WEBVTT - BI Weekend: Disney Earnings, EV Latest

0:00:02.080 --> 0:00:05.880
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Intelligence with Alex Steel and Paul Sweeney.

0:00:06.000 --> 0:00:09.240
<v Speaker 2>The real app performance has been the US corporate high yield.

0:00:09.360 --> 0:00:11.720
<v Speaker 3>Are the companies lean enough? Have they trimmed all the fats?

0:00:11.800 --> 0:00:15.680
<v Speaker 2>The semiconductor business is a really cyclical business.

0:00:15.120 --> 0:00:18.680
<v Speaker 1>Breaking market headlines and corporate news from across the globe.

0:00:18.760 --> 0:00:21.360
<v Speaker 3>Do investors like the M and A that we've seen?

0:00:21.600 --> 0:00:24.640
<v Speaker 2>These are two big time blue chip companies.

0:00:24.720 --> 0:00:28.440
<v Speaker 4>The window between the peak and cut changing super fast.

0:00:28.600 --> 0:00:32.159
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Intelligence with Alex Steel and Paul Sweeney.

0:00:31.960 --> 0:00:36.479
<v Speaker 5>On Bloomberg Radio. I'm Paul Sweeney and I'm John Tucker

0:00:36.479 --> 0:00:37.600
<v Speaker 5>filling in for Alex Steele.

0:00:37.840 --> 0:00:39.360
<v Speaker 6>On Today's Bloomberg Intelligence Show.

0:00:39.360 --> 0:00:42.200
<v Speaker 2>We dig inside the big business stories impacting Wall Street

0:00:42.200 --> 0:00:43.120
<v Speaker 2>and the global markets.

0:00:43.200 --> 0:00:45.599
<v Speaker 5>Each and every week we provide in depth research and

0:00:45.720 --> 0:00:48.240
<v Speaker 5>data on some two thousand companies of one hundred and

0:00:48.240 --> 0:00:50.879
<v Speaker 5>thirty industries our analysts cover worldwide.

0:00:51.040 --> 0:00:53.760
<v Speaker 2>Today, we'll look at how a future Donald Trump presidency

0:00:53.800 --> 0:00:55.280
<v Speaker 2>will impact electric vehicles.

0:00:55.360 --> 0:00:57.880
<v Speaker 5>Plus we're going to discuss why shares of Tyson Food

0:00:58.000 --> 0:00:59.920
<v Speaker 5>surge the most in more than two years.

0:01:00.240 --> 0:01:02.440
<v Speaker 2>But first we dive into corporate earnings from the media

0:01:02.480 --> 0:01:03.960
<v Speaker 2>and entertainment giant Walt Disney.

0:01:04.240 --> 0:01:07.160
<v Speaker 5>Walt Disney reported fourth quarter sales and profit that beat

0:01:07.200 --> 0:01:10.920
<v Speaker 5>Wall Street expectations and forecast earnings growth for the next

0:01:10.959 --> 0:01:11.720
<v Speaker 5>three years.

0:01:12.000 --> 0:01:14.040
<v Speaker 2>For more, John and I were joined by Githa Raganathan,

0:01:14.040 --> 0:01:16.640
<v Speaker 2>Bloomberg Intelligence analysts on US media.

0:01:16.720 --> 0:01:19.640
<v Speaker 5>First, we asked Keitha for her take on Disney's most

0:01:19.760 --> 0:01:20.480
<v Speaker 5>recent quarter.

0:01:21.040 --> 0:01:23.640
<v Speaker 4>What we saw was a lot of guidance, and we've

0:01:23.720 --> 0:01:26.920
<v Speaker 4>never seen guidance laid out like this for us ever before.

0:01:26.959 --> 0:01:29.640
<v Speaker 4>I mean, this was line by line item guidance for

0:01:29.800 --> 0:01:32.600
<v Speaker 4>each of the different subdivisions at Disney, whether you know

0:01:32.680 --> 0:01:35.080
<v Speaker 4>it was the theme park business or the streaming or

0:01:35.160 --> 0:01:38.560
<v Speaker 4>movie studios. They kind of gave us, you know, segment

0:01:38.600 --> 0:01:41.759
<v Speaker 4>by segment numbers and exactly what to expect. And really

0:01:41.800 --> 0:01:45.280
<v Speaker 4>the biggest thing for Disney over the past few quarters

0:01:45.280 --> 0:01:47.920
<v Speaker 4>has just been this lack of visibility and so much

0:01:47.920 --> 0:01:51.960
<v Speaker 4>of investor uncertainty, and they just cleared it all up

0:01:52.000 --> 0:01:55.480
<v Speaker 4>in this one, you know, fell swoop with this earnings report.

0:01:55.560 --> 0:01:57.320
<v Speaker 2>They never did that for me, getha, I always had

0:01:57.360 --> 0:01:59.120
<v Speaker 2>to guess and all that stuff. But for you, they

0:01:59.160 --> 0:02:01.920
<v Speaker 2>just started up on silk platter. What got your attention

0:02:02.200 --> 0:02:03.600
<v Speaker 2>the most from some of this guidance, What do you

0:02:03.600 --> 0:02:04.560
<v Speaker 2>think the street really likes?

0:02:04.960 --> 0:02:07.200
<v Speaker 4>I think what the street really likes is you have

0:02:07.480 --> 0:02:11.560
<v Speaker 4>high single digit EPs growth. Remember the street was projecting

0:02:11.600 --> 0:02:15.320
<v Speaker 4>about four to five percent, So that's a nice uptick

0:02:15.360 --> 0:02:17.799
<v Speaker 4>there for twenty twenty five, and then going into twenty

0:02:17.840 --> 0:02:20.520
<v Speaker 4>twenty six and twenty twenty seven, they're looking at double

0:02:20.600 --> 0:02:24.400
<v Speaker 4>digit earnings growth. And the other bright spots were, you know,

0:02:24.480 --> 0:02:26.359
<v Speaker 4>the theme park business. Now, we do know that there

0:02:26.440 --> 0:02:28.679
<v Speaker 4>is a moderation when it comes to the domestic theme

0:02:28.720 --> 0:02:30.880
<v Speaker 4>park business, but it looks like things might not be

0:02:31.080 --> 0:02:34.200
<v Speaker 4>actually as bad as we had feared. So domestic parks

0:02:34.240 --> 0:02:37.520
<v Speaker 4>actually performed a little bit better than we expected. And

0:02:37.560 --> 0:02:40.800
<v Speaker 4>then they talked about some weakness going into the fiscal

0:02:40.840 --> 0:02:43.799
<v Speaker 4>first quarter. Remember we did have those two big hurricanes

0:02:43.840 --> 0:02:46.800
<v Speaker 4>in Florida. They do have a lot of cruise ships

0:02:46.800 --> 0:02:48.400
<v Speaker 4>that they're launching, and so there's going to be some

0:02:48.480 --> 0:02:51.000
<v Speaker 4>launch costs weighing on profit. But then you get into

0:02:51.040 --> 0:02:53.079
<v Speaker 4>the second half of fiscal twenty twenty five and they're

0:02:53.120 --> 0:02:55.280
<v Speaker 4>expecting those cruise ships to contribute in a big way

0:02:55.680 --> 0:02:57.919
<v Speaker 4>and kind of the theme parks to also come back.

0:02:57.960 --> 0:03:01.360
<v Speaker 4>So I think that's again some source of you know,

0:03:01.440 --> 0:03:03.440
<v Speaker 4>investor optimism and confidence.

0:03:04.360 --> 0:03:06.840
<v Speaker 5>I get this streaming part. I'm not sure that I

0:03:06.919 --> 0:03:10.560
<v Speaker 5>understand that linear TV part and why that's still part

0:03:10.560 --> 0:03:11.320
<v Speaker 5>of the empire.

0:03:12.880 --> 0:03:15.600
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, nobody understands it, john And that was actually a

0:03:15.720 --> 0:03:19.160
<v Speaker 4>question for Hugh Johnston and Bob Eygert at the earnings call.

0:03:19.240 --> 0:03:22.080
<v Speaker 4>They're like, you know, why should you be holding onto

0:03:22.120 --> 0:03:25.680
<v Speaker 4>this business? You know, Comcast just recently said that they're

0:03:25.680 --> 0:03:28.519
<v Speaker 4>going to be kind of considering spinning off their cable

0:03:28.560 --> 0:03:31.360
<v Speaker 4>TV network business. And remember, the big thing that's really

0:03:31.400 --> 0:03:35.040
<v Speaker 4>coming up for Disney in twenty twenty five is that

0:03:35.080 --> 0:03:39.240
<v Speaker 4>they are launching this standalone ESPN product. And if they

0:03:39.240 --> 0:03:43.120
<v Speaker 4>had any reservations in the past about jettisoning, you know,

0:03:43.160 --> 0:03:45.240
<v Speaker 4>the TV network's business because they were tied to the

0:03:45.280 --> 0:03:49.080
<v Speaker 4>bundle through ESPN, you know, this kind of definitely opens

0:03:49.160 --> 0:03:51.480
<v Speaker 4>up the field for them and it no longer ties

0:03:51.520 --> 0:03:53.560
<v Speaker 4>them down to the bundle. So they were asked the question,

0:03:53.920 --> 0:03:56.200
<v Speaker 4>they said that they're not looking into it. They like

0:03:56.240 --> 0:03:58.760
<v Speaker 4>their portfolio just the way it is. But we really

0:03:58.800 --> 0:04:02.160
<v Speaker 4>think that once they get that ESPN standalone of streaming

0:04:02.200 --> 0:04:05.440
<v Speaker 4>service up and running, they surely will kind of look

0:04:05.480 --> 0:04:08.520
<v Speaker 4>into doing something more dramatic, I think with the TV networks,

0:04:08.640 --> 0:04:13.280
<v Speaker 4>especially given you know, a regulatory change.

0:04:11.960 --> 0:04:15.000
<v Speaker 2>To talk to us about the streaming business. They've finally

0:04:15.360 --> 0:04:18.200
<v Speaker 2>turned profitable on that business. Give us the delta that

0:04:18.279 --> 0:04:20.919
<v Speaker 2>you think that streaming business go through from losses to

0:04:21.040 --> 0:04:21.880
<v Speaker 2>potential profits.

0:04:21.880 --> 0:04:24.680
<v Speaker 4>Here, big big turnaround, Paul, And I mean this was

0:04:24.720 --> 0:04:26.960
<v Speaker 4>really the big story for twenty twenty four. To go

0:04:27.040 --> 0:04:30.120
<v Speaker 4>from four billion in losses in twenty twenty two, two

0:04:30.200 --> 0:04:32.520
<v Speaker 4>and a half billion in losses in twenty twenty three,

0:04:32.800 --> 0:04:36.719
<v Speaker 4>to finally squeaking out a profit here in twenty twenty four.

0:04:36.760 --> 0:04:39.080
<v Speaker 4>And remember they've just barely broken even, so about one

0:04:39.120 --> 0:04:41.560
<v Speaker 4>hundred and fifty million dollars in profit. But the whole

0:04:41.600 --> 0:04:43.960
<v Speaker 4>story is how they kind of build on that one

0:04:44.040 --> 0:04:46.919
<v Speaker 4>hundred and fifty million dollars. So you know, Netflix this

0:04:47.000 --> 0:04:50.359
<v Speaker 4>year is going to report about ten billion dollars in profit,

0:04:50.640 --> 0:04:52.719
<v Speaker 4>and I think there's some encouraging commentary, so they already

0:04:52.760 --> 0:04:55.880
<v Speaker 4>kind of guided. They gave us actually hard numbers for

0:04:56.040 --> 0:05:00.480
<v Speaker 4>the streaming profit for both fiscal twenty twenty five and six.

0:05:00.600 --> 0:05:03.520
<v Speaker 4>Twenty twenty five, they said over a billion dollars in profit,

0:05:04.120 --> 0:05:05.880
<v Speaker 4>and in twenty twenty six they actually gave us a

0:05:05.960 --> 0:05:09.279
<v Speaker 4>margin number, double digit margins. And remember this is the

0:05:09.279 --> 0:05:13.440
<v Speaker 4>big story. Everybody is chasing those twenty five percent operating

0:05:13.480 --> 0:05:16.359
<v Speaker 4>margins that Netflix has already achieved, and so Disney is.

0:05:16.440 --> 0:05:18.160
<v Speaker 4>It looks like, I mean, they obviously have a lot

0:05:18.160 --> 0:05:20.599
<v Speaker 4>of catching up to do, but they're closing in.

0:05:20.680 --> 0:05:24.080
<v Speaker 5>Our Thanks to Githa Raganath in Bloomberg Intelligence analyst on

0:05:24.320 --> 0:05:25.400
<v Speaker 5>US media, this.

0:05:25.400 --> 0:05:28.279
<v Speaker 2>Week, we focused on a Bloomberg Big Take story entitled

0:05:28.360 --> 0:05:32.160
<v Speaker 2>Trump's win puts Musk in the White House's new C suite.

0:05:32.400 --> 0:05:34.640
<v Speaker 5>You can find it on Bloomberg dot com and on

0:05:34.720 --> 0:05:37.760
<v Speaker 5>the terminal. The story looks at how Tesla CEO Elon

0:05:37.839 --> 0:05:40.200
<v Speaker 5>Musk spent at least one hundred and thirty two million

0:05:40.240 --> 0:05:43.080
<v Speaker 5>dollars to help Donald Trump's re election as US president

0:05:43.400 --> 0:05:46.280
<v Speaker 5>and now Musk we'll have a role in Trump's new administration.

0:05:46.800 --> 0:05:48.720
<v Speaker 2>For more, guest host Jess Meant and I were joined

0:05:48.720 --> 0:05:52.039
<v Speaker 2>by one of the story's authors, Max Chafkin, Bloomberg BusinessWeek

0:05:52.160 --> 0:05:55.239
<v Speaker 2>Senior reporter. We first asked Max what we know about

0:05:55.240 --> 0:05:56.679
<v Speaker 2>Elon Muck's new role.

0:05:56.760 --> 0:05:58.039
<v Speaker 6>And we learned a little bit more.

0:05:58.120 --> 0:06:01.240
<v Speaker 7>Just after this story was published, Donald Trump made something

0:06:01.240 --> 0:06:04.120
<v Speaker 7>official that he had teased and that Elon Musk can

0:06:04.160 --> 0:06:07.440
<v Speaker 7>tease repeatedly on the campaign trail, Elon Musk will be

0:06:07.600 --> 0:06:12.720
<v Speaker 7>the person charged with providing advice on the streamlining of government. Now,

0:06:12.720 --> 0:06:15.520
<v Speaker 7>that could mean any number of things. It could mean,

0:06:15.680 --> 0:06:19.039
<v Speaker 7>I think very little. It could also mean that, as

0:06:19.160 --> 0:06:23.200
<v Speaker 7>Donald Trump prepares to enact his you know, very ambitious agenda,

0:06:23.920 --> 0:06:26.159
<v Speaker 7>that Elon Musk will be at his side, and that'll

0:06:26.160 --> 0:06:29.000
<v Speaker 7>be my bad. I mean, I think the job thing

0:06:29.720 --> 0:06:32.920
<v Speaker 7>is probably a distraction. You know, the most important question

0:06:33.240 --> 0:06:35.520
<v Speaker 7>in the Trump White House is who has Trump's ear,

0:06:35.920 --> 0:06:39.000
<v Speaker 7>and right now that's Elon Musk. And I think as

0:06:39.040 --> 0:06:41.000
<v Speaker 7>we put together the story and as I've been thinking

0:06:41.040 --> 0:06:44.240
<v Speaker 7>about this, you know, Elon Musk throws him into these companies,

0:06:44.240 --> 0:06:47.679
<v Speaker 7>and famously he has six different companies, you know, Tesla

0:06:47.760 --> 0:06:50.479
<v Speaker 7>and SpaceX, his car company, and rocket Company being.

0:06:50.279 --> 0:06:50.839
<v Speaker 6>The big ones.

0:06:51.080 --> 0:06:53.719
<v Speaker 7>I think we need to start thinking about politics, and

0:06:53.760 --> 0:06:57.000
<v Speaker 7>in particular Elon Musk's role in right wing politics, whether

0:06:57.040 --> 0:07:00.000
<v Speaker 7>it's the Trump the next Trump administration, or even beyond

0:07:00.080 --> 0:07:03.520
<v Speaker 7>on that as his other big company, as something that

0:07:03.560 --> 0:07:05.480
<v Speaker 7>he is going to be devoting a lot of time

0:07:05.560 --> 0:07:09.200
<v Speaker 7>to and trying to use it frankly to benefit his

0:07:09.440 --> 0:07:10.160
<v Speaker 7>other interests.

0:07:10.520 --> 0:07:14.120
<v Speaker 8>Leading a commission specifically outside of government, Elon Musk doesn't

0:07:14.120 --> 0:07:17.240
<v Speaker 8>have to divest his personal and financial holdings when making

0:07:17.240 --> 0:07:20.080
<v Speaker 8>recommendations to the White House on federal spending and regulations

0:07:20.360 --> 0:07:21.840
<v Speaker 8>that he wants to cut. I mean, what sort of

0:07:21.880 --> 0:07:24.240
<v Speaker 8>precedents do we have for something that's created sort of

0:07:24.280 --> 0:07:27.760
<v Speaker 8>that's supposed to be specifically outside government, And what power

0:07:27.800 --> 0:07:30.080
<v Speaker 8>can he yield and not yield? Do we have any indications?

0:07:30.160 --> 0:07:33.960
<v Speaker 7>Sure have been lots of presidential commissions. You know, this

0:07:34.480 --> 0:07:37.559
<v Speaker 7>kind of thing is not necessarily anything new. It's really

0:07:37.640 --> 0:07:41.640
<v Speaker 7>just a question of how closely is Donald Trump listening

0:07:41.680 --> 0:07:44.640
<v Speaker 7>to it? And when Elon Musk, He's suggested all kinds

0:07:44.680 --> 0:07:47.120
<v Speaker 7>of very radical things, things that are likely to be

0:07:47.480 --> 0:07:51.600
<v Speaker 7>either difficult to achieve, like practically working within the confines

0:07:51.640 --> 0:07:55.640
<v Speaker 7>of government, or wildly unpopular or both. So you know,

0:07:55.720 --> 0:07:58.120
<v Speaker 7>he's said he suggested, for instance, that he's going to

0:07:58.200 --> 0:08:02.000
<v Speaker 7>twitter the US governmentsuggessing, you know, massive layoffs. Remember he

0:08:02.080 --> 0:08:05.040
<v Speaker 7>laid off eighty percent of the Twitter staff. He is

0:08:05.080 --> 0:08:07.440
<v Speaker 7>not going to lay off eighty percent of the US government.

0:08:07.440 --> 0:08:10.360
<v Speaker 7>I think that would be a very very very surprising

0:08:10.400 --> 0:08:12.880
<v Speaker 7>thing if it were to happen that said, you know,

0:08:13.080 --> 0:08:17.320
<v Speaker 7>Trump has has is going to try to defund aspects

0:08:17.360 --> 0:08:20.000
<v Speaker 7>of the government, and it really seems like Elon Musk

0:08:20.120 --> 0:08:23.520
<v Speaker 7>is going to play a role in deciding what gets defunded,

0:08:23.680 --> 0:08:26.240
<v Speaker 7>which is of course, is going to raise all sorts

0:08:26.240 --> 0:08:30.360
<v Speaker 7>of ethical concerns and questions. And because because there are

0:08:30.480 --> 0:08:34.280
<v Speaker 7>ways that President Trump, president elect Trump is going to

0:08:34.280 --> 0:08:38.280
<v Speaker 7>be in a position to say, squash investigations into Elon

0:08:38.360 --> 0:08:42.040
<v Speaker 7>Musk companies, or direct funds to Elon musk companies, or

0:08:42.080 --> 0:08:46.600
<v Speaker 7>slow down some of Elon Musk's competitors, and and so

0:08:46.760 --> 0:08:48.839
<v Speaker 7>you know, it's it's it's going to keep journalists busy.

0:08:48.840 --> 0:08:51.920
<v Speaker 7>It's gonna I'm sure that the left is going to

0:08:52.800 --> 0:08:54.839
<v Speaker 7>be very focused on this over the next couple of

0:08:54.920 --> 0:08:58.240
<v Speaker 7>years because Elon Musk, who's a polarizing guy, is going

0:08:58.320 --> 0:08:59.920
<v Speaker 7>to be tied to this administration very closely.

0:09:00.200 --> 0:09:03.120
<v Speaker 2>I mean, Elon Musk, you cite it in your article,

0:09:03.120 --> 0:09:07.040
<v Speaker 2>and you just mentioned here all the companies he runs, Tesla, SpaceX,

0:09:07.200 --> 0:09:09.679
<v Speaker 2>orally on and on and on. How many hours in

0:09:09.679 --> 0:09:10.520
<v Speaker 2>a day does this guy have?

0:09:10.960 --> 0:09:13.320
<v Speaker 6>I mean, I mean, I mean, you know you have.

0:09:13.640 --> 0:09:17.040
<v Speaker 8>Mentioned when you think about how many companies to plays

0:09:17.040 --> 0:09:17.440
<v Speaker 8>a lot.

0:09:17.280 --> 0:09:20.160
<v Speaker 7>Of video games, which you know is one of the

0:09:20.559 --> 0:09:23.720
<v Speaker 7>many head scratchers with this extraordinary man.

0:09:24.160 --> 0:09:26.719
<v Speaker 6>Uh. I think we've seen.

0:09:26.640 --> 0:09:30.160
<v Speaker 7>Investors in some of these other companies get concerned. And

0:09:30.520 --> 0:09:32.920
<v Speaker 7>you know, right now we're in the middle of this

0:09:33.000 --> 0:09:36.160
<v Speaker 7>kind of honeymoon phase. You know, there's a mania to

0:09:36.240 --> 0:09:38.959
<v Speaker 7>the way Elon Musk is talking about this stuff. Is

0:09:39.000 --> 0:09:41.600
<v Speaker 7>in mar A Lago, he's in Washington. You know, Trump

0:09:41.640 --> 0:09:44.240
<v Speaker 7>family members are referring to him as uncle Elon.

0:09:44.600 --> 0:09:46.000
<v Speaker 6>You got to think that.

0:09:45.920 --> 0:09:48.720
<v Speaker 7>This is not going to last, and if it were

0:09:48.760 --> 0:09:50.520
<v Speaker 7>to last, that there would be a bit of a

0:09:50.559 --> 0:09:54.440
<v Speaker 7>coutdown because because as you say, Tesla is a big,

0:09:54.640 --> 0:09:58.199
<v Speaker 7>complicated company with lots of challenges, and right now we're

0:09:58.200 --> 0:10:00.480
<v Speaker 7>seeing a lot of investors bid up the stop, but

0:10:00.559 --> 0:10:03.120
<v Speaker 7>there isn't a ton of It's not like there's a

0:10:03.120 --> 0:10:06.800
<v Speaker 7>clear rationale for why Tesla is suddenly worth like forty

0:10:06.800 --> 0:10:10.200
<v Speaker 7>percent more than it was before the election, except that, hey,

0:10:10.240 --> 0:10:12.840
<v Speaker 7>maybe Trump's gonna make things better. But but you know,

0:10:12.880 --> 0:10:15.920
<v Speaker 7>they're gonna be challenges and distraction is going to be

0:10:15.920 --> 0:10:17.839
<v Speaker 7>something that we're gonna be looking at.

0:10:18.040 --> 0:10:20.520
<v Speaker 8>And what about ev policies because it seemed like they

0:10:20.520 --> 0:10:24.160
<v Speaker 8>were more beneficial toward Tesla maybe under the Biden administration

0:10:24.280 --> 0:10:26.920
<v Speaker 8>rather than the prior Trump administration. So how does this

0:10:26.960 --> 0:10:29.200
<v Speaker 8>sort of shift? And you have kind of the Trump

0:10:29.240 --> 0:10:29.800
<v Speaker 8>two point.

0:10:29.679 --> 0:10:30.160
<v Speaker 4>Zero coming up.

0:10:30.200 --> 0:10:32.080
<v Speaker 7>And this is one of the things that's so strange

0:10:32.120 --> 0:10:36.959
<v Speaker 7>because Elon Musk became much more conservative during the Biden years,

0:10:37.200 --> 0:10:40.160
<v Speaker 7>but the Bid years were incredibly good to Tesla.

0:10:40.240 --> 0:10:43.160
<v Speaker 6>Tesla's value, you know, shot way up.

0:10:43.400 --> 0:10:45.760
<v Speaker 7>It went from being kind of a niche player to

0:10:45.920 --> 0:10:50.240
<v Speaker 7>one of the large American car companies. And you know, Trump,

0:10:50.280 --> 0:10:53.880
<v Speaker 7>as you kind of hint, was very critical about electric

0:10:54.000 --> 0:10:56.320
<v Speaker 7>vehicles on the campaign trail. Now, now there are two

0:10:56.360 --> 0:10:58.840
<v Speaker 7>things here that are probably worth bringing up. One is

0:10:59.160 --> 0:11:01.440
<v Speaker 7>where Tesla is now is very different than it was

0:11:01.679 --> 0:11:03.880
<v Speaker 7>four or five years ago. And you could make an

0:11:03.960 --> 0:11:06.960
<v Speaker 7>argument that these electric vehicle subsidies actually do more for

0:11:07.040 --> 0:11:09.600
<v Speaker 7>Tesla's competitors than they do for Tesla itself.

0:11:09.760 --> 0:11:11.680
<v Speaker 6>So like, if you were to remove all.

0:11:11.559 --> 0:11:15.480
<v Speaker 7>These subsidies, yes, it might cost Tesla investors money, but

0:11:15.679 --> 0:11:18.480
<v Speaker 7>it would also sort of help Tesla lock in its

0:11:18.720 --> 0:11:21.800
<v Speaker 7>very very dominant position in the market. And the second thing,

0:11:21.840 --> 0:11:24.400
<v Speaker 7>probably the more important thing, is that Elon Musk is

0:11:24.440 --> 0:11:27.640
<v Speaker 7>desperately trying to move beyond the auto business. He wants

0:11:27.760 --> 0:11:31.079
<v Speaker 7>Tesla to be an AI company. He wants to have robotaxis.

0:11:31.400 --> 0:11:33.960
<v Speaker 7>There is no regulatory regime there, and I think what

0:11:34.080 --> 0:11:36.640
<v Speaker 7>investors are hoping, and again I don't know that they

0:11:36.640 --> 0:11:39.360
<v Speaker 7>have much sort of clear factual basis for this hope.

0:11:39.400 --> 0:11:42.880
<v Speaker 7>But this is the rationale that Trump will basically legalize

0:11:42.880 --> 0:11:44.880
<v Speaker 7>this business, that he will take a.

0:11:44.920 --> 0:11:47.360
<v Speaker 6>Very dicey regulatory situation.

0:11:47.040 --> 0:11:49.560
<v Speaker 7>And make it less dicey, and that will be worth

0:11:49.600 --> 0:11:52.359
<v Speaker 7>a lot of money to Tesla and ultimately to as shareholders.

0:11:52.480 --> 0:11:54.000
<v Speaker 6>Thirty seconds left, Max.

0:11:54.360 --> 0:11:56.720
<v Speaker 2>How much time do we think Elon Musk is going

0:11:56.800 --> 0:11:59.319
<v Speaker 2>to allocate to the government stuff?

0:11:59.480 --> 0:12:02.080
<v Speaker 7>Well, right now it seems like he's he's it's a

0:12:02.080 --> 0:12:04.160
<v Speaker 7>full time job, right I mean, he seems to be

0:12:04.200 --> 0:12:07.880
<v Speaker 7>there quite a lot. I think this is going to

0:12:07.960 --> 0:12:11.120
<v Speaker 7>be something that he's very very focused on, you know,

0:12:11.240 --> 0:12:14.840
<v Speaker 7>probably as long as it lasts, which which maybe that's

0:12:14.880 --> 0:12:16.840
<v Speaker 7>only going to be a couple of months.

0:12:17.480 --> 0:12:18.760
<v Speaker 6>Maybe it's going to be longer.

0:12:18.880 --> 0:12:19.120
<v Speaker 9>You know.

0:12:19.160 --> 0:12:21.760
<v Speaker 7>He did he has signaled that he wants to play

0:12:21.880 --> 0:12:25.720
<v Speaker 7>in politics beyond this, beyond twenty twenty four. He's talking

0:12:25.720 --> 0:12:28.280
<v Speaker 7>about the midterms already so interesting, you'll see, all right.

0:12:28.320 --> 0:12:32.160
<v Speaker 5>Thanks to Max Chafkin, Bloomberg BusinessWeek senior reporter, coming up

0:12:32.160 --> 0:12:35.120
<v Speaker 5>wi a breakdown how oil producers will be impacted by

0:12:35.120 --> 0:12:36.520
<v Speaker 5>a Donald Trump presidency.

0:12:36.760 --> 0:12:40.040
<v Speaker 2>You're listening to Bloomberg Intelligence on Bloomberg Radio, providing inpth

0:12:40.080 --> 0:12:42.280
<v Speaker 2>research and data on two thousand companies and one hundred

0:12:42.280 --> 0:12:45.360
<v Speaker 2>and thirty industries. You can access Bloomberg Intelligence via b

0:12:45.520 --> 0:12:47.839
<v Speaker 2>I go on the terminal. I'm Paul Sweeney.

0:12:47.480 --> 0:12:49.800
<v Speaker 5>And I'm John Tucker. This is Bloomberg.

0:12:54.120 --> 0:12:57.960
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence podcast. Catch us live

0:12:58.080 --> 0:13:01.400
<v Speaker 1>weekdays at ten am Eastern car playing then broud Otto

0:13:01.480 --> 0:13:04.400
<v Speaker 1>with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you

0:13:04.480 --> 0:13:08.160
<v Speaker 1>get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

0:13:09.040 --> 0:13:11.280
<v Speaker 5>I'm Paul Sweeney and I'm John Tucker filling in for

0:13:11.320 --> 0:13:14.600
<v Speaker 5>Alex Steele. Last week, Donald Trump was elected the forty

0:13:14.640 --> 0:13:18.199
<v Speaker 5>seventh President of the United States, reclaiming the White House

0:13:18.200 --> 0:13:21.480
<v Speaker 5>and pulling off a stunning political comeback. And how many

0:13:21.520 --> 0:13:24.880
<v Speaker 5>industries are wondering how they'll be impacted In twenty twenty five.

0:13:25.440 --> 0:13:27.560
<v Speaker 5>For more against hoos, Matt Miller and I were joined

0:13:27.559 --> 0:13:31.880
<v Speaker 5>by Steve Man, Bloomberg Intelligence Global Autos and Industrials Research Manager.

0:13:32.280 --> 0:13:34.200
<v Speaker 5>We first asked Steve for his take on how the

0:13:34.360 --> 0:13:37.480
<v Speaker 5>EV industry will be affected by Donald Trump.

0:13:37.640 --> 0:13:41.079
<v Speaker 9>Yeah, if Trump decides to kind of remove or cut

0:13:41.080 --> 0:13:43.960
<v Speaker 9>the seventy five hundred tax credit or EV tax credit,

0:13:44.559 --> 0:13:49.079
<v Speaker 9>I think most people believe that the EV penetration will stall.

0:13:49.520 --> 0:13:53.079
<v Speaker 9>If not stall, it'll probably fall because a lot of

0:13:53.120 --> 0:13:57.360
<v Speaker 9>the consumers are relying on that that's seventy five hundred

0:13:57.400 --> 0:14:00.000
<v Speaker 9>dollars to make sure, you know, to bring down the price,

0:14:00.520 --> 0:14:04.480
<v Speaker 9>the effective price of the vehicle. Most evs sold in

0:14:04.520 --> 0:14:08.199
<v Speaker 9>America are still very expensive. There's only a limited number

0:14:08.240 --> 0:14:11.760
<v Speaker 9>of them that are under fifty thousand dollars. So the

0:14:11.800 --> 0:14:16.400
<v Speaker 9>fear is, you know, it's going to stall EV penetration.

0:14:17.559 --> 0:14:19.640
<v Speaker 9>The automaker is going to have a hard time because

0:14:19.640 --> 0:14:23.480
<v Speaker 9>they's already invested. They've already committed investing a lot of

0:14:23.520 --> 0:14:28.000
<v Speaker 9>money under the Inflation Reduction Act about one over one

0:14:28.080 --> 0:14:31.280
<v Speaker 9>hundred and fifty billion dollars to onshore a lot of

0:14:31.360 --> 0:14:33.920
<v Speaker 9>supply chains. So it's going to cause a lot of

0:14:34.000 --> 0:14:35.360
<v Speaker 9>chaos within the industry.

0:14:35.520 --> 0:14:39.560
<v Speaker 5>So they'll be under no pressure whatsoever moving forward, possibly

0:14:39.680 --> 0:14:41.600
<v Speaker 5>to increase sales of evs.

0:14:42.200 --> 0:14:45.400
<v Speaker 9>Yeah, I think the automaker is going to have to

0:14:45.520 --> 0:14:49.880
<v Speaker 9>increase incentives. I think what could happen if the EV

0:14:50.040 --> 0:14:55.160
<v Speaker 9>penetration rate does decrease from about eight percent currently in

0:14:55.200 --> 0:14:58.200
<v Speaker 9>the US. He's going to be left with the strongest players.

0:14:58.320 --> 0:15:02.080
<v Speaker 9>And to me, that looks like Tesla, because Tesla does

0:15:02.160 --> 0:15:06.840
<v Speaker 9>have the lowest costs structure amongst all the EV makers

0:15:07.160 --> 0:15:12.480
<v Speaker 9>in the US, and if the market shrinks, the weaker

0:15:12.520 --> 0:15:14.960
<v Speaker 9>ones will probably fall on the wayside.

0:15:15.040 --> 0:15:17.560
<v Speaker 5>And oddly enough, First Bro or what do we call him,

0:15:17.600 --> 0:15:20.640
<v Speaker 5>first friend, Elon Musk, he's not necessarily in favor of

0:15:20.720 --> 0:15:24.240
<v Speaker 5>these these tax subsidies for evs.

0:15:25.240 --> 0:15:28.960
<v Speaker 9>Yeah, I think, you know, to him, I don't. He

0:15:29.040 --> 0:15:32.120
<v Speaker 9>thinks Tesla doesn't need them, and I you know, it's

0:15:32.160 --> 0:15:36.080
<v Speaker 9>it's partly true. If you look at the amount of

0:15:36.240 --> 0:15:42.600
<v Speaker 9>cars that are least and eligible for the seventy five hundred,

0:15:42.680 --> 0:15:45.200
<v Speaker 9>actually a lot of the seventy five hundred tax credit

0:15:45.680 --> 0:15:49.000
<v Speaker 9>as actually from leased vehicles. If you look at the

0:15:49.040 --> 0:15:52.520
<v Speaker 9>amount of least vehicles that Tesla have sold in the

0:15:52.560 --> 0:15:55.960
<v Speaker 9>past twelve months, it's about twenty percent. So you know

0:15:56.000 --> 0:15:58.680
<v Speaker 9>they'll get impacted. But if you compare it to Rivian.

0:15:59.280 --> 0:16:02.200
<v Speaker 9>You know, Rivian has about fifty percent of their vehicles

0:16:02.280 --> 0:16:06.600
<v Speaker 9>leased and those and eligible for the seventy five hundred,

0:16:06.680 --> 0:16:09.320
<v Speaker 9>so it could be a bigger impact in Reviant.

0:16:09.440 --> 0:16:11.800
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, there's a limit on you don't get the tax

0:16:11.840 --> 0:16:14.920
<v Speaker 10>credit if you're buying a vehicle that costs more than

0:16:14.920 --> 0:16:17.720
<v Speaker 10>eighty thousand dollars. And I believe there's a household income

0:16:18.920 --> 0:16:21.400
<v Speaker 10>requirement as well, you have to be below a certain level.

0:16:21.560 --> 0:16:24.120
<v Speaker 10>But if you lease it, you can get around at

0:16:24.200 --> 0:16:26.160
<v Speaker 10>least one part of that tax credit. Isn't that right, Steve?

0:16:26.960 --> 0:16:27.440
<v Speaker 5>That's right.

0:16:27.480 --> 0:16:29.840
<v Speaker 9>That's actually what I'm referring to. So when we look

0:16:29.880 --> 0:16:32.440
<v Speaker 9>at the companies who's going to get impacted, we really

0:16:32.480 --> 0:16:36.240
<v Speaker 9>look at, you know, how many of those vehicles are leased.

0:16:36.520 --> 0:16:39.000
<v Speaker 9>If you look at EV's in general in the US,

0:16:39.120 --> 0:16:42.800
<v Speaker 9>the you know, the leasing penetration is actually upwards of

0:16:42.840 --> 0:16:45.600
<v Speaker 9>seventy five eighty ninety percent, So a lot of people

0:16:45.640 --> 0:16:48.680
<v Speaker 9>that actually buy evs are leasing it to get that

0:16:48.720 --> 0:16:49.960
<v Speaker 9>seventy five hundred dollars.

0:16:50.040 --> 0:16:52.680
<v Speaker 10>What does the EV market look like right now? I mean,

0:16:52.800 --> 0:16:56.960
<v Speaker 10>I know, if you read the headlines, you would think

0:16:57.000 --> 0:16:59.400
<v Speaker 10>that no one has bought an EV this year, Like,

0:16:59.800 --> 0:17:04.720
<v Speaker 10>you know, the industry is in trouble because they're so unpopular,

0:17:04.800 --> 0:17:07.399
<v Speaker 10>not just politically, but you know, since there's difficult to

0:17:07.480 --> 0:17:10.200
<v Speaker 10>charge for a lot of people, it's just not an option. However,

0:17:10.480 --> 0:17:13.880
<v Speaker 10>don't we still see EV sales actually growing?

0:17:15.000 --> 0:17:15.840
<v Speaker 5>Oh, we are.

0:17:16.000 --> 0:17:18.520
<v Speaker 9>We are seeing EV sales growing, especially in the second

0:17:18.600 --> 0:17:21.119
<v Speaker 9>half of this year, because there's been a lot of

0:17:21.119 --> 0:17:24.520
<v Speaker 9>price cuts right over the past eighteen twenty four months

0:17:24.880 --> 0:17:26.879
<v Speaker 9>in the industry, and a lot of these vehicles have

0:17:27.000 --> 0:17:31.959
<v Speaker 9>become more affordable, and even especially in the used EV market,

0:17:32.440 --> 0:17:37.080
<v Speaker 9>those vehicles are very competitive to gasoline cars. What the

0:17:37.160 --> 0:17:41.800
<v Speaker 9>industry is really facing is getting more impacted by the

0:17:41.840 --> 0:17:44.320
<v Speaker 9>fact that interest rates are high. A lot of people

0:17:44.359 --> 0:17:47.560
<v Speaker 9>cannot afford expensive cars these days, and EV's are a

0:17:47.560 --> 0:17:50.800
<v Speaker 9>little bit more expensive than ice at the moment. So

0:17:50.840 --> 0:17:52.480
<v Speaker 9>what the industry was trying to do, and I think

0:17:52.480 --> 0:17:54.800
<v Speaker 9>what the IRA was trying to do, was trying to

0:17:54.840 --> 0:17:57.480
<v Speaker 9>onshore a lot of the production while on shore a

0:17:57.480 --> 0:18:00.359
<v Speaker 9>lot of the supply chain in the US and hopes

0:18:00.400 --> 0:18:06.320
<v Speaker 9>of brain costs down so automakers can offer more affordable evs.

0:18:06.720 --> 0:18:11.040
<v Speaker 9>And that's what we were expecting. We were actually expecting

0:18:11.080 --> 0:18:15.119
<v Speaker 9>the EV penetration rate to rise, especially into twenty twenty

0:18:15.160 --> 0:18:16.320
<v Speaker 9>six and twenty twenty seven.

0:18:17.680 --> 0:18:19.119
<v Speaker 10>I got to break in here because I feel like,

0:18:19.440 --> 0:18:22.840
<v Speaker 10>you know, Americans have shown a propensity for taking one

0:18:22.880 --> 0:18:24.680
<v Speaker 10>thousand dollars plus monthly payments.

0:18:24.760 --> 0:18:26.119
<v Speaker 6>I don't think it's about the price.

0:18:26.200 --> 0:18:27.840
<v Speaker 5>Frankly, what do you think.

0:18:29.240 --> 0:18:30.000
<v Speaker 6>That's the big problem.

0:18:30.080 --> 0:18:33.480
<v Speaker 10>I'm test driving right now at GMC Sierra EV. It

0:18:33.560 --> 0:18:37.199
<v Speaker 10>is a fantastic vehicle. It's expensive, but I think a

0:18:37.200 --> 0:18:39.359
<v Speaker 10>lot of people are willing to take on debt to

0:18:39.359 --> 0:18:41.600
<v Speaker 10>own a car like that. The problem is there's nowhere

0:18:41.640 --> 0:18:43.679
<v Speaker 10>to charge it. I park in a garage across the

0:18:43.680 --> 0:18:46.800
<v Speaker 10>street in Manhattan, you know, capital of the world, and

0:18:46.880 --> 0:18:50.119
<v Speaker 10>the only option they offer is the slowest potential charge

0:18:50.119 --> 0:18:51.280
<v Speaker 10>for twenty dollars a day.

0:18:51.320 --> 0:18:52.480
<v Speaker 5>So it's just not worth it.

0:18:53.240 --> 0:18:56.120
<v Speaker 9>Yeah, I think that's a very good point. Affordability is

0:18:56.160 --> 0:18:59.520
<v Speaker 9>not the only hurdle. It's the charging and the range,

0:18:59.720 --> 0:19:02.760
<v Speaker 9>and you know, dependent on the use. I think a

0:19:02.760 --> 0:19:05.400
<v Speaker 9>lot of people with the second vehicle make it an EV.

0:19:06.280 --> 0:19:10.040
<v Speaker 9>Someone who's using it for daily commutes make an EV.

0:19:10.880 --> 0:19:13.320
<v Speaker 9>But you know, America is a big country and people

0:19:13.359 --> 0:19:17.680
<v Speaker 9>love to drive cars, and there are a big majority

0:19:17.760 --> 0:19:21.840
<v Speaker 9>of car buyers that are you know, probably staying away

0:19:21.840 --> 0:19:22.440
<v Speaker 9>from ev.

0:19:22.520 --> 0:19:25.760
<v Speaker 5>Because of that, all right? Thanks to Steve Man, Bloomberg Intelligence,

0:19:25.760 --> 0:19:28.480
<v Speaker 5>Global Autos and Industrials Research Manager.

0:19:28.920 --> 0:19:31.520
<v Speaker 2>Each week we look at research from Bloomberg and EF

0:19:31.600 --> 0:19:33.520
<v Speaker 2>previously known as New Energy Finance.

0:19:33.640 --> 0:19:36.520
<v Speaker 5>They're the team at Bloomberg that tracks and analyzes the

0:19:36.680 --> 0:19:41.679
<v Speaker 5>energy transition from commodities to power, transport, industries, buildings, and

0:19:41.760 --> 0:19:45.080
<v Speaker 5>agriculture sectors. This week, we took a look at how

0:19:45.119 --> 0:19:49.359
<v Speaker 5>Donald Trump's upcoming presidency will impact the oil industry.

0:19:49.560 --> 0:19:51.600
<v Speaker 2>For more guests, Sos, Molly Smith, and I were joined

0:19:51.600 --> 0:19:55.119
<v Speaker 2>by ty Lou b n E, f oil market specialist.

0:19:55.440 --> 0:19:57.240
<v Speaker 2>We first asked, Hi, if it is a fair assumption

0:19:57.320 --> 0:19:59.640
<v Speaker 2>that Donald Trump will be good for the energy industry.

0:20:00.080 --> 0:20:03.680
<v Speaker 11>I think the USL industry and the gas industry can

0:20:03.720 --> 0:20:07.320
<v Speaker 11>benefit from Trumpet administration in the number of ways. I

0:20:07.359 --> 0:20:10.160
<v Speaker 11>think the first off, the bed is like a lower

0:20:10.200 --> 0:20:11.120
<v Speaker 11>corporate tax rate.

0:20:12.160 --> 0:20:13.640
<v Speaker 12>So personal see.

0:20:13.400 --> 0:20:16.159
<v Speaker 11>That Trump has mentioned has indicated he would like to

0:20:16.240 --> 0:20:19.040
<v Speaker 11>lower corporate tax rates from the current twenty one percent

0:20:19.160 --> 0:20:19.960
<v Speaker 11>to fifteen percent.

0:20:20.320 --> 0:20:22.520
<v Speaker 12>So if the materializes, that's the way of the BED.

0:20:22.560 --> 0:20:25.240
<v Speaker 11>That's like more money for the industry and for the shareholders.

0:20:25.560 --> 0:20:26.760
<v Speaker 3>What are they going to do with that money?

0:20:26.760 --> 0:20:26.879
<v Speaker 9>Then?

0:20:26.920 --> 0:20:28.919
<v Speaker 3>Are you suggesting it would be share buybacks?

0:20:29.200 --> 0:20:29.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah?

0:20:29.480 --> 0:20:32.800
<v Speaker 11>So there's definitely like a number of options these companies

0:20:32.800 --> 0:20:35.840
<v Speaker 11>can do with this quote unquote extra money. They can,

0:20:35.960 --> 0:20:38.560
<v Speaker 11>like you said, they can do more buyback for the shares,

0:20:38.600 --> 0:20:42.040
<v Speaker 11>they can issue more dibidend payouts, they can reduce the debt,

0:20:42.440 --> 0:20:44.680
<v Speaker 11>and finally they can always they always have the option

0:20:44.760 --> 0:20:48.240
<v Speaker 11>to funnel some of these money into capital expenditures, which

0:20:48.359 --> 0:20:51.920
<v Speaker 11>ultimately retranslates into more production down the road.

0:20:52.280 --> 0:20:54.640
<v Speaker 2>From the regulatory standpoint, I mean, can I go down

0:20:54.640 --> 0:20:56.919
<v Speaker 2>there now and drill a well? Can I make a

0:20:56.960 --> 0:21:00.400
<v Speaker 2>pipeline to take my natural guess to corporate christ Year

0:21:00.359 --> 0:21:02.000
<v Speaker 2>wherever it needs to get to. Is it can be

0:21:02.080 --> 0:21:06.640
<v Speaker 2>easier under a second Trump administration to build energy stuff?

0:21:07.119 --> 0:21:08.480
<v Speaker 12>Yeah, I would definitely think so.

0:21:08.480 --> 0:21:11.600
<v Speaker 11>So under the Parton administration, that's the government has imposed

0:21:11.600 --> 0:21:14.720
<v Speaker 11>a lot of regulations. There are team that's unfriendly to

0:21:14.760 --> 0:21:18.800
<v Speaker 11>the only gas industry. The government is issued during rights

0:21:18.840 --> 0:21:24.600
<v Speaker 11>moratorium they issued they placed the pause on energy exports permits,

0:21:24.640 --> 0:21:27.879
<v Speaker 11>and they also increase royalties on federal land leases.

0:21:28.400 --> 0:21:28.560
<v Speaker 1>Uh.

0:21:28.680 --> 0:21:30.080
<v Speaker 12>And I would presume and all of.

0:21:30.000 --> 0:21:32.399
<v Speaker 11>These like we're pretty hostile and created a lot of

0:21:33.000 --> 0:21:34.440
<v Speaker 11>uncertainty to the industry.

0:21:34.640 --> 0:21:36.280
<v Speaker 12>So I would assume I would.

0:21:36.000 --> 0:21:40.240
<v Speaker 11>Think that Trump administration would remove a lot of these regulations.

0:21:40.480 --> 0:21:43.600
<v Speaker 11>There are team that's ownerds to our gas producers, so

0:21:44.119 --> 0:21:46.080
<v Speaker 11>definitely beneficial from that point of view.

0:21:46.440 --> 0:21:50.360
<v Speaker 13>You mentioned before, you know, increasing capex potentially and how

0:21:50.359 --> 0:21:51.600
<v Speaker 13>that would mean more production.

0:21:52.080 --> 0:21:53.600
<v Speaker 3>Got to the worry about prices.

0:21:53.680 --> 0:21:56.159
<v Speaker 13>If you are producing so much more, what happens to

0:21:56.200 --> 0:22:00.199
<v Speaker 13>the supply demand equation. There is that already some thing

0:22:00.240 --> 0:22:03.160
<v Speaker 13>that drillers are thinking about of how much more they

0:22:03.240 --> 0:22:05.240
<v Speaker 13>might want to maybe not go in too much.

0:22:05.440 --> 0:22:06.240
<v Speaker 12>Yeah, that's for sure.

0:22:06.320 --> 0:22:08.959
<v Speaker 11>So if you look at the past ten years, use

0:22:09.040 --> 0:22:12.879
<v Speaker 11>oil producers have on server occasions crashed the aill process

0:22:12.920 --> 0:22:15.520
<v Speaker 11>when they decided to turn on the production tabs. So

0:22:15.560 --> 0:22:18.240
<v Speaker 11>they're very cognizange of the risks this time around. On

0:22:18.320 --> 0:22:20.600
<v Speaker 11>top of that, that's like a lot of shareholder pressures

0:22:20.640 --> 0:22:23.920
<v Speaker 11>on these oil and gas companies to maintain capital discipline

0:22:23.960 --> 0:22:27.240
<v Speaker 11>and to increase capital payback. So from that sense, I

0:22:27.280 --> 0:22:29.040
<v Speaker 11>think even though if there's like more money to grow

0:22:29.080 --> 0:22:32.879
<v Speaker 11>around in the industry, it would be more much harder

0:22:32.880 --> 0:22:36.919
<v Speaker 11>for the oil producers to grow production the way they.

0:22:36.760 --> 0:22:38.320
<v Speaker 12>Did in the past ten years.

0:22:38.440 --> 0:22:41.520
<v Speaker 2>So when did the US become a net exporter like

0:22:41.560 --> 0:22:44.000
<v Speaker 2>twenty sixteen or something like that. I think so, okay,

0:22:44.040 --> 0:22:46.920
<v Speaker 2>so we were a net importer forever, then we became

0:22:46.960 --> 0:22:49.800
<v Speaker 2>thanks to the shell find so we became.

0:22:49.560 --> 0:22:50.680
<v Speaker 6>A net exporter.

0:22:51.240 --> 0:22:54.199
<v Speaker 2>How does the US oil industry and not sure if

0:22:54.200 --> 0:22:56.719
<v Speaker 2>you can being characterize it or is it just individual companies?

0:22:56.720 --> 0:23:00.600
<v Speaker 2>How does the US oil industry interact with O Peck

0:23:00.920 --> 0:23:01.400
<v Speaker 2>if at all?

0:23:01.920 --> 0:23:04.119
<v Speaker 11>So the way I think about that, very competitive, like

0:23:04.280 --> 0:23:08.160
<v Speaker 11>natural competitors against each other. So if if lower taxes

0:23:08.200 --> 0:23:11.720
<v Speaker 11>in the Trump administration materializes, it would definitely make the

0:23:11.800 --> 0:23:14.840
<v Speaker 11>US O patch a lot more competitive. It will also

0:23:15.080 --> 0:23:18.359
<v Speaker 11>the brick given calculations there be and there would be

0:23:18.359 --> 0:23:20.560
<v Speaker 11>more money to grow around, so it would be it

0:23:20.560 --> 0:23:22.480
<v Speaker 11>will make it much harder for OPEC.

0:23:22.680 --> 0:23:23.760
<v Speaker 12>To increase the output.

0:23:24.000 --> 0:23:26.920
<v Speaker 11>So it's going to place O pack on a more

0:23:26.960 --> 0:23:27.840
<v Speaker 11>difficult grant.

0:23:28.440 --> 0:23:32.080
<v Speaker 13>You know, something that in part got Donald Trump reelected

0:23:32.119 --> 0:23:35.359
<v Speaker 13>to the White House was the idea of bringing prices down.

0:23:35.440 --> 0:23:38.240
<v Speaker 13>And you know, gas prices obviously a big sticking point

0:23:38.320 --> 0:23:41.320
<v Speaker 13>for a lot of Americans. Gas prices have been coming

0:23:41.359 --> 0:23:45.880
<v Speaker 13>down pretty consistently over the past, you know, six months

0:23:46.000 --> 0:23:49.119
<v Speaker 13>or so down to now, like about roughly three dollars

0:23:49.160 --> 0:23:51.240
<v Speaker 13>a gallon on average nationwide.

0:23:51.600 --> 0:23:54.280
<v Speaker 3>What can Trump really do for gas prices?

0:23:55.280 --> 0:23:57.680
<v Speaker 11>Well, when I think about gas prices, there are two

0:23:57.720 --> 0:24:00.840
<v Speaker 11>pieces to it. That's the crude oil price art and

0:24:00.880 --> 0:24:03.639
<v Speaker 11>then the that's the refinery margin part. Now, on the

0:24:03.680 --> 0:24:06.800
<v Speaker 11>refinery margin, there's probably not much a person can do

0:24:06.880 --> 0:24:10.680
<v Speaker 11>to it because you basically have to increase refining capacity

0:24:10.680 --> 0:24:12.760
<v Speaker 11>and that takes years to build out. If you want

0:24:12.760 --> 0:24:15.119
<v Speaker 11>to prove their part, the outer part will be the

0:24:15.200 --> 0:24:19.679
<v Speaker 11>all price prize. Now, if you wed regulations make it

0:24:19.760 --> 0:24:21.480
<v Speaker 11>easier for companies to drill, you.

0:24:21.400 --> 0:24:24.320
<v Speaker 12>Can pre rent. Theoretically, you can prevent some of the.

0:24:24.480 --> 0:24:28.000
<v Speaker 11>Possible price spikes in all price in all prices, just

0:24:28.040 --> 0:24:32.119
<v Speaker 11>because it's less onerous for these jurists to put more

0:24:32.160 --> 0:24:34.560
<v Speaker 11>capital into the ground. So in this sense, you can

0:24:35.160 --> 0:24:39.200
<v Speaker 11>help prices from seeing more spikes. But however, I don't

0:24:39.320 --> 0:24:42.320
<v Speaker 11>think these companies will really go out and go all

0:24:42.359 --> 0:24:44.320
<v Speaker 11>and endure again the way they did before, for the

0:24:44.359 --> 0:24:45.680
<v Speaker 11>reasons we talked about before.

0:24:46.280 --> 0:24:49.280
<v Speaker 2>So what's happened to the Russian oil It's been a

0:24:49.280 --> 0:24:52.200
<v Speaker 2>couple of years now, and if it's not going to Germany.

0:24:52.440 --> 0:24:53.200
<v Speaker 6>Where's it going.

0:24:54.160 --> 0:24:57.400
<v Speaker 11>Yeah, so it's not going to the Western European nations,

0:24:57.600 --> 0:25:00.760
<v Speaker 11>and Western Nations has placed sanctions on Russian So a

0:25:00.800 --> 0:25:02.480
<v Speaker 11>lot of this has been brought up.

0:25:02.359 --> 0:25:04.280
<v Speaker 12>By unconscries like India and China.

0:25:04.600 --> 0:25:07.879
<v Speaker 11>So they're pretty really benefiting from these sensions.

0:25:08.080 --> 0:25:09.879
<v Speaker 6>So these sanctions aren't really working, are they.

0:25:10.000 --> 0:25:11.879
<v Speaker 12>They'll be directing trade flow.

0:25:12.600 --> 0:25:14.240
<v Speaker 6>It's the redirecting trade flow, and.

0:25:14.240 --> 0:25:17.359
<v Speaker 11>They're making it harder for Russia to ship the ows

0:25:17.440 --> 0:25:21.199
<v Speaker 11>around the world. So it does increase the costs on

0:25:21.200 --> 0:25:24.639
<v Speaker 11>the Russian all producers. So that's an impact, but the

0:25:24.640 --> 0:25:26.600
<v Speaker 11>impact I feel like it's probably more limited.

0:25:27.200 --> 0:25:29.840
<v Speaker 5>All Right, thanks to Tyler B and E f oil

0:25:29.960 --> 0:25:32.679
<v Speaker 5>market specialists. Just to head on the program, we're going

0:25:32.720 --> 0:25:35.879
<v Speaker 5>to look at how Wall Street math wizards are decoding

0:25:36.040 --> 0:25:37.560
<v Speaker 5>private market returns.

0:25:37.760 --> 0:25:40.720
<v Speaker 2>You're listening to Bloomberg Intelligence on Bloomberg Radio, providing in

0:25:40.760 --> 0:25:43.760
<v Speaker 2>depth research and data on two thousand companies one hundred

0:25:43.760 --> 0:25:46.119
<v Speaker 2>and thirty industries. You can access Bloomberg Intelligence via b

0:25:46.240 --> 0:25:47.320
<v Speaker 2>I go on the terminal.

0:25:47.400 --> 0:25:51.960
<v Speaker 5>I'm Paul Swiney and I'm John Tucker, and this is Bloomberg.

0:25:55.520 --> 0:25:59.400
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live

0:25:59.480 --> 0:26:03.000
<v Speaker 1>weekdays in ten am Eastern on applecar Play and Android

0:26:03.040 --> 0:26:06.200
<v Speaker 1>Auto with The Bloomberg Business. You can also listen live

0:26:06.320 --> 0:26:09.440
<v Speaker 1>on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station Just

0:26:09.520 --> 0:26:12.160
<v Speaker 1>Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.

0:26:14.160 --> 0:26:16.480
<v Speaker 5>I'm Paul Sweeney and I'm John Tucker filling in for

0:26:16.520 --> 0:26:17.119
<v Speaker 5>Alex Steele.

0:26:17.359 --> 0:26:20.119
<v Speaker 6>We move next to corporate earnings from Tyson Foods. This

0:26:20.160 --> 0:26:22.440
<v Speaker 6>week shares a Tyson food surge, the most in more

0:26:22.480 --> 0:26:23.160
<v Speaker 6>than two years.

0:26:23.320 --> 0:26:26.480
<v Speaker 5>That's after the company beat fourth quarter earnings expectations and

0:26:26.560 --> 0:26:30.040
<v Speaker 5>projected stronger results next year. And this comes as a

0:26:30.040 --> 0:26:34.920
<v Speaker 5>turnaround at Tyson's chicken business offset losses in beef for More.

0:26:35.160 --> 0:26:37.000
<v Speaker 2>Guest host Jess Mett and I were joined by Jen

0:26:37.080 --> 0:26:41.080
<v Speaker 2>bartashis Bloomberg Intelligence senior retail analysts. We first asked Jen

0:26:41.200 --> 0:26:43.720
<v Speaker 2>for her take on Tyson's Foods the most recent.

0:26:43.520 --> 0:26:46.239
<v Speaker 14>Quarter, and I think what we've really thought was they

0:26:46.280 --> 0:26:48.600
<v Speaker 14>were able to end their fiscal year on a high note.

0:26:49.000 --> 0:26:51.080
<v Speaker 14>That's really been a culmination of a lot of effort

0:26:51.119 --> 0:26:54.879
<v Speaker 14>to streamline and improve their business. They've been very inconsistent

0:26:54.880 --> 0:26:56.680
<v Speaker 14>in the last few years, so it is a little

0:26:56.720 --> 0:26:59.480
<v Speaker 14>refreshing to see that they finally seem to have gotten

0:26:59.520 --> 0:27:02.439
<v Speaker 14>their arms around some of the problems that they were having,

0:27:02.480 --> 0:27:04.320
<v Speaker 14>and I seem to be on a very good trajectory

0:27:04.359 --> 0:27:04.959
<v Speaker 14>going forward.

0:27:05.320 --> 0:27:08.480
<v Speaker 8>Talk to us more, maybe about the inflation picture, because

0:27:08.520 --> 0:27:11.760
<v Speaker 8>it looks like Tyson's second largest source of revenue actually

0:27:12.080 --> 0:27:15.119
<v Speaker 8>demand for chicken actually improved because consumers were looking for

0:27:15.160 --> 0:27:17.800
<v Speaker 8>those cheaper alternatives to beef. So what do you think

0:27:17.840 --> 0:27:20.160
<v Speaker 8>this tells us about inflation right now?

0:27:21.480 --> 0:27:24.480
<v Speaker 14>It's a great question, And with regards to inflation, there's

0:27:24.520 --> 0:27:27.520
<v Speaker 14>a dual effect that Tyson has. The first is because

0:27:27.560 --> 0:27:30.280
<v Speaker 14>they are so big in chicken, it's obviously a benefit

0:27:30.320 --> 0:27:33.080
<v Speaker 14>to them when people are trading down or they're seeking

0:27:33.440 --> 0:27:35.639
<v Speaker 14>cheap protein to put on their table. Chicken is a

0:27:35.680 --> 0:27:39.320
<v Speaker 14>big answer to that question, and Tyson is definitely reaping

0:27:39.400 --> 0:27:41.840
<v Speaker 14>the benefits of that. A little bit harder and a

0:27:41.840 --> 0:27:44.120
<v Speaker 14>little bit more nuanced is the impact that inflation has

0:27:44.119 --> 0:27:47.159
<v Speaker 14>on their prepared food segment. That's on the things that

0:27:47.200 --> 0:27:49.639
<v Speaker 14>you find in the frozen aisle, in the refrigerated aisle.

0:27:50.560 --> 0:27:53.360
<v Speaker 14>Those are higher cost items usually and they're a little

0:27:53.400 --> 0:27:56.520
<v Speaker 14>bit higher margin for Tyson. So finding the right balance

0:27:56.800 --> 0:27:59.639
<v Speaker 14>has been important as consumers look for those prices to

0:27:59.640 --> 0:28:01.359
<v Speaker 14>come down a little bit further as well.

0:28:02.000 --> 0:28:06.720
<v Speaker 2>So what drives their business top line revenue drivers is

0:28:06.720 --> 0:28:08.920
<v Speaker 2>is it kind of a GDP stories, It's something different

0:28:08.960 --> 0:28:09.199
<v Speaker 2>than that.

0:28:10.080 --> 0:28:12.719
<v Speaker 14>It really is a reflection of where the consumer is.

0:28:12.880 --> 0:28:15.080
<v Speaker 14>It is really about where the demand is going to

0:28:15.119 --> 0:28:19.120
<v Speaker 14>fall when it comes to cost drivers. For Tyson, they

0:28:19.160 --> 0:28:22.440
<v Speaker 14>really benefit from lower grain prices. So when corn comes down,

0:28:22.520 --> 0:28:25.119
<v Speaker 14>soy comes down. That's good because that's the feedstock for

0:28:25.200 --> 0:28:29.880
<v Speaker 14>the animals. But the way that Tyson goes usually follows

0:28:30.320 --> 0:28:34.000
<v Speaker 14>just the general consumer and where they're trending and how

0:28:34.080 --> 0:28:35.480
<v Speaker 14>incomes are progressing.

0:28:35.960 --> 0:28:38.520
<v Speaker 8>Something earlier this year I thought was interesting because I

0:28:38.560 --> 0:28:41.000
<v Speaker 8>talked to you about kind of price mix when it

0:28:41.040 --> 0:28:45.040
<v Speaker 8>came to another segment in the consumer staples category, when

0:28:45.080 --> 0:28:48.200
<v Speaker 8>it came to consumer package good type companies. Obviously, if

0:28:48.240 --> 0:28:50.520
<v Speaker 8>you look at Tyson's Food too, when it comes to

0:28:50.560 --> 0:28:54.040
<v Speaker 8>those types of food, beverage, food product type companies that

0:28:54.040 --> 0:28:56.880
<v Speaker 8>are distributing packaged foods and meats, how do you view

0:28:57.000 --> 0:28:58.760
<v Speaker 8>kind of when you were talking to me earlier this

0:28:58.880 --> 0:29:01.840
<v Speaker 8>year about promotiontional sales for a lot of these types

0:29:01.840 --> 0:29:03.640
<v Speaker 8>of companies in the back half of the year, like

0:29:03.720 --> 0:29:06.400
<v Speaker 8>buy one, get one free, different things like that. As

0:29:06.400 --> 0:29:09.120
<v Speaker 8>far as what this shows us about maybe consumer spending

0:29:09.200 --> 0:29:11.040
<v Speaker 8>and what a lot of these companies when they are

0:29:11.040 --> 0:29:13.840
<v Speaker 8>distributing these types of goods, how they're faring.

0:29:14.480 --> 0:29:16.960
<v Speaker 14>It's a big topic for these companies. And so when

0:29:17.000 --> 0:29:20.760
<v Speaker 14>you're looking at volumes, almost every package food company started

0:29:20.800 --> 0:29:23.280
<v Speaker 14>this year saying they were going to grow volumes, and

0:29:23.360 --> 0:29:26.520
<v Speaker 14>yet very few have actually been able to actually realize

0:29:26.640 --> 0:29:29.600
<v Speaker 14>volume growth this year. And that's really because the shoppers

0:29:29.640 --> 0:29:32.320
<v Speaker 14>have been so conservative on their spending and they've been

0:29:32.400 --> 0:29:36.080
<v Speaker 14>seeking deals. There's been a lot of pressure to run promotions,

0:29:36.160 --> 0:29:40.400
<v Speaker 14>and so we've seen promotional activity tick up substantially in

0:29:40.440 --> 0:29:43.320
<v Speaker 14>the last quarter and in the second half of this

0:29:43.440 --> 0:29:47.880
<v Speaker 14>year overall, and we're seeing more deals, more discounts, and

0:29:48.080 --> 0:29:50.600
<v Speaker 14>all of that is usually coming at the price of

0:29:50.640 --> 0:29:54.440
<v Speaker 14>the package food company, not necessarily the retailer. So that's

0:29:54.480 --> 0:29:57.600
<v Speaker 14>good news for consumers who are looking for deals. It

0:29:57.600 --> 0:29:59.680
<v Speaker 14>makes it a much harder process to manage for the

0:29:59.640 --> 0:30:02.840
<v Speaker 14>packa food companies. So for Tyson, you know, part of

0:30:02.880 --> 0:30:05.840
<v Speaker 14>what they've really been working on is increasing their innovation

0:30:05.920 --> 0:30:08.960
<v Speaker 14>pipeline things where they can bring new products to market

0:30:09.440 --> 0:30:12.480
<v Speaker 14>and have a different price point for those and that's

0:30:12.520 --> 0:30:14.400
<v Speaker 14>a similar strategy to what a lot of these other

0:30:14.400 --> 0:30:17.680
<v Speaker 14>package food companies are trying to do to just generate

0:30:17.920 --> 0:30:19.680
<v Speaker 14>consumer interest in their products.

0:30:19.680 --> 0:30:23.880
<v Speaker 2>Again, so Jenna know Tyson, they actually have adjusted operating

0:30:23.960 --> 0:30:26.680
<v Speaker 2>income losses for beef and pork.

0:30:27.040 --> 0:30:29.959
<v Speaker 14>Why is that, Yes, Well, when you look at the

0:30:30.000 --> 0:30:34.600
<v Speaker 14>beef market, we have a shortage of beef. The animals

0:30:34.640 --> 0:30:37.800
<v Speaker 14>are getting bigger, so there's still beef there, but because

0:30:37.840 --> 0:30:41.120
<v Speaker 14>of that, prices have been a lot higher and it's

0:30:41.200 --> 0:30:43.840
<v Speaker 14>been a little bit more expensive for consumers in terms

0:30:43.840 --> 0:30:48.000
<v Speaker 14>of purchasing beef and certainly specific cuts of beef. And

0:30:48.080 --> 0:30:50.360
<v Speaker 14>what we're seeing in the cattle market are very few

0:30:50.400 --> 0:30:53.600
<v Speaker 14>signs that that's going to change anytime soon. So at

0:30:53.680 --> 0:30:56.160
<v Speaker 14>this moment, we're thinking we're not going to see big

0:30:56.200 --> 0:30:58.520
<v Speaker 14>signs that the cattle market is going to expand again

0:30:58.640 --> 0:31:02.320
<v Speaker 14>until the end of twenty twenty five, so that's still

0:31:02.520 --> 0:31:04.120
<v Speaker 14>a good ways away, which is part of why the

0:31:04.160 --> 0:31:07.720
<v Speaker 14>company guided to a loss and adjusted operating income for

0:31:07.760 --> 0:31:09.400
<v Speaker 14>the beef segment for twenty twenty five.

0:31:09.880 --> 0:31:13.360
<v Speaker 5>All Right, Thanks to Jen Bartashis Bloomberg Intelligence Senior Analysts,

0:31:13.440 --> 0:31:15.600
<v Speaker 5>Retail staples and packaged food.

0:31:15.960 --> 0:31:18.600
<v Speaker 2>This week, we took a look at a Bloomberg Big

0:31:18.640 --> 0:31:22.360
<v Speaker 2>Take story entitled Wall Street math Wizards are Decoding Private

0:31:22.440 --> 0:31:23.400
<v Speaker 2>market Returns.

0:31:23.520 --> 0:31:25.960
<v Speaker 5>You can find it on Bloomberg dot Com and the Terminal.

0:31:26.240 --> 0:31:28.640
<v Speaker 5>The story looks at how a small band of math

0:31:28.680 --> 0:31:32.120
<v Speaker 5>wizards want to demystify private market returns.

0:31:32.560 --> 0:31:34.640
<v Speaker 2>For more, guest host Molly Smith and I were joined

0:31:34.640 --> 0:31:38.000
<v Speaker 2>by the stories author Justina Lee, Bloomberg Markets reporter. We

0:31:38.080 --> 0:31:41.080
<v Speaker 2>first asked Justina for more context on our latest story.

0:31:41.600 --> 0:31:43.640
<v Speaker 15>If we kind of think about, you know, what's been

0:31:43.680 --> 0:31:46.920
<v Speaker 15>happening to active management in the stock market for the

0:31:46.960 --> 0:31:49.720
<v Speaker 15>past few decades. I mean, these days were really used

0:31:49.720 --> 0:31:52.080
<v Speaker 15>to talk about like you know, alpha and beta and

0:31:52.200 --> 0:31:55.040
<v Speaker 15>kind of how does your performance compare to the benchmark?

0:31:55.120 --> 0:31:57.800
<v Speaker 15>And that's really killed a lot of the business. And

0:31:57.840 --> 0:32:00.120
<v Speaker 15>I think what my story tries to bring up is

0:32:00.240 --> 0:32:03.800
<v Speaker 15>could we see a similar revolution in private markets? And

0:32:03.840 --> 0:32:06.760
<v Speaker 15>of course it's a way harder math to crunch, because

0:32:07.080 --> 0:32:09.120
<v Speaker 15>as you mentioned, you know, you don't have the numbers

0:32:09.160 --> 0:32:11.360
<v Speaker 15>as often and a lot of the time, you know,

0:32:11.440 --> 0:32:15.120
<v Speaker 15>the numbers are quite subjective. But we are seeing a

0:32:15.120 --> 0:32:18.360
<v Speaker 15>lot of interesting quant research here and they are trying

0:32:18.400 --> 0:32:21.560
<v Speaker 15>to kind of use some statistical techniques to kind of

0:32:21.560 --> 0:32:25.720
<v Speaker 15>reveal the risks and also to compare performance within private markets.

0:32:26.320 --> 0:32:29.680
<v Speaker 13>And so much of what comparing performance needs is obviously

0:32:29.720 --> 0:32:31.880
<v Speaker 13>a benchmark. And talking about how the S and P

0:32:32.000 --> 0:32:35.880
<v Speaker 13>five hundred is the natural benchmark for so many companies.

0:32:35.640 --> 0:32:38.040
<v Speaker 3>Does that still apply in private markets?

0:32:38.040 --> 0:32:41.120
<v Speaker 13>Does that still make sense to be comparing these returns

0:32:41.160 --> 0:32:44.520
<v Speaker 13>against a publicly a basket of publicly traded companies.

0:32:44.920 --> 0:32:47.360
<v Speaker 15>Yeah, that really is a big question here, because even

0:32:47.400 --> 0:32:50.120
<v Speaker 15>if you use a lot of these quant techniques, you

0:32:50.200 --> 0:32:53.960
<v Speaker 15>still need to choose a benchmark to compare private markets to.

0:32:54.560 --> 0:32:57.520
<v Speaker 15>And actually it can tell you a very different kind

0:32:57.520 --> 0:33:00.719
<v Speaker 15>of story depending on which benchmark you pick. Like in

0:33:00.720 --> 0:33:04.200
<v Speaker 15>my story, I cited this paper from Public Market Quants

0:33:04.240 --> 0:33:07.160
<v Speaker 15>saying that you know, if you compare PE to S

0:33:07.240 --> 0:33:09.280
<v Speaker 15>and P five hundred, I mean, the average P fund

0:33:09.320 --> 0:33:12.160
<v Speaker 15>actually does quite well. But if you compare it to

0:33:12.280 --> 0:33:15.800
<v Speaker 15>like small cap value, you know, come up. Maybe perhaps

0:33:15.800 --> 0:33:18.200
<v Speaker 15>you might think that looks more like a P portfolio.

0:33:18.360 --> 0:33:21.920
<v Speaker 15>It actually loses to small cap value. And I think

0:33:21.960 --> 0:33:24.280
<v Speaker 15>that really is the big question here, because if you're

0:33:24.480 --> 0:33:27.560
<v Speaker 15>an investor and you can get better returns in public markets.

0:33:28.040 --> 0:33:30.400
<v Speaker 15>I mean, you're paying way less fees in public markets,

0:33:30.440 --> 0:33:32.920
<v Speaker 15>and so you wouldn't want to be EPE.

0:33:33.240 --> 0:33:35.760
<v Speaker 2>What is the direct alpha approach?

0:33:36.240 --> 0:33:39.960
<v Speaker 15>Yeah, so this staric alpha approach was kind of invented

0:33:40.000 --> 0:33:43.240
<v Speaker 15>by this guy, Barry Griffiths, who was at Landmark Partners

0:33:43.720 --> 0:33:46.680
<v Speaker 15>for a long time and then when that was acquired

0:33:46.680 --> 0:33:49.600
<v Speaker 15>by Ares, he was the head quantum ARES. And the

0:33:49.680 --> 0:33:53.840
<v Speaker 15>math is actually not that complicated. It's mostly to compare

0:33:54.200 --> 0:33:56.920
<v Speaker 15>kind of the cash flows you get from PE kind

0:33:56.920 --> 0:34:00.440
<v Speaker 15>of with the opportunity cost of what you would have

0:34:00.480 --> 0:34:03.680
<v Speaker 15>gotten if you had invested that in public markets. And

0:34:03.720 --> 0:34:06.520
<v Speaker 15>so the idea there is kind of a more apples

0:34:06.520 --> 0:34:09.400
<v Speaker 15>to apples comparison to what you could have gotten. And

0:34:09.440 --> 0:34:12.239
<v Speaker 15>then that's supposed to kind of raise a question of

0:34:12.280 --> 0:34:14.720
<v Speaker 15>you know, where the fees worth it? Or was locking

0:34:14.840 --> 0:34:17.680
<v Speaker 15>up your money worth it, Because even if you are

0:34:17.719 --> 0:34:20.400
<v Speaker 15>getting better returns in private equity, a lot of the

0:34:20.400 --> 0:34:22.480
<v Speaker 15>time it might not be worth it if you think

0:34:22.520 --> 0:34:25.120
<v Speaker 15>it's riskier because you cannot sell out of it, or

0:34:25.600 --> 0:34:27.960
<v Speaker 15>you think it's riskier because it's using more leverage. And

0:34:28.040 --> 0:34:30.480
<v Speaker 15>so I think a lot of the quant research is

0:34:30.560 --> 0:34:33.080
<v Speaker 15>kind of bringing forth to these questions give.

0:34:33.000 --> 0:34:35.880
<v Speaker 13>Us a sense of what some of these fees are like,

0:34:36.040 --> 0:34:38.840
<v Speaker 13>because on the public side, it's really been such the

0:34:38.880 --> 0:34:42.320
<v Speaker 13>story as the race to the bottom in fees, especially

0:34:42.360 --> 0:34:45.080
<v Speaker 13>with the proliferation of ETFs and other funds that you

0:34:45.120 --> 0:34:47.640
<v Speaker 13>can get into with passive management.

0:34:47.760 --> 0:34:50.720
<v Speaker 3>So how expensive is it if you're.

0:34:50.560 --> 0:34:52.520
<v Speaker 13>An investor in some of these private funds?

0:34:53.000 --> 0:34:55.000
<v Speaker 15>Yeah, I mean so a lot of these private funds

0:34:55.080 --> 0:34:58.200
<v Speaker 15>do have a hurdle rate, And interestingly, the hurdle rate

0:34:58.480 --> 0:35:00.840
<v Speaker 15>is pretty standard, like around eight percent, and that you

0:35:01.000 --> 0:35:05.160
<v Speaker 15>kind of start earning kind of carry above and beyond that,

0:35:05.440 --> 0:35:09.840
<v Speaker 15>and that carry has actually increased the steer because we

0:35:09.880 --> 0:35:13.600
<v Speaker 15>are seeing a bit more deal making pick cup as well.

0:35:13.719 --> 0:35:18.000
<v Speaker 2>All Right, here's my big issue with private investments is

0:35:18.040 --> 0:35:20.680
<v Speaker 2>just the marked to market. It's so I think it's

0:35:20.680 --> 0:35:25.000
<v Speaker 2>just so unevenly applied. I don't feel like there's any consistency. Again,

0:35:25.080 --> 0:35:28.759
<v Speaker 2>as I was mentioning to Molly, private equity folks are

0:35:28.840 --> 0:35:30.400
<v Speaker 2>happy to mark the market on the way up, But

0:35:30.440 --> 0:35:33.800
<v Speaker 2>I don't recall anybody reporting terrible marks in twenty twenty

0:35:33.800 --> 0:35:37.320
<v Speaker 2>two when stocks and bonds were both down double digits.

0:35:37.520 --> 0:35:39.120
<v Speaker 6>Talk to us at that part of the business.

0:35:39.560 --> 0:35:41.759
<v Speaker 15>Yeah, And I think that is the big question right now,

0:35:41.800 --> 0:35:44.400
<v Speaker 15>because the defining theme of the last two years is

0:35:44.440 --> 0:35:46.839
<v Speaker 15>that we're not really seeing a lot of exits from

0:35:47.040 --> 0:35:50.520
<v Speaker 15>PE investments and because of that, a lot of investors,

0:35:50.520 --> 0:35:53.000
<v Speaker 15>you know, your pensions and your endowments are not getting

0:35:53.040 --> 0:35:56.160
<v Speaker 15>their cash back. And the reason for that seems to

0:35:56.200 --> 0:35:58.239
<v Speaker 15>be that a lot of PE firms don't want to

0:35:58.280 --> 0:36:03.319
<v Speaker 15>sell into this market. They're not getting valuations that they like,

0:36:03.600 --> 0:36:05.600
<v Speaker 15>even though the market has been kind of going up,

0:36:05.880 --> 0:36:07.800
<v Speaker 15>And I think that kind of reflects sort of the

0:36:08.200 --> 0:36:12.439
<v Speaker 15>disconnect here, like maybe maybe private markets haven't really caught

0:36:12.520 --> 0:36:15.640
<v Speaker 15>up with sort of the twenty twenty two adjustment from

0:36:15.920 --> 0:36:18.960
<v Speaker 15>higher interest rates here. And so if you actually kind

0:36:18.960 --> 0:36:21.560
<v Speaker 15>of look at some of these math techniques that's being

0:36:21.680 --> 0:36:25.120
<v Speaker 15>used to unsmooth the volatility, what you get is actually

0:36:25.440 --> 0:36:28.360
<v Speaker 15>a volatility level that's very similar to the S and

0:36:28.400 --> 0:36:31.439
<v Speaker 15>P five hundred. So, but a lot of people would

0:36:31.440 --> 0:36:34.680
<v Speaker 15>say maybe investors do like the smooth volatility, even if

0:36:34.680 --> 0:36:36.759
<v Speaker 15>it's not the truth. So that is one sin of

0:36:36.800 --> 0:36:38.200
<v Speaker 15>code Taque that we hear a lot.

0:36:38.719 --> 0:36:41.040
<v Speaker 13>What do you hear from other people outside of private

0:36:41.080 --> 0:36:43.680
<v Speaker 13>markets about some of these math techniques?

0:36:43.719 --> 0:36:46.319
<v Speaker 3>Do they pass the so called sniff test.

0:36:46.440 --> 0:36:48.799
<v Speaker 13>You know, they seem legit or cause I guess like

0:36:48.960 --> 0:36:51.600
<v Speaker 13>for maybe like some where my head is going, is

0:36:51.640 --> 0:36:54.040
<v Speaker 13>you know the way that companies can sometimes make like

0:36:54.080 --> 0:36:55.960
<v Speaker 13>really creative adjustments.

0:36:55.440 --> 0:36:56.640
<v Speaker 3>To what their earnings looks like.

0:36:56.719 --> 0:36:59.560
<v Speaker 13>And it's like, hmm, is that like maybe just a

0:36:59.600 --> 0:37:01.880
<v Speaker 13>little bit to Rosie, So tell us a little bit

0:37:01.880 --> 0:37:04.239
<v Speaker 13>about like what the feedback has been on what these

0:37:04.320 --> 0:37:05.160
<v Speaker 13>quants are doing.

0:37:05.760 --> 0:37:09.120
<v Speaker 15>Yeah, I think, you know, using these cont techniques is

0:37:09.160 --> 0:37:12.000
<v Speaker 15>definitely not the standardier And I think if you talk

0:37:12.080 --> 0:37:15.040
<v Speaker 15>to a lot of allocators they will tell you sort

0:37:15.080 --> 0:37:17.719
<v Speaker 15>of the practical side of things, which is that, you know,

0:37:17.920 --> 0:37:21.319
<v Speaker 15>since two thousand and eight, PE generally has at least

0:37:21.320 --> 0:37:24.400
<v Speaker 15>on the surface, done better than you know, public markets,

0:37:24.560 --> 0:37:28.120
<v Speaker 15>and most people are pretty happy with that, and they

0:37:28.200 --> 0:37:29.960
<v Speaker 15>kind of feel like, you know, even if it is

0:37:30.000 --> 0:37:33.640
<v Speaker 15>actually riskier, who cares, right. I have a kind of

0:37:33.640 --> 0:37:36.160
<v Speaker 15>a quote from a guy who's very familiar with PEE

0:37:36.200 --> 0:37:38.920
<v Speaker 15>where he's like, well, there's more cash coming out of

0:37:38.960 --> 0:37:42.520
<v Speaker 15>this box, So do we really need to dig that deeper?

0:37:42.560 --> 0:37:45.400
<v Speaker 15>Do we really need to torture the data? But I

0:37:45.440 --> 0:37:48.399
<v Speaker 15>think there's also more interest in these methods right now

0:37:48.440 --> 0:37:51.240
<v Speaker 15>because there's a sense out here that with interest rates

0:37:51.320 --> 0:37:56.200
<v Speaker 15>higher and kind of with maybe just riding valuations getting

0:37:56.200 --> 0:37:59.720
<v Speaker 15>a bit more difficult, we're entering into a tougher period

0:37:59.760 --> 0:38:02.120
<v Speaker 15>for private equity, and so people will actually start to

0:38:02.280 --> 0:38:04.080
<v Speaker 15>ask these questions, all right.

0:38:04.080 --> 0:38:06.680
<v Speaker 5>Thanks to Justina Lead, Bloomberg Markets Reporter.

0:38:07.320 --> 0:38:11.839
<v Speaker 1>This is the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast, available on Apples, Spotify,

0:38:12.040 --> 0:38:15.720
<v Speaker 1>and anywhere else you'll get your podcasts. Listen live each weekday,

0:38:15.840 --> 0:38:18.800
<v Speaker 1>ten am to noon Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the

0:38:18.920 --> 0:38:22.360
<v Speaker 1>iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app. You

0:38:22.400 --> 0:38:25.560
<v Speaker 1>can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and

0:38:25.760 --> 0:38:27.360
<v Speaker 1>always on the Bloomberg terminal