Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane. Along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Ferrell and Lisa Abramowitz. Daily we bring you
Speaker 1: insight from the best and economics, finance, investment, and international relations.
Speaker 1: To find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple podcast, SoundCloud, Bloomberg dot Com,
Speaker 1: and of course on the Bloomberg terminal. We're gonna get
Speaker 1: a brief down. It has been very visible. Lisa Hornby
Speaker 1: joins us out of the US multisector fixed income at
Speaker 1: Schroeder's and and Lisa, I really want to go to
Speaker 1: a general sentence buried in your note. The value was
Speaker 1: there for a decade in bills, notes and bonds. The
Speaker 1: values extraordinary discussed that why is price cheap in fixed income? Well,
Speaker 1: to be fair, we wrote that note about four or
Speaker 1: five weeks ago. But you know, when we look at
Speaker 1: on yields today and the longer term, over the longer term,
Speaker 1: there is much better value than there has been certainly
Speaker 1: any time in the past decade. And in fact, if
Speaker 1: you look back even going back twenty years, where at
Speaker 1: the sort of top percentile or so, and so you know,
Speaker 1: in our view, the first six seven months of this
Speaker 1: year have been quite painful in return space, but when
Speaker 1: you look forward, we've now set the landscape for much
Speaker 1: better returns. We actually have income in fixed income now
Speaker 1: for the first time in a while. We couldn't make
Speaker 1: that case a year ago. Lisa spreads of tit and aggressively.
Speaker 1: You've seen that we've gone from close to six hundred
Speaker 1: basis points on high yield to threatening to break four hundred. Lisa,
Speaker 1: can you help me understand just dissect that runny for
Speaker 1: us when that strength has come from? Is that an
Speaker 1: up and quality trade? Is everything? What's happened to here?
Speaker 1: I think it's I think it's a few things. I
Speaker 1: think the main one for us actually is that people
Speaker 1: have a bit more certainty in the rates volatility scenario.
Speaker 1: And what I mean by that is, I think you
Speaker 1: went back through four months ago, people didn't know where
Speaker 1: the terminal rate belonged. I mean you heard strategists talking
Speaker 1: three four or five six percent, to mean, there were
Speaker 1: there were lots of expectations out There are lots of
Speaker 1: various scenarios, and that led to extraordinary high rates volatility,
Speaker 1: and of course the the subsequent impact on credit spreads
Speaker 1: and and equity markets. Because if you can't price the
Speaker 1: risk free rate, how can you price everything else? And
Speaker 1: I think what happened was not only did sentiment get
Speaker 1: so poor that positioning work perhaps a bit offside, but
Speaker 1: what happened was the FED was perceived to do a
Speaker 1: slight pivot and show that they are willing at some
Speaker 1: point to slow the pace down UM, and that they
Speaker 1: think that they're getting fairly close to you know, perhaps
Speaker 1: they've perhaps a neutral rate, you know, over long term.
Speaker 1: But UM, I think people got comfort in the fact
Speaker 1: that the terminal rate is probably not five or six percent,
Speaker 1: it's probably three or four percent. But at Lisa, the
Speaker 1: FED is said, we haven't pivoted, no pivots going on here,
Speaker 1: and basically we're expecting that to hear that in the minutes.
Speaker 1: Is that going to reverse some of the spread tightening
Speaker 1: that we've seen. I think it will. UM. I think
Speaker 1: that the market narrative shifted a bit and that lower
Speaker 1: vowel regime is positive for risk assets, and especially it's
Speaker 1: more positive when sentiment had gone so far offside. I mean,
Speaker 1: we looked at that, we look at that Credit Swiss
Speaker 1: panic Euphoria index. It was negative five panic for for
Speaker 1: you know, months, almost um. Now it's back actually in
Speaker 1: positive territory, So there was a massive swing in sentiment.
Speaker 1: I think that coupled with that perception that the FED
Speaker 1: became a bit more perhaps stablished, led to the rally
Speaker 1: that we've seen. To your point, Lisa, in our view,
Speaker 1: this is a fade. I don't think that the I
Speaker 1: don't think the outcome that the market is painted, which
Speaker 1: is one if you know, you look at what's priced
Speaker 1: in the yield curve is invertus points to a recession. Um.
Speaker 1: You look at what's priced into FED funds rates, it's
Speaker 1: it's basically the FED stops in February or March hiking
Speaker 1: and they basically do an out about face and start
Speaker 1: cutting rights in in in the summertime. I think that's
Speaker 1: a that's a fairly unlikely scenario unless there's a really
Speaker 1: big downturn, which there could be. But then should risk
Speaker 1: assets be priced the way that they are today, Lisa,
Speaker 1: Our bond markets as well as the FED all just
Speaker 1: trading and operating around an oil market that's influx um.
Speaker 1: I think oil is one part of it. Certainly, that's
Speaker 1: you know, that's going to lead to the headline inflation
Speaker 1: sort of gyrations, and you know, oil came off and
Speaker 1: and so we saw a big, big drop down and
Speaker 1: in cp I headline CPI. But I think core inflation
Speaker 1: is more important, um and and that's really where the
Speaker 1: story is. And to us that's a bit more concerning.
Speaker 1: You know, yes, there was maybe a little bit of moderation,
Speaker 1: but the sticky components of core inflation are still running
Speaker 1: north of five five and so to us, that's the
Speaker 1: that's the real challenge. Yes, oil will will have puts
Speaker 1: and takes that will drive headline, but you gotta get
Speaker 1: core inflation down to more reasonable levels. And I think
Speaker 1: that's what the FED is focused on. LESA. Just listening
Speaker 1: to that final common there, that just sounds like you
Speaker 1: think this debate over terminal rights own result that it's
Speaker 1: too ready to get ahead of the story. I think
Speaker 1: it's too early to be discounting FED cuts. Certainly, um,
Speaker 1: I think it's too early to be discounting the FED
Speaker 1: has has pivoted. I think that's that's not not done yet.
Speaker 1: You know, I do think that they probably moderate their
Speaker 1: pace in September to fifty probably, you know, they could
Speaker 1: do a couple of fifties, They could do a couple
Speaker 1: of I don't think the five or six percent story
Speaker 1: is the one that you know, people were fearful of
Speaker 1: at the very front of the year. I don't think
Speaker 1: we're getting there, But I think the market is pricing
Speaker 1: in this very uh specific outcome where we head into
Speaker 1: a very moderate or mild recession. The FED is able
Speaker 1: to stop hiking and then start cutting, and that just
Speaker 1: seems unlikely. Historically, they don't cut when inflation is at
Speaker 1: elevated levels unless growth is really really bad. Employment is
Speaker 1: much higher, unemployment excuse me, it's much higher than where
Speaker 1: we are today. So you know, I think the markets
Speaker 1: is getting a little too excited right now to be
Speaker 1: to be you know, I've always called that Lisa a
Speaker 1: bedtime story. To have equity market balls sleep well at night,
Speaker 1: and that's what that is. Right now, Lisa won't be there.
Speaker 1: Shoulders Kitchen ex joined us now chief ex Strategistics Sock
Speaker 1: gen K. The first line in your note this morning
Speaker 1: the markets listening to the Fed and ignoring them or
Speaker 1: just not listening, which one is it? I think that
Speaker 1: I think they're choosing not to listen. I'm sure markets
Speaker 1: are listening to the Fed, but they're not really hearing
Speaker 1: the message, or you know, there's a there's a disconnect
Speaker 1: between some of the kind of optimism that a little
Speaker 1: bit less inflation means we'll get less from the Fed
Speaker 1: and a fad that's looking at high inflation anyway, I mean, way, way,
Speaker 1: way too high and a labor market which you know
Speaker 1: is just incredibly tight now, and so they really have
Speaker 1: nowhere to go. And I will be surprised if we
Speaker 1: don't end up pricing a four percent FED funds peak
Speaker 1: into this market before we've done over the next few weeks,
Speaker 1: because it seems to me that the message from the
Speaker 1: Fed is it cannot soften at all at this point. Kid,
Speaker 1: what is the message of strong Swiss Frank and particularly
Speaker 1: Euroswissy breaking through point nine seven to point nine six?
Speaker 1: What is the signal of that sticking out like a
Speaker 1: sore thumb on a Monday morning. Um, it tells you
Speaker 1: a little bit about risk conversion. I mean, it tells
Speaker 1: you something about the fight. But the Swiss decided that
Speaker 1: they wanted to get rates backed in depositive territory if
Speaker 1: they've ever got a chance, and that they've got some
Speaker 1: intuation that they need to fight. Uh, and if they
Speaker 1: have to sacrifice all attempts to keep the currency down
Speaker 1: in the process. It's fine because dollar Swiss isn't the problem,
Speaker 1: so so domestically you can see what they're doing. But yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, it's an extension of the China story from
Speaker 1: this morning that says the US economy might still be
Speaker 1: doing well so long as we don't look at the
Speaker 1: yield curve and don't worry about the the things that
Speaker 1: don't don't jell well with yours economy. But if we
Speaker 1: look at the rest of the world, there's just a
Speaker 1: world of trouble out there. Kid. You're talking about how
Speaker 1: perhaps this market is not listening to the federals or
Speaker 1: and I wonder in this quiet summer week, whether Wednesday
Speaker 1: will be a pivotal day in terms of FED meeting minutes,
Speaker 1: whether they try to signal, hey, wake up, four percent
Speaker 1: FED funds rate is actually a reality. Do you believe
Speaker 1: that this will be a catalyst for some sort of
Speaker 1: dollar strength, for more market disruption As people kind of
Speaker 1: start to hear whij Powell was saying, hard to know
Speaker 1: for sure, because I think I think what the you know,
Speaker 1: I think I think the last FMC meeting was about
Speaker 1: stepping away from excessive forward guidance. So I don't know
Speaker 1: if they want to come back and steer us too hot.
Speaker 1: I think Jackson holl is a different story. But but
Speaker 1: I think they have a they have a problem with
Speaker 1: with with the degree of over precise forward guidance we've
Speaker 1: had from central banks in a very complicated and chaotic
Speaker 1: global economy, it just doesn't make sense. They should take
Speaker 1: the fact, you know, the facts as they are when
Speaker 1: they get them and moved. They should have hiked in
Speaker 1: June last year. You know, they then so on and
Speaker 1: so forth. So I would I would be a little
Speaker 1: bit depressed if I thought that they were still using
Speaker 1: FMC minutes to mike a manager expectations. UM, I would
Speaker 1: be more encouraged if they came out having seen that,
Speaker 1: having seen the peril data, and having seen everything that
Speaker 1: we've seen since this month, if they came in and
Speaker 1: Jackson hole and they don't say, look, you know, we
Speaker 1: have to get inflation back in its box, and we
Speaker 1: could only do that by putting some slack into the
Speaker 1: opor market and find out contradictions just keep on easing.
Speaker 1: And that's been problematic. Lisa. I was reading through the
Speaker 1: notes last week and pretty much every single note, so
Speaker 1: the same thing. It looked like to me at least,
Speaker 1: that we were equating peak inflation, Lisa, with peak FED hawkishness.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure whether you can do that. And a
Speaker 1: lot of people came out and basically said the FED
Speaker 1: put is still a FED call, and that the more
Speaker 1: that starts rally, the more that the FED is going
Speaker 1: to have to step in and do something to to
Speaker 1: cause this to reverse. And how much is this going
Speaker 1: to become the reality and the talking point of the
Speaker 1: next few weeks a kid, would you summarize it as
Speaker 1: follows as Lisa just called it, Is this a FED
Speaker 1: call now? And does this FED have to respond to
Speaker 1: this aggressive rally we've seen in this equity market, this
Speaker 1: aggressive tightening we've seen in credit spreads. I don't think that.
Speaker 1: I don't think that the market helps the FED. But
Speaker 1: the reality is that inflation that with the labor market
Speaker 1: where it is and wage growth where it is, as
Speaker 1: a result of that, inflation may drift lower over the
Speaker 1: course of the next six nine months, but they'll still
Speaker 1: have a problem because it's not going back under five
Speaker 1: percent easily from here. So you know, there's a two stage.
Speaker 1: So I think I think the Fed's messaging in sense
Speaker 1: of the fleas problem is the third's problem is they
Speaker 1: don't have a choice. The inflation mandate requires action, more action.
Speaker 1: The market does what it does. The concern is that
Speaker 1: as soon as the market things, they might have done enough.
Speaker 1: Um that that that that sort of look at it
Speaker 1: and you think, no, they just haven't, not until the
Speaker 1: data improved. A kid, just quickly, as an arsenal fan,
Speaker 1: did you enjoy two other London clubs just beating each
Speaker 1: other up for ninety minutes yesterday? It was good entertainment?
Speaker 1: Whatever else it? Kid? Juicus? So kid, thank you. Right
Speaker 1: now we're gonna rip up the script. We can do
Speaker 1: this with William Lee, his chief economist at Milk And Institute.
Speaker 1: We're going to talk to him about the Empire statistics,
Speaker 1: but said, let's take advantage of his encyclopedic knowledge of
Speaker 1: the Pacific rim and the dynamics of China. Of course,
Speaker 1: Dr Lee has all of the efforts he's done at
Speaker 1: the International Monetary Fund over the years and City Group,
Speaker 1: and of course has a shingle out at the Milk
Speaker 1: And Institute. Right now, Billy, I want to go to
Speaker 1: the Party Congress. Right now, Elizabeth Economy of the Council
Speaker 1: on Foreign Relations, in her beautiful book The World according
Speaker 1: to China has the view of China looking out. How
Speaker 1: does Beijing and their leader in Beijing, how does he
Speaker 1: look within? Giving the grim data of the day, Actually,
Speaker 1: President she has made a major campaign of his to
Speaker 1: start looking inward. It's called the deal circulation strategy, where
Speaker 1: he wants to have the domestic economy become the primary
Speaker 1: focus for China and the source of growth going forward. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: so much as collapsed within China that the domestic economy
Speaker 1: is nowhere to be found, especially in the private sector,
Speaker 1: where the only store of wealth the middle class had.
Speaker 1: The property sector has completely collapsed, had about a year
Speaker 1: of declining real estate crisis. So so so right now
Speaker 1: the rest of the world is the only hope for China,
Speaker 1: and even that's collapsed because the latest data show the
Speaker 1: export numbers are are are are nowhere to be found.
Speaker 1: So China really has nothing to hang on too. Going
Speaker 1: into the Party commos, how does she Billy prosecute decisions, logistics,
Speaker 1: the process of it to Shanghai or to cheng Do.
Speaker 1: How does Beijing actually get the message out. You know,
Speaker 1: right now there's a tension between the center of the
Speaker 1: central government and the municipal governments because right now the
Speaker 1: only place for revival is to have the municipal governments
Speaker 1: go in there and do infrastructure building and just start
Speaker 1: pumping out fiscal policy. Unfortunately, every municipality out there is
Speaker 1: so indebted they can't do it. Uh. And so so
Speaker 1: the only thing that j Pick has to to have
Speaker 1: to save face going into the Party Congress in October
Speaker 1: is to have some prayer of saying we will have
Speaker 1: a revival in the second half of the year. These
Speaker 1: numbers today have put that to rest, and there's no
Speaker 1: chance for that. On top of that, uh, Speaker Pelosi
Speaker 1: has slapped him in the face, and the loss of
Speaker 1: face going into the Party Congress is gonna be something
Speaker 1: that's gonna be very hard for him to recover from.
Speaker 1: But we get to timeline in the moment. Just on
Speaker 1: the economy, are you describing a balance sheet recession in China?
Speaker 1: Balance sheet recession for short in the private sector because
Speaker 1: the only source of saving for the households has been
Speaker 1: real estate and the very volatile stock market. And so
Speaker 1: with the collapse of the real estate market and the
Speaker 1: health the huge youth unemployment. It's very hard for households
Speaker 1: to have a positive outlook for the future and start
Speaker 1: buying things like consumer durables, and and and and other
Speaker 1: other items. So so the balance sheet recession notion is
Speaker 1: very much in play at China. Now leaves money to
Speaker 1: your policy impotent, doesn't it. And I feel if that's
Speaker 1: the case, I'm just trying to work out where that
Speaker 1: leaves the global economy off the fact of this dynamic
Speaker 1: stating to bubble to the service just a little bit more.
Speaker 1: The only place monitored policy can have a play here
Speaker 1: would the regulatory policy to somehow ignore all of the
Speaker 1: holes that are in the real estate sector and say, okay, guys,
Speaker 1: go on and Bill, we're gonna backstop all of your
Speaker 1: your your bad debt and all of those empty apartments
Speaker 1: of yours. That's the only place Montory policy brow. It's
Speaker 1: the regulatory side, and China's doctor to be able to
Speaker 1: do that because the regulatory sector, the real estate sector
Speaker 1: is in such bad shape. So what are we looking at, Bill,
Speaker 1: in terms of GDP growth for China? I hear two
Speaker 1: handles going into the rest of the year. Uh, and
Speaker 1: so in order for China to get to his five
Speaker 1: and a half percent target has to have seven and
Speaker 1: eight percent for the rest of the year, and right
Speaker 1: now is exactly going to the opposite direction as the
Speaker 1: rest of the world economy. Factored that in the likelihood
Speaker 1: in your idea that you can see a two hand
Speaker 1: all for Chinese GDP growth. I I think that notion
Speaker 1: has gotten out, especially among my my friends who are
Speaker 1: China chief economists out there. They can't publish it because
Speaker 1: they may be banned from China, but I think the
Speaker 1: notion is among the among the investors of the world. Well,
Speaker 1: this may be temporary and the China will somehow recovered
Speaker 1: because it always has, but the structural problems I just
Speaker 1: pointed out are just so severe. I think there's gonna
Speaker 1: be a lot more work to be done for China
Speaker 1: to regain anywhere nearest investor status. What about the asset
Speaker 1: pricing though globally and we're just talking about the Empire
Speaker 1: Manufacturing survey severely disappointed. Biggest, second biggest job in this
Speaker 1: history of this index, The second biggest just all in
Speaker 1: level that we have ever seen in this index is history.
Speaker 1: How much how are we looking at a global recession
Speaker 1: really pitting off the slowtown in China. Well, manufacturing is
Speaker 1: really at the core of the globalization. That's the one
Speaker 1: sect that's most affected by globalization, and China in particular
Speaker 1: because it's been the next is the manufacturing So we
Speaker 1: would expect any kind of slowdown in China that affects
Speaker 1: the global supply chain to kill the manufacturing sector before
Speaker 1: anything else. And we have seen that in the data now,
Speaker 1: so that's not so surprising. What is going to be
Speaker 1: difficult with the how the rest of the economy work.
Speaker 1: Global economy will adapt its global supply chains in a
Speaker 1: way that it takes China out of the picture, or
Speaker 1: at least become less important part of the picture. But
Speaker 1: you said something moments ago i'll paraphrase that certain people
Speaker 1: can't publish things because they'll be thrown out the country
Speaker 1: now built. There's an element of truth in that in
Speaker 1: the minds of a lot of people. And I wonder
Speaker 1: if these things start to deteriate just a little bit more,
Speaker 1: Bill where I look for reliable data on what's actually
Speaker 1: happening in that economy. Well, I hate to say this,
Speaker 1: but my supply, my cell side colleagues are are kind
Speaker 1: of constrained. I'm lucky to be at Milton where I'm
Speaker 1: not constrained to say what I think. And I think
Speaker 1: it's going to be very difficult to find hard intelligence
Speaker 1: about China outside of private sources. That's tough. Bill. Thank you,
Speaker 1: bo Lee at the Milk and Institute on Oil. Ellen
Speaker 1: Wall joins senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and really
Speaker 1: quite good on particularly the mix of what's going on
Speaker 1: in Saudi Arabia. Ellen, thank you so much for joining
Speaker 1: us today. Should we get used to oil at eighty
Speaker 1: or ninety or are you with a school of thought
Speaker 1: that normal is much higher and we're just on borrowed
Speaker 1: time down here n suns and borrowed time. But I
Speaker 1: do think that for the current the current picture that yes,
Speaker 1: higher is definitely a new normal. And when you look
Speaker 1: at the changes that are going on in the US
Speaker 1: in terms of oil production and new regulations and different
Speaker 1: corporate outlooks towards increasing production, there's definitely a trend towards
Speaker 1: less dynamic responses to the market, um, higher costs in
Speaker 1: terms of production, uh, slower increases in production, and so
Speaker 1: I think we definitely could be looking at a somewhat
Speaker 1: higher basis in terms of oil, and as you've been mentioning,
Speaker 1: inflation also does play a role in that. And it
Speaker 1: can't just pick up on some of this and ask
Speaker 1: you how durable this decline is going to be. With
Speaker 1: south of four dollars a gallon for gas in this
Speaker 1: country right now, on average, we've seen numbers declined, decline,
Speaker 1: decline every single day going back to the middle of June.
Speaker 1: It's pretty impressive. STUF. Secondly, grand home over the weekend
Speaker 1: to see an and hoping it continues. Do you have
Speaker 1: that same feeling that it will continue? Well? I think
Speaker 1: that you also have to remember that seasonality is still
Speaker 1: a very important component in gasoline demand and gasoline prices,
Speaker 1: and generally around this time we do see a slight
Speaker 1: dip in demand. School is starting for large portions of
Speaker 1: the country, and um this summer driving season is coming
Speaker 1: to an end. But I think that um what will
Speaker 1: really give us a good sense of where things are
Speaker 1: headed in terms of gasoling prices and demand is as
Speaker 1: we hit the fall, as we hit September, when refineries
Speaker 1: have to go into their maintenance season, I think we'll
Speaker 1: get a good picture of whether demand is still strong,
Speaker 1: whether it's going to drop off because typically prices decline.
Speaker 1: But will refineries feel secure enough to even go offline
Speaker 1: to do maintenance or will they feel pressure to keep
Speaker 1: churning out more and more barrels and kind of put
Speaker 1: off needed maintenance, And that could be a significant factor
Speaker 1: for gasoline prices for the rest of the year. Hepic
Speaker 1: of a swing factor Ellen is COVID zero and China
Speaker 1: ending that after the National People's Congress later this year. Uh,
Speaker 1: that would be a huge deal if if China ended
Speaker 1: its COVID zero policy, because essentially the market is always
Speaker 1: kind of on edge. Is China going to shut down? Uh?
Speaker 1: Is this major city gonna shut down? What's demand going
Speaker 1: to look like out of China? And to some extent,
Speaker 1: you get a little bit of a sense when they
Speaker 1: issue their import quotas, especially for the independent refined reason,
Speaker 1: but how much oil they're going to be importing. But
Speaker 1: at the you know, at the stroke of a pen,
Speaker 1: they could basically crush domestic demand. And so I think
Speaker 1: that if they do get rid of this zero COVID policy,
Speaker 1: I think that that will be quite telling for the market,
Speaker 1: especially for the next year. Well, but how tight is
Speaker 1: production right now? How tight are supplies? And that's I
Speaker 1: guess the question that I have is how resilient is
Speaker 1: the market to a potential shock and demand one way
Speaker 1: or another. Right now we're seeing cooling demand. How low
Speaker 1: would those prices be if it weren't for that tightness. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't think. I think we We could definitely potentially
Speaker 1: see prices, you know, down in the sixties if it
Speaker 1: weren't for that tightness. But on the other hand, part
Speaker 1: of the tightness is what is causing prices to to
Speaker 1: cool down, the fact that they were so high because
Speaker 1: things were tight and then we did see some demand destruction.
Speaker 1: We are seeing continued fears of global recession. You know,
Speaker 1: even if we do get more data out of Europe
Speaker 1: and Europe does plunge into recession, which I think most
Speaker 1: people think is going to happen. Um, that doesn't necessarily
Speaker 1: mean that they're still not gonna need oil because prices
Speaker 1: electricity crisis there are still so high and that could
Speaker 1: cause them to switch to UH to some oil. And
Speaker 1: the distinction to me and say ave given one hundred
Speaker 1: page research report is the potential demand of the Pacific
Speaker 1: RIM and even the Pacific rim ex China. Do you
Speaker 1: believe in that that they're going to have the buoyant
Speaker 1: boom over one year, two years, three years, it's gonna
Speaker 1: pop oil to a permanence above a hundred dollars of barrel.
Speaker 1: I don't believe that that's necessarily going to be the case.
Speaker 1: I definitely think that there's room for an economic boom
Speaker 1: there um, but I wouldn't say that that's definitely gonna
Speaker 1: cause oil to to stay above a hundred, especially if
Speaker 1: you're looking at say a major decline in in European demand,
Speaker 1: if you're looking at economic weakness in America, those could
Speaker 1: all be significant factors. And also remember that, um, when
Speaker 1: the middle of December comes at early December, that's when
Speaker 1: these sanctions on Russian oil are supposed to take effect.
Speaker 1: And I think that that will be very telling for
Speaker 1: where oil is going in the next year in and
Speaker 1: how well these sanctions are actually enforced or adhered to
Speaker 1: the coast isn't clear. We've heard that a lot, haven't we.
Speaker 1: All'm walta the Atlanta Castle, the Britiant Allam walt on
Speaker 1: the Lightest and I thank you. This is the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Surveillance Podcast. Thanks for listening, Join us live weekdays from
Speaker 1: seven to ten am Eastern on Bloomberg Radio and on
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Television each day from six to nine am for
Speaker 1: insight from the best in economics, finance, investment, and international relations.
Speaker 1: And subscribe to the Surveillance podcast on Apple podcast, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot com, and of course, on the terminal. I'm
Speaker 1: Tom keene In. This is Bloomberg people,