iran's leadership since their nineteen
Speaker 4: seventy nine revolution, the first one being a decade later
Speaker 4: during the Iran Or War. So my guess is they're
Speaker 4: going to focus on regime consolidation. Down the road, they
Speaker 4: may focus on reconstituting their nuclear program. We have no
Speaker 4: idea how much of their nuclear program is intact, but
Speaker 4: I think it is difficult for the Iranian leadership to act.
Speaker 4: They're trying to stay off the net because they don't
Speaker 4: want to give signals for Americans or Israelis to target them.
Speaker 4: They obviously have lost control over the airspace of their
Speaker 4: own country. Their proxies are much diminished, so I don't
Speaker 4: think they have very good options. That said, they can
Speaker 4: still lob missiles at the forty thousand American soldiers in
Speaker 4: the region. They can play havoc with shipping. It doesn't
Speaker 4: take a lot to drive insurance rates up. They can
Speaker 4: do asymmetrical warfare using cyber or terrorism, so they actually
Speaker 4: have lots of capability. You don't have to compete with
Speaker 4: US be two stealth fighters in order to be militarily effective.
Speaker 4: But I just think that the Iranians right now, their
Speaker 4: priority in the short is not to retaliate against the
Speaker 4: United States.
Speaker 2: Richard Haus with US, we continue with Ambassador House Paul Sweene,
Speaker 2: and I welcome all of you across the nation are
Speaker 2: continuing that coverage. Here a difference this morning, the markets
Speaker 2: are open. We will consider the markets across the arc
Speaker 2: of the show. We thank Golder mount Avali from London
Speaker 2: for being with us. Jumana Brasseti from Dubai, and we
Speaker 2: continue here on YouTube and on all of our commute
Speaker 2: our audio radio affiliates as well, and we say good morning.
Speaker 3: Paul Richard.
Speaker 5: For many observers, the American strike on the nuclear facilities
Speaker 5: in around was a bold strike, a surprising strike. Does
Speaker 5: that have an impact in other parts of the world.
Speaker 5: I'm thinking about Ukraine and Russia, thinking about China. How
Speaker 5: do you think those actors are viewing this?
Speaker 4: It was surprising more in the tactical rather than strategic sense.
Speaker 4: We've been talking for years that we weren't going to
Speaker 4: let her On gain nuclear weapons or even get close
Speaker 4: to them. What was surprising, for how tactically was when
Speaker 4: the President talked about his two week last chance for
Speaker 4: diplomacy to work that turned out to be a faint
Speaker 4: or a ruse. I think it was surprising tactically, not strategically.
Speaker 4: I think the rest of the world took note both
Speaker 4: that the United States acted as well as how effectively
Speaker 4: the US military looked. What was brought together was was
Speaker 4: criite extraordinary. My guess is the Russians probably have liked
Speaker 4: this crisis any time. They like when energy prices go up.
Speaker 4: They like when the United States expends munitions in other
Speaker 4: parts of the world. That means we don't have to
Speaker 4: give to Ukraine. People aren't talking as much about Ukraine.
Speaker 4: I thought it was quite interesting at the G seven
Speaker 4: that Ukraine almost seemed to be something of an afterthought.
Speaker 4: So the Russians have to like that. My guess isn't
Speaker 4: The Chinese are probably concerned about on the opposite side
Speaker 4: of the coin, as a massive energy importer. They don't
Speaker 4: much like instability in the Middle East, but all of
Speaker 4: them have to be happy. I would think that the
Speaker 4: United States is once again involved in the Middle East.
Speaker 4: That means we have less bandwidth, less ability to focus
Speaker 4: on safety Stasia or Taiwan, or on helping Ukraine.
Speaker 2: Richard Haass with us and folks, I can't say enough
Speaker 2: about this. This is a book you can throw at
Speaker 2: your smart alec kids, the college brats. They're home from
Speaker 2: Oberlin and you throw this book at him, and you
Speaker 2: won't hurt them because it's beautifully brief bill of obligations.
Speaker 2: I can't say enough about Richard Haas's cry for citizenship
Speaker 2: in America. I can't again, I can't say enough about it.
Speaker 2: I'll put that out on Twitter and LinkedIn as well.
Speaker 2: Part of our bill of obligations, Richard Haass is to
Speaker 2: have a coherent foreign policy. We can go back to
Speaker 2: clash of civilizations staggered a Zakaria in a post American world.
Speaker 2: Robert Cappen coming up in a bit, maybe with a
Speaker 2: Kissingerian realist theory. What's the host theory you observe at
Speaker 2: the State Department right now?
Speaker 4: Well, State Department Israel to observe. It's actually a sad
Speaker 4: story over the last decade or two of the weakening
Speaker 4: of an institution, the hollowing out of the Foreign Service,
Speaker 4: more broadly, the hollowing out of our interest or capability
Speaker 4: in terms of diplomacy, in terms of the whole mission
Speaker 4: of the Agency for International Development, the whole promotion of
Speaker 4: democracy and American values around the world. We have dramatically
Speaker 4: weakened one of the principal instruments of American national security.
Speaker 4: We've then compounded a top with the hollowing out of
Speaker 4: the National Security Council. This is an administration, I would
Speaker 4: argue that is in some ways it's put itself dangerously
Speaker 4: dependent on a top down approach to foreign policy, where
Speaker 4: the president does things and quite honestly, the rest of
Speaker 4: the administration falls in behind. I don't see an awful
Speaker 4: lot of ground up analysis, but I do worry about
Speaker 4: what's been now more than what decade and a half
Speaker 4: of the weakening of the diplomatic dimension instrument of American
Speaker 4: foreign policy and national security Richard.
Speaker 5: Some folks are even discussing, probably a small chance, but
Speaker 5: still discussing regime change in a rent How do you
Speaker 5: think about that topic?
Speaker 3: A couple of ways.
Speaker 4: One is I find regime change in the category of wish,
Speaker 4: not a strategy. If Bibi Netsnahu, the Prime Minister of Israel,
Speaker 4: or Donald Trump said to their generals, I want regime change,
Speaker 4: they wouldn't know how to implement it. Regime change is
Speaker 4: not something you can design an operation to bring about.
Speaker 4: Colin Powell used to say, the military military instruments do
Speaker 4: two things. They destroy and they kill. Regime change is
Speaker 4: not is not on the menu. So that's one thing.
Speaker 4: Second of all, you never know if you can bring
Speaker 4: about You also never know what comes of it. You
Speaker 4: know what would follow this regime? Is it necessarily something
Speaker 4: that you want for all, you know, nuclear materials which
Speaker 4: are clearly still existing around could get into the hands
Speaker 4: of all sorts of groups that might be in the
Speaker 4: Be careful what you wish for. So I take, I
Speaker 4: take regime changes, unseerious foreign policy. If it comes about,
Speaker 4: it's going to come from within Iran. It's not going
Speaker 4: to come, if you will, from Israeli or American bayonets.
Speaker 2: Do we underestimate, ambassador, has the military violence of the
Speaker 2: theocracy in Iran? The news flow to me, Ambassador, with
Speaker 2: the respect of my colleagues, is so simplistic. Iatola theocracy,
Speaker 2: the people of Iran. What's in between them? And the
Speaker 2: answer is a harsh dictatorship.
Speaker 4: Right, You've got that, You've got all sorts of citizen
Speaker 4: groups that are uh, listen to them, the so called basis,
Speaker 4: you know, the the guys who used to come out
Speaker 4: with the sticks and beat beat up on the Green
Speaker 4: Movement protesters. And then you've got formal authorities, uh, the
Speaker 4: military and and.
Speaker 3: And so forth.
Speaker 4: So this is this is a regime that has tools,
Speaker 4: if you will, time of repression in addition to what
Speaker 4: it can do as a more traditional marilitary In addition
Speaker 4: to its its proxies. But this is a this is
Speaker 4: a system, it's been in place now for more than
Speaker 4: half a century, that has instruments of repression and coercion.
Speaker 2: Paul, I remember exactly where I was in the shock
Speaker 2: of the hostages. Are you ready a country road in Pittsfield, Vermont,
Speaker 2: on a cold, cold November day, walking down the road,
Speaker 2: trying not to slip in my two tone Tony Lahma
Speaker 2: cowboy boots, and we were in shock. Is a nation
Speaker 2: over the failed hostage event?
Speaker 3: Yep?
Speaker 5: Absolutely, Richard, give us the point of view of Israel here.
Speaker 5: A lot of folks are saying this might be a
Speaker 5: special time for Israel to kind of reset the Middle
Speaker 5: East as it takes care of, you know, many of
Speaker 5: what it perceives to be its enemies, including obviously a
Speaker 5: Ran most recently, can Israel change its position in the
Speaker 5: Middle East or the balance of power in the Middle East?
Speaker 4: Well, I would argue Israel has much improved its strategic position,
Speaker 4: mainly through the weakening of Iran's proxies as Bola first
Speaker 4: and foremost Amas secondarily, then through regime change what we
Speaker 4: saw in Syria. Israel has improved its position against Iran,
Speaker 4: but hasn't resolved it. By that, I mean Iran remains
Speaker 4: hostile to Israel has capabilities. And again we don't know
Speaker 4: how much of their nuclear components survived. For all we know,
Speaker 4: a lot of them were parked in undisclosed location. So
Speaker 4: Israel is not out of the woods there. And even more,
Speaker 4: Israel's not out of the woods dealing with Gaza or
Speaker 4: with the three million Palestinians in the West Bank. And
Speaker 4: I think that's still the biggest strategic question. So Israel
Speaker 4: has the Iranian dimension and still has the Palestinian dimension
Speaker 4: very much.
Speaker 2: Richard has one final question Paul and I in our
Speaker 2: broadcast yesterday, Paul, please help me.
Speaker 3: I agree that we.
Speaker 2: Were thunder struck by the acuity and concision of our
Speaker 2: Chairman of the Joint chief of Staff. I was blown
Speaker 2: away by his report. Richard Hass you're the grizzled veteran.
Speaker 2: What did you think of the press conference of our
Speaker 2: Chairman of the Joint chiefs of Staff.
Speaker 4: Tom He was impressive. General Carilla, the head of Central Command,
Speaker 4: is impressive. Let me just make a larger point. When
Speaker 4: I look at American society, I think there's two great
Speaker 4: pools of talent one is in the American military. The
Speaker 4: professionalization there is awesome. And the other is something you guys,
Speaker 4: you have all deal with all the time, which is
Speaker 4: the best of American corporate leadership. These are people who
Speaker 4: know how to run big operations and do it in
Speaker 4: a really responsible, accountable way. So I'm not surprised when
Speaker 4: I see great talent in the military rise to the top.
Speaker 4: It is a meritocracy. These people are tested and they
Speaker 4: are responsible for large numbers of lives. So I find
Speaker 4: the post Vietnam American military is quite an extraordinary institution.
Speaker 2: Richard Huss, thank you so much. Just send of you
Speaker 2: partners and a course is definitive work. The Council on
Speaker 2: Foreign Relations Ambassador House back decades to the diplomacy of
Speaker 2: a Northern Ireland solution.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Catch US Live
Speaker 1: weekday afternoons from seven to ten am Eastern Listen on
Speaker 1: Applecarplay and Android Otto with the Bloomberg Business app, or
Speaker 1: watch US Live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: There is an approach that each expert in international relations
Speaker 2: and geopolitics takes. We had Richard Haass with this earlier.
Speaker 2: Ambassador Hass looking at the fabric of American culture and
Speaker 2: extending it out across his treatment of foreign policy, Robert D. Kaplan,
Speaker 2: over a stretch of over twenty books, just simply speaks
Speaker 2: of the map. If you're one of those believers in
Speaker 2: get out the map and look at it, Kaplan is definitive.
Speaker 2: His new tour de force is Wasteland a world in
Speaker 2: permanent crisis.
Speaker 3: This is coming off my.
Speaker 2: Book of the year a few years ago, The Loom
Speaker 2: of Time from Morocco to Persia. Robert Chaplin, thank you
Speaker 2: so much for joining us. I'll cut to the chase.
Speaker 2: You say, technology has permanently changed our map, our geography.
Speaker 2: Is that true of this war with Israel and Iran?
Speaker 6: Yes, it is to an extent, because Iran is a
Speaker 6: long distance from Israel on the map.
Speaker 3: But yet the.
Speaker 6: Israelis and of course the Americans have condensed that distance
Speaker 6: through technology. The America excuse me. The Americans sent B
Speaker 6: two bombers all the way from the center of the
Speaker 6: United States white Men Air Force based in Missouri to
Speaker 6: bomb Iran, so that Iran is is close to America
Speaker 6: in you know, in in operational terms, as you know,
Speaker 6: as Kansas was to the Indian wars in the middle
Speaker 6: of the nineteenth century. And let me just make one
Speaker 6: thing very clear here. Yeah, people who are saying that
Speaker 6: this could this could lead to another you know, forever
Speaker 6: forever war, Middle East quagmire, they're making a mistake of category.
Speaker 6: Iraq is in different was in a different category than Iran.
Speaker 6: Iraq was in the category of Vietnam and Afghanistan and
Speaker 6: Korea in the sense that it involved tens of thousands
Speaker 6: of ground troops which got stuck literally in a quagmire.
Speaker 6: Here we're dealing with just air and naval sets. The
Speaker 6: war could go in a number of ways. There could
Speaker 6: be blowback, but as long as we stick with air
Speaker 6: and naval assets, there's not going to be a quagmire.
Speaker 6: There's going to be something different. It may be something bad,
Speaker 6: but it will simply exist in a category different from
Speaker 6: those four forever wars Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Speaker 5: Robert, what do you expect the response from Iran will be?
Speaker 6: I think there will be a response. It may take
Speaker 6: a few days or a few weeks. It may be
Speaker 6: a terrorist attack in Europe. It may be an attack
Speaker 6: by Shia, a pro Iranian Shia militia in Iraq on
Speaker 6: US troops not too far away. There certainly will be blowback,
Speaker 6: but it's going to take a few months at least
Speaker 6: to really just whether this decision by President Trump to
Speaker 6: bomb the Iranian nuclear facilities was a wise or an
Speaker 6: unwise decision. It will unfold stages, and.
Speaker 2: You're the loom of time, and folks, I can't say
Speaker 2: enough about this is your single concise read on the
Speaker 2: span from Morocco to the Eastern Arab world and over
Speaker 2: to Persia. You talked there, Robert Kaplan, about the giant
Speaker 2: of your academics, which is Clifford Gertz, and it's the
Speaker 2: idea of culture described for our American audience today, the
Speaker 2: Persian culture, the Persian culture extant since the theocracy of
Speaker 2: nineteen seventy nine.
Speaker 6: Yes, Persia. Iran is not the Arab world. It is
Speaker 6: not Iraq, it is not Syria, it is not Libya.
Speaker 6: Iran has been a nation state of sorts on the
Speaker 6: Iranian plateau for thousands of years. Iran was the world's
Speaker 6: first superpower and antiquity. You're dealing with a highly sophisticated,
Speaker 6: highly evolved organ you know, culture and civilization where there
Speaker 6: is not one center of political power, but multiple centers
Speaker 6: of political power. Uh. You know, I've been to Iran
Speaker 6: several times. It takes two hours in traffic to drive
Speaker 6: from one end of Tehran to the other. Being in
Speaker 6: Iran is like being in Egypt or India, and that
Speaker 6: is it's overwhelming. You feel overwhelmed. So the so the
Speaker 6: idea that you know that a singular attack on nuclear
Speaker 6: facilities is going in a linear fashion to lead to
Speaker 6: a regime change is far too simplistic. They're you know,
Speaker 6: they're very very well likely could be a regime evolution,
Speaker 6: as I call it, but it will involve many other factors,
Speaker 6: and it will be internally driven. It won't be imposed
Speaker 6: from the outside.
Speaker 5: Robert, what do you think our the US strategy should
Speaker 5: be towards Iran at this point? Again, the over the weekend,
Speaker 5: a significant escalation and military action, it should be our
Speaker 5: strategic view.
Speaker 6: Well, at this point, we should try, as President Trump said,
Speaker 6: to keep it a one off that we try as
Speaker 6: hard as we can not to attack again, not to
Speaker 6: respond again. You know, if they're just going to do
Speaker 6: a desultory pin prick response like they did after President
Speaker 6: Trump bordered the assassination of Kassamsuleimani, the head of the
Speaker 6: El Kutz force, back in twenty twenty. In January twenty twenty,
Speaker 6: I think it was there's no need to spawn, you know,
Speaker 6: the policy now should be to lower the temperature, not
Speaker 6: talk about changing a regime from the outside. Because the
Speaker 6: damage has been done. It will take days or weeks
Speaker 6: to more properly assess exactly how much damage was done.
Speaker 6: But the idea that the Uranians are just going to
Speaker 6: rebuild their nuclear facilities is very simplistic. They're never going
Speaker 6: to rebuild it to the point that Fardeau or Natans was,
Speaker 6: you know, way before they get to that point, the
Speaker 6: Israelis will be able to attack them. So this attack
Speaker 6: really did do substantial damage.
Speaker 5: What do you expect Israel to do here? Because a
Speaker 5: lot of folks are suggesting this is a unique time
Speaker 5: for Israel here in terms of exerting and expending and
Speaker 5: its role within the Middle East and add to its security.
Speaker 5: Is this a unique time for Israel?
Speaker 6: Yes, it is because you know, Benjamin Netanyahu, love em
Speaker 6: or hate him, is a world historical figure. People may
Speaker 6: forget Clinton, Obama and Biden and half of the European
Speaker 6: prime ministers, you know, who will be forgotten in the
Speaker 6: course of the decades. But decades from now, people will
Speaker 6: be writing biographies about Netanyahu, you know, because he's been
Speaker 6: in power so long, and the way he was able to,
Speaker 6: you know, achieve tactical surprise in his attacks on Iran,
Speaker 6: and then I'll use the word manipulate President Trump into
Speaker 6: taking action on his own is is nothing short of extraordinary.
Speaker 6: I think with these the smart thing for the Israelis
Speaker 6: to do now, now that they got help from the US,
Speaker 6: is to give the US something that is start the
Speaker 6: process of withdrawing from Gaza.
Speaker 2: Robert Kevin one final question, and one's going to run
Speaker 2: on with the day. And again, folks, I can't say
Speaker 2: enough about Wasteland. Robert Caplin's new effort in The Loom
Speaker 2: of Time, my book of the year. You wrote a
Speaker 2: monograph I'm going to call it The Tragic Mind, taking
Speaker 2: us back to Greek mythology and how we need tragedy
Speaker 2: to move forward. Does President Trump have a tragic mind
Speaker 2: in there somewhere? Is there a philosophy of tragedy?
Speaker 3: Is a foundation strength? Very hard?
Speaker 6: Yeah, Tom, that's a very hard question to answer. Because
Speaker 6: I don't sense it. I think he's too vain and
Speaker 6: superficial to really have a deeply, a deeply developed sense
Speaker 6: of tragedy. But I could be wrong. I could be
Speaker 6: wrong on this because the person who really did have
Speaker 6: a deeply evolved sense of tragedy was President George H. W. Bush,
Speaker 6: who is very cautious and another. You know, the great
Speaker 6: thing about his administration was not what happened, but all
Speaker 6: the bad things that did not happen because of governance.
Speaker 2: This has been wonderful, Robert Kaplam, thank you so much.
Speaker 2: It's a muster read folks wasteland, a world in permanent crisis.
Speaker 1: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Listen live each weekday
Speaker 1: starting at seven am Eastern on Apple Corplay and Android
Speaker 1: Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen
Speaker 1: live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 1: Just say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: Lri Calvicina joins us for a quick discussion here this
Speaker 2: morning with the RBC Capital Marcus Lorie. How did your
Speaker 2: strategy change this weekend as you published for Monday?
Speaker 3: How do you amend to a new war.
Speaker 7: Hi Hi, Tom, So, thanks for having me. To be honest,
Speaker 7: we didn't change anything. We had done a piece about
Speaker 7: a week ago laying out our framework for how we
Speaker 7: were thinking about rising tensions in the Middle East and escalations,
Speaker 7: and I would say, you know, while while I got
Speaker 7: more convinced that we needed to have some sort of
Speaker 7: short term market draw down, which obviously we haven't gotten
Speaker 7: so far yet, we really just continued to focus on
Speaker 7: the things we've been focusing on, and I would say,
Speaker 7: you know, maybe where our view is a little differentiated.
Speaker 7: Everyone's debating the oil price supply disruption potential. We obviously
Speaker 7: agree that's one big transmission mechanism to equities. We also
Speaker 7: think that you have to look at it through the
Speaker 7: lens of valuation. Heightened uncertainty on geopolitics typically suppresses pes
Speaker 7: in the S and P. Five hundred. And also, we're
Speaker 7: very concerned about sentiment. This has been a market that
Speaker 7: has been melting up because of very very modest inflections
Speaker 7: in various sentiment gauges, and we think that those sentiment
Speaker 7: gauges could be at risk down the road from an
Speaker 7: episode like this.
Speaker 5: Laurie listening to the FED last week again, they don't
Speaker 5: seem to be in any rush to cut rates here,
Speaker 5: so that maybe puts even more pressure on corporate earnings here.
Speaker 5: What is your sense of kind of where corporate earnings are?
Speaker 5: Is there a risk to I don't know out of
Speaker 5: the upside where the downside from here?
Speaker 7: It's a great question, Paul, and I'll say our rates
Speaker 7: team is still looking for September cuts, but they have
Speaker 7: also highlighted the risk that perhaps the FED starts a
Speaker 7: little bit later, and so we do think that could
Speaker 7: potentially be a headwind for equities if you start to
Speaker 7: see those cuts pushed out. I would say from an
Speaker 7: earnings perspective, you know, we are sitting at two fifty
Speaker 7: eight in our own twenty twenty five Sep. Five hundred
Speaker 7: and forecast. It's a little bit below consensus. On a
Speaker 7: bottom up basis, we think that's still the right number
Speaker 7: for this moment in time. If we look at gauges
Speaker 7: of earning sentiment, they've rebounded, but they're about as good
Speaker 7: as they tend to get if you're not coming off
Speaker 7: of an extreme low on a big crisis.
Speaker 3: That's right where I wanted to go.
Speaker 2: As we staggered towards July fifteenth, I mean, folks, with
Speaker 2: all the distractions, I guess it's about earnings. LORI, where
Speaker 2: is the street now?
Speaker 3: Is the street still.
Speaker 2: Overestimating earnings and then they pull them down?
Speaker 3: Or we now as a consensus going the.
Speaker 2: Other way where we're low balling like Lori Kelvisina and
Speaker 2: we'll drag it up later.
Speaker 3: Which is it?
Speaker 4: So?
Speaker 7: Look, I think we're in a discovery process, right and
Speaker 7: I think that we've had these massive uncertainties from tariffs,
Speaker 7: and we've listened to a bunch of companies that just
Speaker 7: came out in the last reporting, Sayson saying, you know, Frankly,
Speaker 7: I think they were in a state of shock, but saying, look,
Speaker 7: you know, we can manage through this, we can mitigate.
Speaker 7: We're going to pass things on through pricing and customers
Speaker 7: are just going to eat it and there's not going
Speaker 7: to be any erosion in demand at least that's what
Speaker 7: you're hearing from more sort of the industrial side of
Speaker 7: the economy. We're going to see if that's right. The
Speaker 7: consumer companies having a much tougher time, you know, and
Speaker 7: Frankly have sounded less optimistic, and we're going to see
Speaker 7: how they're feeling as well. But you know, I think
Speaker 7: there's still a little bit of downside risk to the
Speaker 7: bottom of consensus numbers here and there, And you know
Speaker 7: that contrasts with the numbers having you know, kind of
Speaker 7: rebounded a bit in here, and so, you know, my
Speaker 7: my concern is that we're going to see things go
Speaker 7: the other way a bit.
Speaker 2: Paul Discovery process, they were a great barbine.
Speaker 3: They play blues like.
Speaker 5: Nobody Lord to the extent that some level of terriffs
Speaker 5: are year to stay. Does that suggest that the bigger
Speaker 5: you are, the better you are on your income statement
Speaker 5: to deal with that, that would suggest, you know, big
Speaker 5: cap stable companies versus maybe smaller mid.
Speaker 7: Camp Yeah, that's generally the rule of thumb we use,
Speaker 7: Paul whenever there is something that poses a challenge to
Speaker 7: corporate America to manage through. The smaller companies unfortunately don't
Speaker 7: tend to manage through it quite as well. And that's
Speaker 7: because they have less bargaining power, whether you're looking at
Speaker 7: sort of their employees, whether you're looking at their suppliers.
Speaker 7: And you know, it's interesting, Paul, I was, I can't
Speaker 7: remember what survey this came out in last year. I
Speaker 7: think it might have been the Duke's CFO survey. But
Speaker 7: they did, you know, sort of a study on are
Speaker 7: you using AI or not? Are you using automation tools?
Speaker 7: And bigger This wasn't necessarily a big cap versus small cap,
Speaker 7: but bigger companies were more likely to be using those
Speaker 7: automation tools and to be using tools like AI to
Speaker 7: enhance their efficiencies than smaller companies. And so you know,
Speaker 7: even frankly, some of the tools that are being engaged
Speaker 7: with are just different when you're looking from big cap
Speaker 7: companies small cap companies.
Speaker 2: Lurri Cavasena, thank us so much, RBC Capital Markets.
Speaker 1: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Listen live each weekday
Speaker 1: starting at seven am Eastern on Apple Coarclay, and Android
Speaker 1: Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also watch
Speaker 1: us live every weekday on YouTube and always on the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg terminal.
Speaker 2: Now, the markets we really wanted to focus in here,
Speaker 2: and they have in studio Paul Sank coming up on
Speaker 2: oil world class and even better, Steven Englander with its
Speaker 2: Sandra Charter Bank joining us at the studio. Now, folks,
Speaker 2: this is going to be a window in the global
Speaker 2: Wall Street where they don't just look at yen in
Speaker 2: euro Steven Englander, you walked in and you said, cad yen,
Speaker 2: which is the number of Japanese yen per Canadian dollar
Speaker 2: since a pandemic. It's been massively strung Canada weekend.
Speaker 3: And it's reversed.
Speaker 2: How do you glean information from a study of Canada
Speaker 2: versus Japan.
Speaker 8: Well, you know, I'm thinking of it more short term
Speaker 8: that you know, even though yen traditionally is a safe haven,
Speaker 8: it's it's still low yielding, has the lowest drilled interest rates.
Speaker 8: The politics are kind of a little bit soft, and
Speaker 8: it's very exposed to higher oil prices, whereas some of the.
Speaker 2: Weakness we're seeing today in dollar yen as well.
Speaker 8: Yeah, and you know, and what you're seeing is is
Speaker 8: that the end is actually one of the weakest currencies overnight.
Speaker 8: Canada is holding in there because it does have oil.
Speaker 8: You know, it's trade related.
Speaker 3: It's not as.
Speaker 8: Exposed to to July the ninth, and you start of say,
Speaker 8: if things go south that you know, maybe cad is
Speaker 8: continues to hang in there.
Speaker 3: But you know, yeah, you bet at.
Speaker 2: The standard charter bank is strong, loooning weaker.
Speaker 8: Yeah, well, we don't bet, but it's certainly sort of
Speaker 8: something that we sink, we we would think about if
Speaker 8: you're asking us, you know how markets might trade.
Speaker 2: Put me in my place there?
Speaker 3: Why did you save the interview?
Speaker 2: Steve Hall?
Speaker 5: Has a world of rising tariffs impacted your view of
Speaker 5: currencies here. We don't know where the tariffs are going
Speaker 5: to shake out, but we do know that we got
Speaker 5: to pay attention to these things for at least for
Speaker 5: the next several years. How does that impact your view?
Speaker 8: Well, it's made very complicated because there are three factors
Speaker 8: that are involved. One is that they've increased the risk
Speaker 8: premium on US assets a lot.
Speaker 3: Part weaker dollar, yeah.
Speaker 8: Partly because of you know, the expansion of the envelope
Speaker 8: of tariffs beyond what anybody thought was reasonable, but also
Speaker 8: the possibility that they can do everything else with the
Speaker 8: same kind of broader envelope of policy options. Second thing
Speaker 8: is it's risk off for the rest of the world.
Speaker 8: You know, if you get tariffed up, that's no fun.
Speaker 8: It's going to disrupt trade.
Speaker 3: And the third thing.
Speaker 8: Is that normally you would sort of say, look if
Speaker 8: your if US tariffs on Europe go up, the euro
Speaker 8: would fall, although that hasn't been the case yet because
Speaker 8: the risk premium has dominated. How you weigh all those
Speaker 8: three is very complicated.
Speaker 2: I look, Steve Angloder in my book of the Summer
Speaker 2: Ken Rogoff out of Harvard, our dollar year problem fabulous, fabulous,
Speaker 2: look back at Rudy Donbush and the late Stan Fisher
Speaker 2: and all in our dollar for the greater public listening
Speaker 2: right now, should they have dollar worries?
Speaker 3: Yeah? They should.
Speaker 8: I think that the You know what makes America great,
Speaker 8: I think is the ability to attract money from abroad
Speaker 8: at low interest rates. That's been the history of the
Speaker 8: last twenty or thirty years. Invested in new technologies, get
Speaker 8: high rates of return and do very well of it.
Speaker 8: You know, the US is like a big hedge fund.
Speaker 2: Do you suggest that's bro I love that. Can we
Speaker 2: steal that?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 2: Lisa right, that the US is like a big edge
Speaker 2: fun My book of the Year by Ruster Sherman. Rockefeller
Speaker 2: now is basically a trease on capitalism in America. Steven
Speaker 2: Anglicher the Standard Charter Bank with this on quote, the
Speaker 2: US is like a hedge fund. Is this the financialization
Speaker 2: of America? It's only giving gains.
Speaker 3: To the elite, not necessarily.
Speaker 8: I think everyone benefits, you know, from the development of
Speaker 8: new technologies. I mean, even if you're poor, having a
Speaker 8: cell phone with remarkable capabilities is a wonderful thing. But
Speaker 8: I do think it's dependent on being able to borrow
Speaker 8: cheaply as long as you're running a current account deficit,
Speaker 8: and that's not going to go away, so, you know.
Speaker 8: And my worry about the dollar is that some of
Speaker 8: the policies that are being pursued and that are contemplated
Speaker 8: may raise the cost of capital to the most dynamic
Speaker 8: sector of the US and that would be a pity.
Speaker 5: Speaking of the US dollar year date, we've seen it
Speaker 5: down you know, eight to nine percent, having a little
Speaker 5: bit of a bounce back today, maybe risk even how
Speaker 5: much more downside do you think there could be? Because
Speaker 5: I've been asking, I don't know anything about your world,
Speaker 5: the currency business. So my stock question is are we
Speaker 5: ever going to see a bear market in the dollar?
Speaker 5: I've been asking that for six years. Are we starting
Speaker 5: to see the beginning of one? Or is this just
Speaker 5: a trade?
Speaker 8: It could be if you think of say we have
Speaker 8: you know, another session a year from now, and tax
Speaker 8: build has passed, tariffs have been resolved, and the US
Speaker 8: is growing sluggishly, has a big fiscal deficit, has a
Speaker 8: big current account deficit.
Speaker 3: That could be real trouble for the dollar.
Speaker 2: What does one final question, what does the standard Charter bank,
Speaker 2: with all of your heritage of the Pacific RIM and
Speaker 2: particularly down south over to India, what do you see
Speaker 2: of a vibrancy in the Pacific RIM right now?
Speaker 8: Ex China, you know, they're hit with the same issues
Speaker 8: everybody else has hit. You know, there's the deflation being
Speaker 8: exported from China. There's loss of confidence because of the
Speaker 8: you know, the risk on the tariff side. So you know,
Speaker 8: nothing is catastrophic, but a lot is sluggish.
Speaker 2: I look, you know, just in the space folks, I
Speaker 2: can do this on the Bloomberg Professional Service. I got
Speaker 2: like a five standard deviation plus two to minus three
Speaker 2: on Taiwan dollar. I got a massively strong Taiwan dollar
Speaker 2: Sing dollar in the rest is that on an asymmetric basis?
Speaker 2: Is that strong EM or is that weak US? Or
Speaker 2: is it something different?
Speaker 8: Well, there's a lot of speculation on you know, what's
Speaker 8: causing these moves, and I think there's some anticipation that
Speaker 8: perhaps currency adjustment was substitute for some of the trade
Speaker 8: impediment adjustment that the US wants that you know, especially
Speaker 8: Asian currencies as a group, may prefer to allow their
Speaker 8: and he's to appreciate rather than sort of say, use
Speaker 8: that as a leakage. Yeah yeah, but rather than open
Speaker 8: up vulnerable sectors like farming and stuff where which is
Speaker 8: politically important, they say, let's socialize this. Everybody will take
Speaker 8: the hit through the exchange.
Speaker 2: And you know, my keymail me and he says, Tom,
Speaker 2: use the damn terminal. So yeah, I'm doing the t function.
Speaker 3: Yeah a monthly.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to impress englander.
Speaker 3: Here.
Speaker 2: I got Taiwan dollar in April plus two standard deviations
Speaker 2: on trend and now it's minus exactly minus three. That's
Speaker 2: a five standard deviations swing. That's it's it's like more
Speaker 2: than substantial.
Speaker 3: Was that?
Speaker 2: Will you come back now that we use the terminal?
Speaker 3: I'm always impressed when I talk to you. Well please,
Speaker 3: there you go.
Speaker 2: So that's what the third divorce lawyers, Thank you so much,
Speaker 2: greatly appreciate it. He's with a standard charter at Bank
Speaker 2: and Studio.
Speaker 1: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Listen live each weekday
Speaker 1: starting at seven am Eastern on Applecarplay and Android Auto
Speaker 1: with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live
Speaker 1: on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station. Just
Speaker 1: say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: They emailed the White House today, I say, can you
Speaker 2: give me an oil tweet from the president because we
Speaker 2: got Paul Sanki coming and joining us. Paul Sanki, Sankie
Speaker 2: researcher four. Our conversation we're going to do quickly here
Speaker 2: the President of the United States moments ago, all caps. Everyone,
Speaker 2: come keep oil prices down.
Speaker 3: Period.
Speaker 2: I'm watching exclamation point. You're playing right into the hands
Speaker 2: of the enemy. Don't do it. What would you say
Speaker 2: to the White House and the manipulation of oil prices?
Speaker 9: H I think the best trade is of oil of
Speaker 9: the Chinese. And so they're the real you know, the
Speaker 9: under the power underneath this order is there is that
Speaker 9: buying an Iranian crude.
Speaker 2: They put the bid on oil.
Speaker 9: They put the bid on Iranian oil so that the
Speaker 9: main buyer, by far, you know, eighty percent of Iranian
Speaker 9: oil is a lot of it actually goes to Malaysia
Speaker 9: and then is reflagged. So you see that Malaysia exports
Speaker 9: more oil to China than it produces oil, so it's
Speaker 9: obviously smuggled. And basically the other manipulation is the White
Speaker 9: House turning their blind eye. And this is the second
Speaker 9: administration that's done that to all these sanctions. So you know,
Speaker 9: you haven't really interrupted Russian oil despite all the sanctions.
Speaker 9: Iranian oil as of today is still flowing as it
Speaker 9: was that you know, recent, very high levels compared to history,
Speaker 9: and so there has been you know, concerted efforts not
Speaker 9: to get the oil interrupted, and nobody, including Iran, wants
Speaker 9: to interrupt the oil. The other thing here is that,
Speaker 9: you know, people seem to think that there's some sort
Speaker 9: of gate at the Straits of hor Moves when they
Speaker 9: talk about closing the Straits of horr Moos, you know,
Speaker 9: they think Iran has the power to do that. The
Speaker 9: real question is does Iran start shooting missiles at tankers,
Speaker 9: which is really going to be dramatic if it happens,
Speaker 9: And of course that's what happened in the tanker War
Speaker 9: of the seventies between Iran and a Rock, where they
Speaker 9: were both firing missiles, and that's actually what got us
Speaker 9: the nineteen seventies high in oil prices, which was over
Speaker 9: one hundred dollars a barrel.
Speaker 5: Given that background, why isn't Brent crude north of one
Speaker 5: hundred dollars today?
Speaker 9: There's plenty of oil, and you know, Chinese demand is weak,
Speaker 9: suppliers abundon. I think to me, Tom and I have
Speaker 9: known each other twenty five years. What's so extraordinary about
Speaker 9: the current market is firstly that we're a one hundred
Speaker 9: and three million barrels a day of demand, you know,
Speaker 9: an extraordinary number, one hundred and three million barrels a
Speaker 9: day of every day, you know, so this is like
Speaker 9: one thy three hundred barrels a second of consumption. But
Speaker 9: even more extraordinarily, which we would never have thought you
Speaker 9: could do twenty years ago, you've got capacity of you know,
Speaker 9: one hundred and eight million barrels a day, so there's
Speaker 9: actually five million barrels a day spare. The interesting thing
Speaker 9: about the spec capacity is it's all in the Gulf,
Speaker 9: so the market is clearly as further to the answer
Speaker 9: to your question is the market is thinking that the
Speaker 9: risk of interruption in the Straits of horn Moves is low.
Speaker 9: Basically because China, US, Europe, everybody set out pretty much
Speaker 9: maybe less so want the oil to keep flowing, and
Speaker 9: that the Iranian's only source of revenue now dollar revenue
Speaker 9: is going to be oil. So it's difficult to see
Speaker 9: exactly who wants to shut the straits of war moves,
Speaker 9: and I think the odds on various betting sites are
Speaker 9: far too high. It's actually quoted at thirty percent chance
Speaker 9: the straits are shut by the end of June, which
Speaker 9: I just think is extremely unlikely because I don't even
Speaker 9: know how you would shut it short of sending missiles.
Speaker 5: If you take the risk premium, assuming there's some risk
Speaker 5: premium in global crude today, if you take that out,
Speaker 5: is a market still pushing this monority lower?
Speaker 9: Yes, I think so. I mean I think that you know,
Speaker 9: we are in a plentiful supply situation. The one thing
Speaker 9: that hasn't turned out well for the Bears has been
Speaker 9: that demand remains pretty strong, particularly Middle Eastern heat. So
Speaker 9: we saw a very cold winter in the globally in
Speaker 9: you know the key markets, which would be Northeast, Asia, Europe,
Speaker 9: and the US that gave us a lot of extra demand,
Speaker 9: a million over a million miles a day of extra
Speaker 9: demand just on than Q one and now we're getting
Speaker 9: a good four hundred thousand bars a day of extra
Speaker 9: demand because of the massive heat that we've had in
Speaker 9: the Middle East. You're doing if you think it's hot
Speaker 9: in New York today, Abby Dabbi recorded fifty three degrees
Speaker 9: I think, which is one hundred and twenty seven degrees
Speaker 9: in the shade in May. And as a result, experts
Speaker 9: have been a bit constrained. Now having said that Saudi
Speaker 9: is now all of them have now started sending as
Speaker 9: much oil out of the Gulf as possible. So we
Speaker 9: really need some incremental geopolitical disaster to make well go high.
Speaker 2: Can we do something quaint like an individual stack?
Speaker 10: Yeah, I don't know if he still does OXI Vicky
Speaker 10: over at Axey with Warren Buffet twenty seven percent ownership
Speaker 10: of Berkshire at the way, debt encumbered.
Speaker 2: Essentially, his stock's gone nowhere for ten years. Akson has
Speaker 2: sixty some thousand employees. Oxy's teen swings thirteen thousand employees.
Speaker 2: Is mister Buffet got himself into a problem.
Speaker 9: Warren Buffet, as you call him, owns actually more dollars
Speaker 9: of Chevron than he does of Oxy. So my thought
Speaker 9: is that if he wanted to engineer something. Yeah, you
Speaker 9: know that you could. You could roll it all up
Speaker 9: into Chevron and move on. So that's one option. But
Speaker 9: of course Chevron's buying Hess at the moment, and we're
Speaker 9: in arbitration on that deal. So I think a lot
Speaker 9: will obviously depend on whether that arbitration says that Exxon
Speaker 9: has a right of first refusal on the assets in
Speaker 9: Guyana or whether Chevron simply wins the deal and moves on.
Speaker 9: If Chevron wins Hess, it's in terrific shape. It's got
Speaker 9: a great asset base with that extra Guyana leg that
Speaker 9: they really need to make them source complete. The beauty
Speaker 9: of Oxy for a Chevron would be that it would
Speaker 9: catapult them pretty much beyond Exxon, you know, which would
Speaker 9: be a historic moment for them.
Speaker 2: To be larger and more international than the Exon.
Speaker 9: Not more international, but larger because they've become the largest
Speaker 9: player in the Permian. Chevron actually in twenty twenty, when
Speaker 9: Xon was really struggling badly, went up to a higher
Speaker 9: market cap. And I can tell you there was champagne
Speaker 9: corks in the corridors of San Romano when Chevron. If
Speaker 9: you think about the his but today, you know, would
Speaker 9: Exon do another big deal? I think the main thing
Speaker 9: here is Thomas is the Trump. You know, would Trump
Speaker 9: be more ready to allow Exon for Conico, Phillips, you
Speaker 9: know some of these mega deals that they sort of
Speaker 9: have to do now because it doesn't look like oil
Speaker 9: is going to get much out of a call it
Speaker 9: sixty to eighty range. And really the thing for these
Speaker 9: companies to do is to merge and create synergies and
Speaker 9: increase returns.
Speaker 2: I got eight ways to go here, I got time
Speaker 2: for one question is as simply as I camp Paul
Speaker 2: Sank for our American audience, what is our biggest misconception
Speaker 2: of oil production and the Persian golf? After we all
Speaker 2: read Daniel Jurgen's surprise, what's a thing we get wrong?
Speaker 3: Now?
Speaker 9: I think the single biggest thing people get wrong is
Speaker 9: they think that, you know, there's there's more environmentally friendly
Speaker 9: alternative to oil. When ail is naturally occurring, always say
Speaker 9: it's liquid solar power. So the big idea is oil
Speaker 9: just has a very bad public image. It's actually, if
Speaker 9: we could if gas was announced as an invention today,
Speaker 9: the word world would celebrate that we found the solution
Speaker 9: to our energy problems that are environmental problems, and US
Speaker 9: emissions are down based on our increased use of natural gas.
Speaker 9: It's as simple as that. That's how we've actually reduced
Speaker 9: CO two over time. The biggest misconception in the Gulf,
Speaker 9: I think, is that they're all much more friendly and
Speaker 9: talking to each other than you realize. You know, you
Speaker 9: see all these back channels, and you can see that
Speaker 9: even the US is talking to Iran. So I think
Speaker 9: there's you know, a whole different level here for conspiracy theorists,
Speaker 9: which is that you know, a lot of these guys
Speaker 9: are much more trying to sort this out. And I'm
Speaker 9: actually believing I'm not quite optimistic here, Tom, because I
Speaker 9: believe that if you can actually have some sort of
Speaker 9: transition in Iran, and that's going to be a terrible challenge.
Speaker 9: You know, you're going to be in a Venezuela situation
Speaker 9: quite possibly. In the seventy nine revolution, there was significant
Speaker 9: civil war fighting in Iran for at least a year
Speaker 9: or two posts the revolution. I mean that they continue
Speaker 9: to basically fight within Iran, and at the moment there's
Speaker 9: no opposition nor opposition leader in Iran, So you worry
Speaker 9: that it's likely to go to the Revolutionary Guard, who
Speaker 9: are effectively not just a military force, there an economic force.
Speaker 9: So they run the u at the Iranian economy. And
Speaker 9: as a result, the thing I'd be watching for is
Speaker 9: for a split in the Revolutionary Guard.
Speaker 2: Right at the time I got to ask how attached
Speaker 2: is a revolutionary regard to Ayotola.
Speaker 9: I mean, that's their job. Their job is not military,
Speaker 9: their job is to protect the revolution, and they've turned
Speaker 9: that into a massive, sort of corrupt they're sort of
Speaker 9: like a cartel. They're like a government cartel that they're crooks,
Speaker 9: their criminals. All these guys should be out, you know,
Speaker 9: we've got to get rid of them. And I just
Speaker 9: hope the Iranian people, who, as you said, have a
Speaker 9: wonderful culture, can come through it.
Speaker 2: So wrong, be a stranger your weekend note, You tore
Speaker 2: apart me, you tore apart financial media. You said you'd
Speaker 2: done seventeen things. Will you come back or.
Speaker 3: Are we like you lumping us in with everyone? So
Speaker 3: you're on a special list.
Speaker 9: Man, you're on the yes every time. But you know
Speaker 9: you don't pay me, So if you want to pay me,
Speaker 9: may I'll come a day, Okay, I think Lisa likes,
Speaker 9: get them.
Speaker 3: A case of Kirkling hot dogs.
Speaker 5: Can we dogs.
Speaker 9: Have a quarter hot dog every morning, so I'm always
Speaker 9: in the market for hot dogs.
Speaker 3: Thank you, thank you, thank.
Speaker 2: You so much for joining us.
Speaker 1: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast, available on Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 1: and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live each weekday,
Speaker 1: seven to ten am Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app. You
Speaker 1: can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and
Speaker 1: always on the Bloomberg terminal