Speaker 1: P and L is brought to you by proper Cloth,
Speaker 1: a leader in men's custom shirts, with proprietary smart sized
Speaker 1: technology and top rated customer service. Ordering a custom shirt
Speaker 1: has never been easier. Visit proper cloth dot com to
Speaker 1: order your first custom shirt today. Welcome to the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: P and L Podcast. I'm Pim Fox. Along with my
Speaker 1: co host Lisa Abramowitz. Each day we bring you the
Speaker 1: most important, noteworthy and useful interviews for you and your money,
Speaker 1: whether at the grocery store or the trading floor. Find
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg P and L Podcast on iTunes, SoundCloud and
Speaker 1: at Bloomberg dot com. The President's phone the point of
Speaker 1: much speculation and worry. Now we have a new worry.
Speaker 1: President Trump is fond of using his Android phone, which
Speaker 1: is not as well protected as some newer versions of
Speaker 1: other phones. I want to bring in Nicholas Weaver, who's
Speaker 1: a security researcher at the International Computer Science Center in Berkeley, California. UM. Nicholas,
Speaker 1: you wrote in a recent UH a recent column that
Speaker 1: you said that you would basically assign to your UH
Speaker 1: advanced graduate students the project of hacking into the President's phone.
Speaker 1: How how easy is it um, assuming it is a
Speaker 1: Galaxy S three or S four, It is very straightforward,
Speaker 1: and it's for two reasons. First of all, that phone
Speaker 1: has known vulnerabilities that you can just basically download and
Speaker 1: to use one of those vulnerabilities, all you need to
Speaker 1: do is convince your victim with that phone to click
Speaker 1: on a link. And given the president's temperament, it's probably
Speaker 1: pretty easy to tweet something at him that would attract
Speaker 1: his attention and cause him to click. Well, why doesn't
Speaker 1: they Why don't they just use them more secure phone,
Speaker 1: give him that function if you wants it, that outgoing function,
Speaker 1: and then pair back any of the any of the
Speaker 1: incoming data. The problem is is what is his workflow.
Speaker 1: His workflow on that phone is he wants to take
Speaker 1: phone calls off the book from his friends, and he
Speaker 1: wants to tweet and read links. And so you could
Speaker 1: build a more Trump resistant phone, but you'd still need
Speaker 1: to get him to cooperate in terms of switching over
Speaker 1: to basically separate devices for his different roles. Well, so
Speaker 1: let's talk about sort of the past precedent for this.
Speaker 1: I mean, what have previous presidents in the high tech
Speaker 1: era done? Obama, who was a notorious BlackBerry addict just
Speaker 1: broke down and used a government device, and um, he
Speaker 1: joked about the morning process of no longer having his
Speaker 1: own personal device. What's the what's the drawbacks for them? Um?
Speaker 1: In order to do a secure device, it's going to
Speaker 1: be locked down and more limited. So let's say I
Speaker 1: want a phone that Trump can tweet on. I'm going
Speaker 1: to want to remove the microphone and camera. I'm going
Speaker 1: to want to remove the cellular connectivity in GPS because
Speaker 1: I know he's going to carry it where he shouldn't
Speaker 1: and he's not going to want a device that's that crippled,
Speaker 1: all right, So if he doesn't want that device, is there,
Speaker 1: for example, another device that would do some of this?
Speaker 1: For example, I know that there's something called the black phone.
Speaker 1: What would what would that doesn't have the kind of functionality,
Speaker 1: I guess, but what would be? Uh? What what would
Speaker 1: be the advantages there? Well, the black phone and Boeing's
Speaker 1: black type things, those are more locked down Android devices. Um,
Speaker 1: but it would be a new device for him. He's
Speaker 1: very set in his ways on comfort level, and it's
Speaker 1: just a really hard problem to convince the boss to
Speaker 1: do things securely when he's used to doing things his
Speaker 1: own way. So if this is a problem CSO's face
Speaker 1: all over the planet. Well, so, so this is this
Speaker 1: is my thinking right now, is that potentially, unless he
Speaker 1: were to remove the phone from the room during any
Speaker 1: confidential conversation, this could be a pretty pretty serious national
Speaker 1: national security concern. Is there anything to sort of contradict
Speaker 1: that that impression? No, And what's right is that he's
Speaker 1: had this phone for months, and so the real question
Speaker 1: is is not what is he doing now? Because looking
Speaker 1: at his Twitter feed, the staff seemed reasonably adept at
Speaker 1: keeping the phone out of his hands during working hours,
Speaker 1: since those working hour tweets seemed to be dictated to
Speaker 1: an aid on a different device. But the problem is
Speaker 1: is he's had this phone for months, and we have
Speaker 1: to assume that that phone was compromised months ago. And
Speaker 1: so what needs to happen is people need to go
Speaker 1: back and go, Huh, what conversations did I have around
Speaker 1: the President elect at the time that I would worry
Speaker 1: if it got to Moscow, Beijing, Tel Aviv, Paris, or
Speaker 1: any place else. Well, so Nicholas zooming out, Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: there's been a lot of concern about the security of
Speaker 1: information among various government officials. We saw this with with
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton and the and the d n C. I mean,
Speaker 1: what's your impression of how secure the overall governmental system is. Well,
Speaker 1: those systems, in many cases are private. Um, the US government,
Speaker 1: if it's classified, has really good protection. The US government
Speaker 1: uses multiple layers of protection for classified data, and so
Speaker 1: unless it's safe for all we know discussed in a
Speaker 1: marra Lago dining room, the protections are really good. The
Speaker 1: problem is with the U s government is the unclassified systems,
Speaker 1: the stuff that's connected to the Internet, and that's just
Speaker 1: often such an attractive target. The other problem is personal devices.
Speaker 1: So let's look at that famous photo at maral Lago
Speaker 1: of a AID illuminating some briefing document with the cell
Speaker 1: phone camera. This was related to the missile launch from
Speaker 1: North Korea. Yes, so we had a whole panicked gathering
Speaker 1: and we saw photos of an AID illuminating a who
Speaker 1: knows what classified or unclassified document with a cell phone. Now,
Speaker 1: if this was a government phone, I think it's no
Speaker 1: worse than having the conversation at marl Ago, where, for
Speaker 1: all we know, the Russians tip the weight staff better
Speaker 1: than Trump does. But if it was a private phone,
Speaker 1: that person is still a high value target and the
Speaker 1: private devices are nowhere near as secure. So as it
Speaker 1: was a personal phone, they might as well have just
Speaker 1: facts that document to Moscow in terms of trying to
Speaker 1: do a damage assessment. Nicholas, I just curious if let's say,
Speaker 1: one of the patrons at Mara Lago or in any
Speaker 1: public setting a meeting of any kind, not just with
Speaker 1: the president, but if there are mobile phones that are present,
Speaker 1: is it possible or is it How easy is it
Speaker 1: to hack into one and use them almost as a
Speaker 1: listening device for everything that goes on in the room.
Speaker 1: I keep thinking also of those home devices like the Alexa,
Speaker 1: the Echo and so on. It really depends on the
Speaker 1: device and the security model. So like, I use an
Speaker 1: iPhone and I'm very happy because i know I'm not
Speaker 1: worth risking a one point five million all or exploit
Speaker 1: to attack. However, if somebody's using a Galaxy Note or
Speaker 1: a Galaxy three or Galaxy four and they know they
Speaker 1: are a worthwhile target, they basically need to throw that
Speaker 1: phone in the trash because for that phone it costs
Speaker 1: basically nothing in terms of exploits. That just basically costs
Speaker 1: having to take a little time to get that victim
Speaker 1: to click on a link. Thanks very much for taking
Speaker 1: the time to explain all of this to us. Nicholas Weaver,
Speaker 1: security researcher at the International Computer Science Center, Berkeley University.
Speaker 1: Let's get a little bit more color on what exactly
Speaker 1: happened with Kraft, heins and you Leaver at Hammond is
Speaker 1: here with us UH he covers takeovers F four Bloomberg News,
Speaker 1: and I just want to start with some questions. I've
Speaker 1: got a lot of questions. My first question is, so
Speaker 1: Kraft made this one billion dollar offer for Unilever, UH,
Speaker 1: but Uni Leaver spurned that offer, and yet we're still
Speaker 1: seeing the gains persist in the shares. Can you why why? Well,
Speaker 1: it's a good question, I think for two reasons. I
Speaker 1: think one, this is not how Craftines intended this information
Speaker 1: to come out. The rumor had started to get into
Speaker 1: the market. There was some speculation this morning, so they
Speaker 1: were forced by the UK Takeover panel to make a statement.
Speaker 1: I think behind closed doors they maybe would have tried
Speaker 1: to increase the bid for Unilever and get Unilever to
Speaker 1: to come to the table and then to negotiations. Isn't
Speaker 1: it dead, Then it's not necessarily dead. I think there's
Speaker 1: opportunity for craftin's and obviously backed by three G, this
Speaker 1: very very ambitious and sort of deal loving Brazilian private
Speaker 1: ecuity firm. I think there's an opportunity for them to
Speaker 1: come back with a higher offer. It's unlikely that this
Speaker 1: would have been their best and final offers. So I
Speaker 1: think one of the things we were seeing in UNI
Speaker 1: do the stock right now is the market pricing in
Speaker 1: a very good chance that this is not end game
Speaker 1: and that three G, you know, in the form of
Speaker 1: craft himes, come back to the table and try and
Speaker 1: get this thing done well Kraft heinds, as statement specifically said,
Speaker 1: and I'm quoting here, we look forward to working to
Speaker 1: reach agreement on the terms of a transaction. So in
Speaker 1: other words, they're still interested. This is just the opening
Speaker 1: salvo and we see where it goes from here. I mean,
Speaker 1: you're know leaver her talking about the you know, the
Speaker 1: the deal undervaluing the company. I mean that's sort of
Speaker 1: classic takeover speak for give us more money and maybe
Speaker 1: we'll come around. Well, but it's interesting to me that
Speaker 1: craft shares are up to so in other words, the
Speaker 1: market thinks that even if Craft were to offer a
Speaker 1: higher amount, that that's still it would be worthwhile to
Speaker 1: be a creative right. And and look, this is this
Speaker 1: is a very good point that speaks exactly to the
Speaker 1: three G business model, which is they acquire companies to
Speaker 1: go out, they get scaled, and they essentially make money
Speaker 1: off of them by cutting costs in an extremely aggressive,
Speaker 1: almost a sort of barbaric way where they'll go in
Speaker 1: and they will fire a ton of people, the scale
Speaker 1: back on every single small item they can to make
Speaker 1: you know, cost savings, so that the market is looking
Speaker 1: at this and saying, well, look, you're going to put
Speaker 1: together a company that is worth a hundred fourteen billion
Speaker 1: dollars with a company that they're going to pay upwards
Speaker 1: of a hundred forty billion dollars four and you're going
Speaker 1: to have this monster, monster sort of consumer products food business,
Speaker 1: and they're going to extract some huge cost savings from it,
Speaker 1: just because that is what their model is. You saw
Speaker 1: them do it with Burger King and Tim Horton's. They
Speaker 1: obviously did it when they put Craft and Hinds together.
Speaker 1: They're doing it at the moment when they're in this
Speaker 1: merger with ant Busch in Bev and s A P. Mayonnaise.
Speaker 1: That's what I was going to tell you about mayonnaise,
Speaker 1: because if this deal does go through, you'll have Hellman's
Speaker 1: mayonnaise along with Heinz Ketchup and Mama. Yeah. Well that
Speaker 1: was I know right. It's all on the go ahead, Dave.
Speaker 1: A big deal for the Brits, not so much for
Speaker 1: the Americans. Well, now, the name that hasn't come up
Speaker 1: yet is Warren Buffett. Berkshire has behind three absolutely, and
Speaker 1: you've got to bear in mind I was just looking
Speaker 1: for the nos Berkshire under the third quarter of about
Speaker 1: eighty five billion dollars of cash. So what it means
Speaker 1: is that three G, through their support from Berkshire, has
Speaker 1: a lot of firepower to go after a company as
Speaker 1: big as Uni Leaver and bear in mind, this offer
Speaker 1: as it stands is the fourth largest ever made for
Speaker 1: any company worldwide, only a O L Time Warner Votus
Speaker 1: Phone MONISMN and Fightser's failed bid for Alegant or bigger.
Speaker 1: Those of the kind of stakes we're talking about, Ed,
Speaker 1: real quick, How big could this get? What are you
Speaker 1: hearing it could obviously go up a little bit from here.
Speaker 1: But I think one thing to note on this this
Speaker 1: buy union of three g war in Buffer is that
Speaker 1: they do not overpay for stuff. They're quite rigid on
Speaker 1: price and and they obviously are not gonna want to
Speaker 1: go in with a huge number and then have to
Speaker 1: extract a much cost. I think the real issue here
Speaker 1: is what it would mean for Union Leaver in terms
Speaker 1: of employment. This company has some of the hundred seventy
Speaker 1: thousand employees worldwide, and you can bet that if this
Speaker 1: merger was to be consummated, a lot of those people
Speaker 1: would would see their jobs go. We're to follow this
Speaker 1: and we want to thank you for keeping us up
Speaker 1: to date. Ed Hammond on you know, Leaver turning down
Speaker 1: a craft Hens takeover approach. Thank you very much, Thanks
Speaker 1: to Dave Wilson, Bloomberg Stocks, calmnesst, P and L. Is
Speaker 1: brought to you by proper Cloth, the leader in men's
Speaker 1: custom shirts. At proper cloth dot com, ordering custom shirts
Speaker 1: has never been easier. Create your custom shirt size by
Speaker 1: answering ten easy questions, select from over five fabrics to
Speaker 1: suit your personal taste. Shirts start from eighty five dollars
Speaker 1: and are delivered in just two weeks with Proper Cloths
Speaker 1: perfect Fit Guarantee. Remakes are completely free and expert staff
Speaker 1: are standing by to help. For premium quality, perfect fitting shirts,
Speaker 1: visit proper cloth dot com custom shirts made Smarter. The
Speaker 1: US Leading Economic Index increased again in January, pointing to
Speaker 1: a positive economic outlook in the first half of this year.
Speaker 1: Here to tell us more is I can Goldstein can
Speaker 1: of course economist with the conference board. Here to tell
Speaker 1: us more can thanks for being where This has always
Speaker 1: an increase, a jump, and it is described perhaps as
Speaker 1: being a sharp increase zero point six percent higher. Tell
Speaker 1: us about the details. Sharp increase for a second straight month.
Speaker 1: The Coincident Index, that's the one that tells us where
Speaker 1: we are right now, that continues to sort of move along,
Speaker 1: creep along, um, you know, not not very strongly. But
Speaker 1: this is the second straight month that we've got a
Speaker 1: real strong push and turns the lead index, which is
Speaker 1: a signal about where we might be going. So we
Speaker 1: already start with a strong consumer market, strong housing. Maybe
Speaker 1: this is suggesting either trade and or investment might begin
Speaker 1: to start to kick in this ring. Maybe you know,
Speaker 1: earlier this morning, Jeff Rosenberg fixing come strategists at black
Speaker 1: Rock was on Bloomberg Television and he was talking about
Speaker 1: how the bond markets right now are wrong in his opinion,
Speaker 1: and that they are not adequately pricing in the upsurge
Speaker 1: that we are seeing in inflation prospects. Do you agree, Oh,
Speaker 1: the bond market has been under pricing for a couple
Speaker 1: of years, so this is not anything new. But but
Speaker 1: what indicator in here in this report might point to
Speaker 1: Jeff's point, which is that that that that it's going
Speaker 1: to be caught off guards. In other words, it's been wrong. Uh,
Speaker 1: and yet it's been wrong for a long time, so
Speaker 1: people could say, well, it's actually been right. The flip
Speaker 1: side is at what point does this hit the hit
Speaker 1: the wall? See, this is exactly the question because it
Speaker 1: isn't just this sector. This isn't just manufacturing or just
Speaker 1: consumer or just labor. It really is the different you know,
Speaker 1: pulse beats in the different pieces of the overall economy,
Speaker 1: either by industry or by region, are all suggesting that
Speaker 1: the pace of activity will at least steady or pick
Speaker 1: up as we move into the spring, move into the summer.
Speaker 1: The bond market is not fully picking that up. Hasn't
Speaker 1: been for a couple of years, and so the bond
Speaker 1: market in fact might be caught, you know, dragging its
Speaker 1: heels at the same time that the stock market might
Speaker 1: be peaking well. The bond market, you do have to
Speaker 1: add that it has been artificially uh, I don't even
Speaker 1: know not you know, help right influenced, I want to say,
Speaker 1: because of the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve and
Speaker 1: a variety of other things. So sometimes it's difficult to
Speaker 1: even call that, um, you know, natural market. I want
Speaker 1: to go into a little bit of detail on the
Speaker 1: report because I was looking at two items. One was
Speaker 1: average average weekly initial claims, plus I was also looking
Speaker 1: at building permits. Tell us about those two areas well.
Speaker 1: Claims you know, I have moved down lower than we've seen.
Speaker 1: I think these are lower numbers, and we've seen in
Speaker 1: two decades the housing starts and housing permits they move
Speaker 1: up and down one month, you know, or you know,
Speaker 1: they fluctuated lot, but they're moving up steadily. And even
Speaker 1: with that, building supply is below demand, so that there's
Speaker 1: more room for housing to continue. So that, as I say,
Speaker 1: both the consumer market and housing they were already doing
Speaker 1: better than good they're above average in terms of growth.
Speaker 1: Maybe that's going to finally lead some support to the
Speaker 1: rest of the economy, specifically trade or capex. So at
Speaker 1: what point will we be able to see the pickup
Speaker 1: in inflation enough to cause a disruption in markets. It's
Speaker 1: not a pickup in inflation, in the fact, we might
Speaker 1: not see that, and it's a pickup in growth, so
Speaker 1: that you want to look at manufacturing, you want to
Speaker 1: look at at signals about business investment, you want to
Speaker 1: look at trade. But so if you said it's not
Speaker 1: about inflation, so we could get sort of the steady
Speaker 1: inflation rate that we've seen for a longer period of time,
Speaker 1: even as growth picks up, Oh absolutely, I mean we're
Speaker 1: close now to about a two and a pcent rate
Speaker 1: of growth in terms of inflation. In terms of wage growth,
Speaker 1: maybe that might move up to three. It might not
Speaker 1: even move up that much. It certainly isn't gonna move
Speaker 1: up more than that. So that inflation isn't and hasn't
Speaker 1: been the problem. The problem really has been how do
Speaker 1: we goose up growth specifically, how do we get more
Speaker 1: out of manufacturing, how do we get more out of
Speaker 1: business investment, how do we get more at a trade
Speaker 1: and it there's at least a chance that there's enough
Speaker 1: growth going on, there's enough demand going on to finally
Speaker 1: force business to move in those kinds of directions. Maybe
Speaker 1: I can as an economist, I'm gonna pull you out
Speaker 1: of your your your comforts on just a little bit.
Speaker 1: I want to get your thoughts on interest rates. You
Speaker 1: think the Fed is going to raise two three four
Speaker 1: times this year? Yes, to three or four? I knew
Speaker 1: that was that was the economist joke. What do you
Speaker 1: think not only two or three or maybe even four
Speaker 1: this year, but another two or three next year. We
Speaker 1: know that they want to get to about a three
Speaker 1: percent rate for the short end of the Yeld curve,
Speaker 1: about four and a half five at the long end,
Speaker 1: and they're finally going to start to move that. The
Speaker 1: biggest anchor is not what does or does not happen
Speaker 1: in the States. The biggest anchor is how low, even
Speaker 1: how negative interest rates are elsewhere. So there's a little
Speaker 1: bit of balance here between what we're doing and what's
Speaker 1: going on elsewhere in the globe. Do you think that
Speaker 1: the U. S economy is strong enough to withstand three
Speaker 1: four rad hikes this year? Oh, easily, easily, and and
Speaker 1: what tells us that is there is this momentum that
Speaker 1: is building in terms of either this is a two
Speaker 1: month plateau in terms of the YELI turns the leading index,
Speaker 1: or there's momentum that has been it has been building
Speaker 1: for some time. It's starting to finally show up. And
Speaker 1: the surprise is that it took this long to show up,
Speaker 1: not that it's showing up. Thank you so much for
Speaker 1: joining us, Ken Goldstein, really interesting discussion economist with the
Speaker 1: conference board talking about the leading indicators. Matt Miller, who
Speaker 1: is our Bloomberg Tell Levision uh and Bloomberg News correspondent,
Speaker 1: is at the Munich Security Conference. Matt was wearing a
Speaker 1: hat that in the rain earlier today reporting on what
Speaker 1: he was hearing. Matt, thank you so much for joining us. Now, so,
Speaker 1: what what's been the biggest headline that you've experienced at
Speaker 1: the Munich Security Conference? Well, um, so far, it's interesting
Speaker 1: to ask all the world leaders who walk past whether
Speaker 1: or not they think the White House has lost credibility
Speaker 1: and what their expectations are as far as um the
Speaker 1: US supporting NATO, especially in regards to any kind of
Speaker 1: Russian conflict. Most of the people that I've asked and said, Look,
Speaker 1: we're here to find out the answer to those questions,
Speaker 1: so we can't give you our answer just yet. It's
Speaker 1: really a wait and see kind of thing. UM. So
Speaker 1: it's been very interesting to see that everyone from the
Speaker 1: most important leaders I speak to, to UM to the
Speaker 1: soldiers walking around this conference really just want to hear
Speaker 1: what the U. S position is on Russia, especially as
Speaker 1: relates to Ukraine. Well, you've got the secred is the
Speaker 1: Secretary of State? Is he at this meeting, Rex Tillerson?
Speaker 1: Because I know Maddis, James Maddis and John Kelly they
Speaker 1: are attending, as well as Vice President uh, Mike Pence.
Speaker 1: But I thought that maybe it was Rex Tillerson. Is
Speaker 1: he he's there as well. I I have seen General
Speaker 1: Maddie walking around, although I was corrected and told he
Speaker 1: is now to be addressed as Secretary of Maddis. Um.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure which one is is better, but um, no,
Speaker 1: Rex Tillerson is not here. UM, But we do obviously
Speaker 1: expect Mike Pence tonight, so and and Rex Tillerson. Tim,
Speaker 1: I'm sure you're referring to the comments that he made
Speaker 1: in Bonn yesterday has said he expects Russia to uphold
Speaker 1: its commitments to the mint Minsk Agreement. Um, it'll just
Speaker 1: be interesting to see it. Pence is um supportive of
Speaker 1: that as well when he gets here tonight. And I'm
Speaker 1: actually just about to speak to the President of Lithuania.
Speaker 1: So that'll be an interesting interview because Donald Trump wrote
Speaker 1: a letter to her last week saying that he does
Speaker 1: support Um, well, he supports let's put it this way,
Speaker 1: it's gonna sound strange, he supports her support of the
Speaker 1: Ukraine as an independent and sovereign nation. Well, um, and
Speaker 1: just sort of to your point of that, people are
Speaker 1: waiting to hear from the US and get there get
Speaker 1: its position on national security issues. Is there anything else
Speaker 1: that sort of come out that's a little bit more
Speaker 1: definitive than just waiting for Vice President Pence to speak
Speaker 1: or get more color around our policies here. So, so
Speaker 1: I was asking a lot of people this morning whether
Speaker 1: or not they think the White House has lost credibility
Speaker 1: because of this Mike Flynn resignation. And I spoke with
Speaker 1: John McCain, Senator John McCain UM as well as UM
Speaker 1: a couple of the other senators who are walking in
Speaker 1: and asked them, hey, do you think that Mike Pence
Speaker 1: has lost credibility because um he you know, gave misinformation
Speaker 1: as far as the contact with with our Russian allies.
Speaker 1: And Senator McCain said, he didn't, you know, give misinformation,
Speaker 1: He was given misinformation. He didn't miss lead, he was misled.
Speaker 1: Uh so appearing to support and the Vice President tent
Speaker 1: on his way into this conference. Hey man, I'm wondering
Speaker 1: if you could tell us a little bit about the
Speaker 1: Russians and the feeling about Russia's power. I mean, we
Speaker 1: just got a report that Russian fighter jets had buzzed
Speaker 1: the US worship in the Black Sea. You got the
Speaker 1: report that Finland is going to boost its army by
Speaker 1: over because of heightened tensions with Russia. Your schedule to
Speaker 1: speak with the President of Lithuania. Give us the details
Speaker 1: if you can. I mean, well, as far as the
Speaker 1: buzzes of the work, you know, uh well, as a
Speaker 1: names man that military men often do these kinds of
Speaker 1: shows of bravado, and it's that's not the kind of
Speaker 1: thing that's ever probably gonna completely stop interest in Russia's position.
Speaker 1: And let's say that the two most highly regarded guests
Speaker 1: here other than Mike Pener and he had a arrived
Speaker 1: are um president por Shanko from the Ukraine and Sergey Labor.
Speaker 1: Everyone media pool at least has been following those two
Speaker 1: around um you know, uh, putting, putting down their every
Speaker 1: move and just watching to see if we get any
Speaker 1: hint of whether or not there's capitulation of Russians or
Speaker 1: a little bit more confidence on the side of Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Can we just get your thoughts on not a completely
Speaker 1: different topic, GM selling its European operations to p s
Speaker 1: A to Pugeau. Yeah, this is fascinating. I was in
Speaker 1: Russell time yesterday right outside of Frankfurt, which is where
Speaker 1: um Opal has its main factory. The Germans initially were
Speaker 1: very unhappy about the way they found out about this deal.
Speaker 1: I'm talking about Anglo America on her cabinets, not thrilled
Speaker 1: with the fact that they had to find out that
Speaker 1: the fact that Kim wanted to sell to the show
Speaker 1: from a Bloomberg scoop on I believe late day. So
Speaker 1: that uh that aside. Um, it seems that they've kind
Speaker 1: of come around with possibility that every years have been
Speaker 1: slightly charmed married bar It. She flew here right after
Speaker 1: this uh cross star wire, and so it may be
Speaker 1: a little bit closer to a deal now we're here.
Speaker 1: Thursday might be Wait, we're losing you in this field.
Speaker 1: All right, let's we're gonna Matt Miller, thank you very much,
Speaker 1: reporting from Munich, giving us an update on that G
Speaker 1: twenty meeting, and also a little bit of color on
Speaker 1: General Motorists and p S a group. You know, the
Speaker 1: valuation I believe what is it about two billion dollars
Speaker 1: billion dollars right now, the valuation of opal uh in
Speaker 1: this deal that that GM is talking about with PS
Speaker 1: like half in cash and half half in liabilities, right,
Speaker 1: so probably will be some debt issuance if this goes through.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg P and L podcast.
Speaker 1: You can subscribe and listen to interviews at iTunes, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: or whatever podcast platform you prefer. I'm pim Fox. I'm
Speaker 1: out there on Twitter at pim Fox. I'm out there
Speaker 1: on Twitter at Lisa Abramo. It's one before the podcast.
Speaker 1: You can always catch us worldwide on Bloomberg Radio. P
Speaker 1: and L is brought to you by Proper Cloth, a
Speaker 1: leader in men's custom shirts with proprietary smart sized technology
Speaker 1: and top rated customer service, ordering a custom shirt has
Speaker 1: never been easier. Visit proper cloth dot com to order
Speaker 1: your first custom shirt today