WEBVTT - TX Empire Goes Bankrupt in Sudden Fall

0:00:01.840 --> 0:00:04.480
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Business Week. I'm Carol Masser and I'm

0:00:04.519 --> 0:00:07.320
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Quick Takes Tim Stanovk. We're here every day bringing

0:00:07.360 --> 0:00:09.880
<v Speaker 1>you the latest news from the world of business and finance,

0:00:09.960 --> 0:00:13.680
<v Speaker 1>of technology, politics, economics, all parnessing the power of Business

0:00:13.720 --> 0:00:17.200
<v Speaker 1>Week reporters and editors, not to mention our journalists and

0:00:17.200 --> 0:00:20.040
<v Speaker 1>analyst in more than one twenty countries. You can download

0:00:20.040 --> 0:00:23.480
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Business Weekend iTunes, SoundCloud, or Bloomberg dot com. You

0:00:23.520 --> 0:00:25.479
<v Speaker 1>can also listen to our radio show at two pm

0:00:25.520 --> 0:00:28.400
<v Speaker 1>Eastern Time on Bloomberg Radio, or watch us on YouTube

0:00:28.440 --> 0:00:32.640
<v Speaker 1>search Bloomberg clovel News. Obviously, the breaking news today is

0:00:32.680 --> 0:00:37.800
<v Speaker 1>that Crypto Exchange f t X filing for Chapter eleven bankruptcy.

0:00:37.880 --> 0:00:41.599
<v Speaker 1>This story has moved incredibly fast. Let's bring in Crypto

0:00:41.760 --> 0:00:44.639
<v Speaker 1>reporter for Bloomberg News, Olga Career if she joins us

0:00:45.080 --> 0:00:47.520
<v Speaker 1>over zoom right now, Olga, I want to go back

0:00:47.560 --> 0:00:53.159
<v Speaker 1>in time to last Friday. This How shocking would it

0:00:53.200 --> 0:00:56.360
<v Speaker 1>be if I told you that fast forward one week

0:00:56.400 --> 0:01:01.520
<v Speaker 1>f t X the Empire, It's in bankruptcy protection. Completely shocking.

0:01:01.680 --> 0:01:06.400
<v Speaker 1>Last week was very quiet overall, so people worried about

0:01:06.560 --> 0:01:10.160
<v Speaker 1>low volatility in the markets, and how are they changes

0:01:10.319 --> 0:01:15.120
<v Speaker 1>gonna you know, make hands meet until you know something happened,

0:01:15.160 --> 0:01:18.200
<v Speaker 1>And people generally said, well, nothing is going to happen

0:01:18.280 --> 0:01:22.120
<v Speaker 1>now until they economy improved, so not much to expect

0:01:22.120 --> 0:01:24.440
<v Speaker 1>in the next year or so, and then here we go,

0:01:24.840 --> 0:01:28.319
<v Speaker 1>here we go, um olga. The latest headline here is

0:01:28.360 --> 0:01:31.800
<v Speaker 1>that the f t X withdraws derivatives clearing plan from

0:01:31.959 --> 0:01:35.240
<v Speaker 1>us C f TC I mean shocker coin desk is

0:01:35.280 --> 0:01:37.920
<v Speaker 1>also reporting that f t x u s stop processing

0:01:37.920 --> 0:01:41.720
<v Speaker 1>withdrawals midday Friday. What do you think the headlines are

0:01:41.720 --> 0:01:45.200
<v Speaker 1>going to be over the next forty eight hours. Well,

0:01:45.240 --> 0:01:51.520
<v Speaker 1>I think everybody's waiting to see what Sam Bankman Freed says,

0:01:51.760 --> 0:01:57.280
<v Speaker 1>either on Twitter or in upcoming sort of bankruptcy fightings. Uh.

0:01:57.560 --> 0:02:03.560
<v Speaker 1>It's gonna be uh interesting to see the financials as

0:02:03.600 --> 0:02:07.720
<v Speaker 1>well as maybe get some commentary on what happened, what

0:02:07.880 --> 0:02:11.960
<v Speaker 1>went rowing in a In a series of tweets earlier today,

0:02:12.120 --> 0:02:16.480
<v Speaker 1>Sam promised sort of to describe exactly what happened. So

0:02:17.040 --> 0:02:19.880
<v Speaker 1>I think a lot of people are waiting for that.

0:02:20.680 --> 0:02:24.920
<v Speaker 1>It is amazing SPF just tweeting through it. I don't know,

0:02:25.000 --> 0:02:26.600
<v Speaker 1>I'm thinking like wouldn't someone tell them to be like

0:02:26.639 --> 0:02:29.360
<v Speaker 1>shut it down? Yeah, I would. I would log out

0:02:30.000 --> 0:02:32.720
<v Speaker 1>so rarely what I log out, but probably in this situation.

0:02:32.760 --> 0:02:35.880
<v Speaker 1>But Olga, let's talk a little bit about the fallout here,

0:02:35.880 --> 0:02:39.200
<v Speaker 1>because we've heard a lot about contagion. I want to

0:02:39.240 --> 0:02:42.040
<v Speaker 1>know where to look next. We've already seen block five

0:02:42.080 --> 0:02:46.000
<v Speaker 1>for example, halting withdrawals, the shutdown of Alameda, of course,

0:02:46.160 --> 0:02:50.560
<v Speaker 1>SPFS trading arm where else should we be looking? So

0:02:51.080 --> 0:02:54.720
<v Speaker 1>a lot of funds uh in companies kept their funds

0:02:54.800 --> 0:02:59.040
<v Speaker 1>on fds, so they will obviously be affected. A lot

0:02:59.080 --> 0:03:02.080
<v Speaker 1>of companies over tweeted out or put out statement and

0:03:02.160 --> 0:03:06.600
<v Speaker 1>saying we don't have much exposure, but some do and

0:03:06.600 --> 0:03:09.440
<v Speaker 1>and so we'll see the ripple effects of that in

0:03:09.480 --> 0:03:14.280
<v Speaker 1>the coming days. Also f t X and Alameda another

0:03:14.320 --> 0:03:20.079
<v Speaker 1>company that uh SBF owned uh they had their tentacles

0:03:20.120 --> 0:03:23.760
<v Speaker 1>and pretty much throughout crypto, they were investors in a

0:03:23.800 --> 0:03:28.040
<v Speaker 1>lot of projects and some of these projects kept their

0:03:28.240 --> 0:03:31.760
<v Speaker 1>treasuries on f t X. So but we'll see some

0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:36.240
<v Speaker 1>ripple effects from that as well. So of course uh

0:03:36.400 --> 0:03:40.119
<v Speaker 1>SAM was a big supporter of projects like Salona, and

0:03:40.480 --> 0:03:45.600
<v Speaker 1>obviously the token is getting crushed partially because of people

0:03:45.600 --> 0:03:48.120
<v Speaker 1>are still trying to figure out what they impact on

0:03:48.240 --> 0:03:51.480
<v Speaker 1>Salona might be. Are there any other tokens out there

0:03:51.520 --> 0:03:54.160
<v Speaker 1>that have the same kind of intricate relationship with its

0:03:54.200 --> 0:03:57.040
<v Speaker 1>parent company or an exchange that could be in the

0:03:57.080 --> 0:03:59.120
<v Speaker 1>same kind of spot where it was used as a

0:03:59.160 --> 0:04:02.440
<v Speaker 1>loan or as called lateral, etcetera. Are there other worry

0:04:02.520 --> 0:04:06.880
<v Speaker 1>spots like this? So, of course f t t the

0:04:06.960 --> 0:04:11.480
<v Speaker 1>token connected to the extra ft X exchange, crashed and burned.

0:04:11.880 --> 0:04:14.920
<v Speaker 1>As a result of this, it's probably going to be

0:04:14.960 --> 0:04:19.119
<v Speaker 1>in the center of investigations into sort of what happened here,

0:04:19.320 --> 0:04:23.280
<v Speaker 1>why and where did the money from ft X go?

0:04:24.279 --> 0:04:29.960
<v Speaker 1>Um so, so that that token sort of plummeted over

0:04:30.000 --> 0:04:34.840
<v Speaker 1>the last week. Um and there can be other tokens

0:04:34.880 --> 0:04:38.160
<v Speaker 1>that are impacted. But you know, honestly, f t X

0:04:38.240 --> 0:04:41.800
<v Speaker 1>was such a huge presence in the entire ecosystem, I

0:04:41.800 --> 0:04:45.400
<v Speaker 1>think it's probably easier to name, you know, major tokens

0:04:45.440 --> 0:04:49.400
<v Speaker 1>where f t X did not have much influence than

0:04:49.520 --> 0:04:53.160
<v Speaker 1>the ones where where it did. Yeah, No, definitely. I

0:04:53.200 --> 0:04:56.800
<v Speaker 1>mean his empire was so far reaching, and I mean

0:04:56.839 --> 0:04:58.960
<v Speaker 1>one of the places that it did reach was the

0:04:58.960 --> 0:05:02.839
<v Speaker 1>Salona blockchain, and it's probably not surprising that after f

0:05:03.000 --> 0:05:06.320
<v Speaker 1>t T we've seen a lot of pain in the

0:05:06.320 --> 0:05:11.359
<v Speaker 1>Salona token. What's the bowl case left for the Salona token,

0:05:11.400 --> 0:05:14.560
<v Speaker 1>the Salona blockchain, because I mean I think Salana, I

0:05:14.560 --> 0:05:19.640
<v Speaker 1>think Alameda, I think SPF Sure, that's a good question.

0:05:19.800 --> 0:05:28.360
<v Speaker 1>So a Salona was built for as a competitor for ethereum,

0:05:28.600 --> 0:05:30.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, as a as a block chain to handle

0:05:30.960 --> 0:05:34.359
<v Speaker 1>uh financial transactions, and of course it was handling some

0:05:35.160 --> 0:05:40.599
<v Speaker 1>financial transactions for a SBFS businesses. So I guess what

0:05:40.760 --> 0:05:43.960
<v Speaker 1>we'll see in the coming weeks is just how much

0:05:44.000 --> 0:05:49.359
<v Speaker 1>adoption has it had outside of SBFS empire. Uh. You know,

0:05:49.400 --> 0:05:52.480
<v Speaker 1>a lot of people say this is a good technology,

0:05:53.080 --> 0:05:56.320
<v Speaker 1>it's it has it's a big ecosystem, it's bigger than

0:05:56.440 --> 0:05:59.839
<v Speaker 1>a spf um, and b'll see how it plays out

0:05:59.839 --> 0:06:02.640
<v Speaker 1>in the coming gays. Yeah exactly. I really think a

0:06:02.640 --> 0:06:04.600
<v Speaker 1>lot of people probably wish that bit quindon trade over

0:06:04.640 --> 0:06:07.400
<v Speaker 1>the weekend. Now at this point, thank you so much,

0:06:07.400 --> 0:06:10.200
<v Speaker 1>Oga curryve joining us on f t X. That latest

0:06:10.200 --> 0:06:12.120
<v Speaker 1>headline Katie that f t X with draws rid is

0:06:12.120 --> 0:06:15.679
<v Speaker 1>clearing plan from us C f t C. I mean, like, yeah,

0:06:16.279 --> 0:06:18.760
<v Speaker 1>I would think so, but nonetheless it is now official

0:06:18.800 --> 0:06:20.839
<v Speaker 1>that that is happening. Probably would have been bigger news

0:06:20.960 --> 0:06:23.960
<v Speaker 1>if they hadn't at this point. But I mean, I'm

0:06:24.000 --> 0:06:25.880
<v Speaker 1>sure we're going to get more and more headlines like

0:06:25.920 --> 0:06:28.160
<v Speaker 1>that over the cooming. It's like a drip feed, right

0:06:28.200 --> 0:06:30.240
<v Speaker 1>because since no, It's like, if there is no regulation,

0:06:30.320 --> 0:06:32.200
<v Speaker 1>then how do you sort of go after someone when

0:06:32.200 --> 0:06:34.680
<v Speaker 1>there was no regulation. It's a great question. I wish

0:06:34.680 --> 0:06:40.680
<v Speaker 1>I had the answer. This is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg

0:06:40.720 --> 0:06:44.360
<v Speaker 1>Business Week with Carol Messer and Bloomberg Quick Takes Tim

0:06:44.440 --> 0:06:48.200
<v Speaker 1>Stinovic on Bloomberg Radio. It's time now for our Business

0:06:48.240 --> 0:06:50.040
<v Speaker 1>Week segment. This is when we dive deep in when

0:06:50.080 --> 0:06:53.520
<v Speaker 1>Business Week stories of the day, and this time we're

0:06:53.560 --> 0:06:58.560
<v Speaker 1>talking about gaming has a hated CEO who's now crushing

0:06:58.600 --> 0:07:01.360
<v Speaker 1>and crashing into the meta verse. I didn't know who

0:07:01.360 --> 0:07:03.320
<v Speaker 1>the CEO was. I didn't know anything about him, but

0:07:03.320 --> 0:07:06.600
<v Speaker 1>apparently his reputation is not so great. So joining us

0:07:06.600 --> 0:07:09.039
<v Speaker 1>now to break this all down for us is Bloomberg

0:07:09.160 --> 0:07:13.400
<v Speaker 1>News Technology and Venture capital reporter Priya Ann and Bloomberg

0:07:13.400 --> 0:07:16.920
<v Speaker 1>Business Week editor Joel Weber. Joel, let's start. First of all, Hey,

0:07:16.920 --> 0:07:19.000
<v Speaker 1>it's been a while haven't talked to you in a bit. Hello,

0:07:19.160 --> 0:07:21.160
<v Speaker 1>it's good just to chat with you. First of all,

0:07:21.360 --> 0:07:23.840
<v Speaker 1>talk me through the headline of the story and what

0:07:23.880 --> 0:07:28.280
<v Speaker 1>was behind the article. So the story is written by

0:07:28.320 --> 0:07:32.120
<v Speaker 1>Austin car Jason Tryer and and Priya. And this is

0:07:32.160 --> 0:07:35.320
<v Speaker 1>a really interesting guy. You you you're right, not exactly

0:07:35.360 --> 0:07:40.120
<v Speaker 1>a household name, except once you um here where he's been, um,

0:07:40.160 --> 0:07:42.960
<v Speaker 1>you might be familiar with sort of some of his legacy.

0:07:43.000 --> 0:07:46.560
<v Speaker 1>And so we're talking about John Rick Rick Tellio, who

0:07:46.640 --> 0:07:50.240
<v Speaker 1>is the CEO of a company called Unity UM. And

0:07:50.400 --> 0:07:53.840
<v Speaker 1>Unity is a really interesting company because not probably not

0:07:53.880 --> 0:07:57.120
<v Speaker 1>a household name, but in the gaming world, UM, they

0:07:57.160 --> 0:08:01.200
<v Speaker 1>are known for basically, uh, doing a platform that allows

0:08:01.240 --> 0:08:05.520
<v Speaker 1>a lot of very nimble games and advertising. UM. But

0:08:05.720 --> 0:08:09.760
<v Speaker 1>before he was there, he was at e a UM

0:08:09.800 --> 0:08:13.000
<v Speaker 1>where he was definitely um, not loved. But one of

0:08:13.000 --> 0:08:15.800
<v Speaker 1>my most favorite anecdotes from the story was, actually, you know,

0:08:16.600 --> 0:08:18.800
<v Speaker 1>he's like one of these executives that can go from

0:08:18.840 --> 0:08:21.960
<v Speaker 1>industry to industry. He was actually Sarah Lee Bakery. This

0:08:22.200 --> 0:08:24.640
<v Speaker 1>get this the pound cake. He took it from sixty

0:08:24.640 --> 0:08:28.920
<v Speaker 1>announces to twelve no longer a pound That's that's kind

0:08:28.920 --> 0:08:32.360
<v Speaker 1>of one of the legacies that we ran across. But

0:08:32.360 --> 0:08:34.480
<v Speaker 1>but Pria talked to us about what his legacy has

0:08:34.520 --> 0:08:37.400
<v Speaker 1>been like in gaming and and sort of what his

0:08:37.520 --> 0:08:41.800
<v Speaker 1>vision for the metaverse is looking like, because that's really

0:08:41.800 --> 0:08:46.280
<v Speaker 1>where we tried to center this narrative. Yeah, so, actually

0:08:46.280 --> 0:08:50.160
<v Speaker 1>writing the story, the metaverse conjures everything and nothing. These days,

0:08:50.200 --> 0:08:52.600
<v Speaker 1>it's a hot it's a hot hot hot news space.

0:08:53.000 --> 0:08:56.640
<v Speaker 1>Mark Duckerberg is very interested right naming his company meta

0:08:57.000 --> 0:09:00.920
<v Speaker 1>and John Dractello is known for, uh jumping into the

0:09:00.960 --> 0:09:04.080
<v Speaker 1>next big shiny thing. I mean, and he's a he's

0:09:04.120 --> 0:09:07.480
<v Speaker 1>a marketing guy through and through people we spoke would

0:09:07.480 --> 0:09:10.160
<v Speaker 1>phrase his marketing skills. When he was at Hagen Daz.

0:09:10.200 --> 0:09:13.880
<v Speaker 1>At one point he recruited director of Magic Um to

0:09:14.240 --> 0:09:18.199
<v Speaker 1>make their shops into unforgettable tasting events that celebrate the

0:09:18.240 --> 0:09:21.040
<v Speaker 1>experience of being alive. So this is someone who really

0:09:21.679 --> 0:09:26.880
<v Speaker 1>jumps into things when he's interested. And um at Unity

0:09:27.120 --> 0:09:31.080
<v Speaker 1>he has been talking up the metaverse as well and

0:09:31.280 --> 0:09:34.720
<v Speaker 1>all the applications in and outside of gaming that his

0:09:34.840 --> 0:09:39.080
<v Speaker 1>company can help different sorts of clients with UM. We

0:09:39.160 --> 0:09:42.160
<v Speaker 1>did finding reporting out this story that there were plenty

0:09:42.200 --> 0:09:46.160
<v Speaker 1>of examples that he shared with our reporting team that

0:09:46.520 --> 0:09:48.520
<v Speaker 1>later on when we went to the customers, they said

0:09:48.520 --> 0:09:50.640
<v Speaker 1>they were exaggerated, you know, they were like, we don't

0:09:50.640 --> 0:09:53.240
<v Speaker 1>actually use Unity for these things. So that was a

0:09:53.240 --> 0:09:55.960
<v Speaker 1>bit interesting in terms of the strategy there to share

0:09:56.000 --> 0:09:59.240
<v Speaker 1>those kinds of examples with us. But Unity is is

0:09:59.280 --> 0:10:01.840
<v Speaker 1>best known as the company that you might not have

0:10:01.880 --> 0:10:05.080
<v Speaker 1>heard of that put all those ads into the mobile

0:10:05.080 --> 0:10:08.120
<v Speaker 1>games that you play that some people might consider a

0:10:08.160 --> 0:10:11.080
<v Speaker 1>little bit spammy. So one question is like, if we

0:10:11.120 --> 0:10:13.360
<v Speaker 1>do get to this world where we're all in the metaverse,

0:10:13.840 --> 0:10:16.400
<v Speaker 1>it does seem like if Unity is a part of

0:10:16.400 --> 0:10:19.679
<v Speaker 1>that future, we can probably say with at least some

0:10:19.760 --> 0:10:22.319
<v Speaker 1>degree of likelihood that ads are going to be part

0:10:22.320 --> 0:10:24.079
<v Speaker 1>of that world too. If you if you thought you

0:10:24.120 --> 0:10:26.160
<v Speaker 1>couldn't have more ads in your world, just wait for

0:10:26.200 --> 0:10:28.760
<v Speaker 1>this digital world to take over your life. Oh, many

0:10:28.800 --> 0:10:31.640
<v Speaker 1>would say that this whole metaverse employ is just a

0:10:31.760 --> 0:10:36.199
<v Speaker 1>cash grab, but we think about Mark Zuckerberg going big

0:10:36.200 --> 0:10:39.120
<v Speaker 1>on the metaverse. Uh, it isn't too far a stretch

0:10:39.200 --> 0:10:43.000
<v Speaker 1>to say that shareholders haven't loved that, if you could

0:10:43.040 --> 0:10:44.840
<v Speaker 1>just look at the stock price for that. But how

0:10:44.920 --> 0:10:47.880
<v Speaker 1>is it going over at Unity? What is the response

0:10:47.960 --> 0:10:50.720
<v Speaker 1>been like from investors? From employees or they on board.

0:10:52.920 --> 0:10:55.240
<v Speaker 1>Well for Unity, you know, they're a bad projects that

0:10:55.280 --> 0:10:57.880
<v Speaker 1>have started. They've had projects that have stopped the company

0:10:57.880 --> 0:11:02.600
<v Speaker 1>and CEO addressed to staff in an internal memo before

0:11:02.640 --> 0:11:08.720
<v Speaker 1>our story published saying, you know, UM, projects start and stop. UM,

0:11:08.960 --> 0:11:12.560
<v Speaker 1>they don't always complete themselves. UM. You know this is

0:11:12.720 --> 0:11:17.080
<v Speaker 1>something that's at early stages. So it definitely is early

0:11:17.160 --> 0:11:19.400
<v Speaker 1>days to the Metaverse, and we don't quite know yet

0:11:19.400 --> 0:11:23.240
<v Speaker 1>what is going to happen there. UM. But the question

0:11:23.520 --> 0:11:25.840
<v Speaker 1>this week is, you know, with all the layoffs at Meta,

0:11:25.960 --> 0:11:28.079
<v Speaker 1>what's going to happen with other companies that are also

0:11:28.080 --> 0:11:31.560
<v Speaker 1>operating in the metaverse space or trying to writ I mean,

0:11:31.640 --> 0:11:35.400
<v Speaker 1>what's going to come of all these heavy, heavy investments. Um,

0:11:35.440 --> 0:11:38.839
<v Speaker 1>when we're already starting to see that many companies, perhaps

0:11:38.920 --> 0:11:43.040
<v Speaker 1>over higher got too excited. Okay, so there's the challenges

0:11:43.080 --> 0:11:45.720
<v Speaker 1>of actually building the metaverse and and what that looks

0:11:45.760 --> 0:11:48.560
<v Speaker 1>like and what those applications are could look like. I'd

0:11:48.640 --> 0:11:50.800
<v Speaker 1>like to come back to that. But the other thing

0:11:50.880 --> 0:11:53.680
<v Speaker 1>that UM was was pretty juicy in the story was

0:11:54.000 --> 0:11:57.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, there's there's also the what what Ricky Tellio

0:11:57.760 --> 0:11:59.439
<v Speaker 1>is like in real life? So would you guys learn

0:11:59.480 --> 0:12:04.240
<v Speaker 1>on that front. You Yeah, John Riccotello is UM controversial

0:12:04.280 --> 0:12:07.680
<v Speaker 1>for for several reasons, one being that he is not known.

0:12:08.520 --> 0:12:13.640
<v Speaker 1>He has known for for sometimes really catching people in

0:12:13.760 --> 0:12:17.400
<v Speaker 1>unexpected ways during meetings. And you know, if you get

0:12:17.440 --> 0:12:20.240
<v Speaker 1>his attention and you hold his attention, great, If you don't,

0:12:20.640 --> 0:12:22.839
<v Speaker 1>you're gonna hear about it in ways that some people

0:12:22.840 --> 0:12:27.880
<v Speaker 1>can find unpleasant. Um. You know, sometimes they're shouting, sometimes

0:12:27.920 --> 0:12:31.800
<v Speaker 1>there's some really brushed talk going on. And then notably,

0:12:32.640 --> 0:12:34.520
<v Speaker 1>John held a meeting a couple of years ago in

0:12:34.600 --> 0:12:36.640
<v Speaker 1>his office where he shared with staff in the a

0:12:36.800 --> 0:12:39.040
<v Speaker 1>dream of their office that he had been dating the

0:12:39.040 --> 0:12:42.840
<v Speaker 1>head of HR at the company. And that made that

0:12:42.920 --> 0:12:46.280
<v Speaker 1>made a number of employees we spoke with uncomfortable because

0:12:46.840 --> 0:12:49.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, who do you report any personnel issues too?

0:12:49.880 --> 0:12:53.840
<v Speaker 1>If the head of DHR is dating the CEO UM

0:12:53.960 --> 0:12:56.559
<v Speaker 1>the company said that he had reported his relationship to

0:12:56.640 --> 0:13:00.160
<v Speaker 1>the board, that it was above water. Um that out

0:13:00.160 --> 0:13:03.400
<v Speaker 1>of HR lets just Brown eventually less the company and

0:13:03.440 --> 0:13:06.959
<v Speaker 1>they've since married. Um. But it did strike a lot

0:13:07.000 --> 0:13:11.920
<v Speaker 1>of folks as something unconventional and less not great taste

0:13:11.920 --> 0:13:16.760
<v Speaker 1>in some employees. Now, okay, well it's interesting, right, So Okay,

0:13:16.800 --> 0:13:20.240
<v Speaker 1>back to the metaverse. UM, when you know, what could

0:13:20.280 --> 0:13:23.280
<v Speaker 1>this look like? To give him just a little bit

0:13:23.320 --> 0:13:26.360
<v Speaker 1>of credit for like what you know, this is the

0:13:26.360 --> 0:13:30.480
<v Speaker 1>future future getting to the future sometimes a little bumpy,

0:13:30.559 --> 0:13:34.040
<v Speaker 1>but best case scenario, what is Unity potentially look like?

0:13:35.520 --> 0:13:38.319
<v Speaker 1>Best cass scenario for them would be UNIT is involved

0:13:38.360 --> 0:13:42.480
<v Speaker 1>in creating these these digital worlds already right, um and

0:13:42.600 --> 0:13:46.520
<v Speaker 1>helping the creators monetize them. And UM, in the best

0:13:46.559 --> 0:13:49.480
<v Speaker 1>case world, they'll be involved that and what John calls

0:13:49.960 --> 0:13:53.320
<v Speaker 1>uh sort of like the three D digital world, which

0:13:53.360 --> 0:13:56.320
<v Speaker 1>which is the metaverse as we've been saying, UM. And

0:13:56.440 --> 0:13:59.400
<v Speaker 1>so you know, they see themselves as if this thing

0:13:59.480 --> 0:14:02.600
<v Speaker 1>really take soft, they'll be front and center in helping

0:14:02.640 --> 0:14:06.440
<v Speaker 1>to build those spaces and help people monetize them. Um.

0:14:06.559 --> 0:14:08.840
<v Speaker 1>And and as we know on the Internet, ads are

0:14:08.840 --> 0:14:13.679
<v Speaker 1>a huge portion of you know, how people make money UM,

0:14:13.720 --> 0:14:16.439
<v Speaker 1>and they see themselves as really capitalizing on that. At

0:14:16.440 --> 0:14:20.440
<v Speaker 1>the same time, they're looking at, you know, applications that

0:14:20.520 --> 0:14:25.080
<v Speaker 1>and they've touted applications to our reporting team that aren't

0:14:25.120 --> 0:14:28.200
<v Speaker 1>necessarily even related to things like games. For example, they

0:14:28.240 --> 0:14:30.880
<v Speaker 1>said an architecture firm was using their help to design

0:14:30.920 --> 0:14:33.800
<v Speaker 1>a stadium alright, guys, we've gotta leave it there. Thank

0:14:33.840 --> 0:14:36.400
<v Speaker 1>you to Joel Webber and prey on on on one

0:14:36.440 --> 0:14:39.800
<v Speaker 1>of gaming's most heated executives, crashing the metaverse. You can

0:14:39.800 --> 0:14:43.000
<v Speaker 1>find that in the latest issue of Bloomberg Business Week.

0:14:43.240 --> 0:14:48.360
<v Speaker 1>And this is Bloomberg Business Week on Bloomberg Radio. You're

0:14:48.440 --> 0:14:52.400
<v Speaker 1>listening to Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Messer and Bloomberg

0:14:52.480 --> 0:14:56.640
<v Speaker 1>Quick Takes Tim Stinovic on Bloomberg Radio. Let's get back

0:14:56.640 --> 0:14:59.120
<v Speaker 1>to crypto. It's my favorite topic. It's the story of

0:14:59.160 --> 0:15:02.960
<v Speaker 1>the day f t X filing for Chapter eleven bankruptcy.

0:15:03.000 --> 0:15:04.920
<v Speaker 1>We're going to dive into that with Timothy Totally. He

0:15:05.080 --> 0:15:08.960
<v Speaker 1>is chief executive officer at zell Core Technologies. That's a

0:15:09.040 --> 0:15:13.400
<v Speaker 1>multi asset ecosystem that helps investors navigate all major exchanges

0:15:13.440 --> 0:15:18.520
<v Speaker 1>and blockchains. Timothy joins us on zoom from Boston. And

0:15:18.720 --> 0:15:21.720
<v Speaker 1>when we think about the events of this week, I've

0:15:21.720 --> 0:15:25.800
<v Speaker 1>heard it described as a Lehman event in n Ron moment.

0:15:25.880 --> 0:15:29.480
<v Speaker 1>I've heard some describe it as an extinction event. Timothy,

0:15:29.520 --> 0:15:33.400
<v Speaker 1>how would you describe it? Well, thanks for having me on.

0:15:33.720 --> 0:15:36.400
<v Speaker 1>I think I would. I would probably describe it as

0:15:36.440 --> 0:15:39.240
<v Speaker 1>a lot of short term pain, but long term it's

0:15:39.840 --> 0:15:41.920
<v Speaker 1>it's going to get blockchain back to where it was

0:15:41.920 --> 0:15:44.840
<v Speaker 1>supposed to be right, which is a really high level

0:15:44.880 --> 0:15:50.120
<v Speaker 1>of transparency, and to eliminate a lot of this counterparty

0:15:50.240 --> 0:15:54.760
<v Speaker 1>dealings that were behind you know, closed room arrangements, and

0:15:54.800 --> 0:15:59.600
<v Speaker 1>that's this isn't yet another example of that happening. Um.

0:15:59.640 --> 0:16:03.080
<v Speaker 1>I think the other big issues are relates to FTX

0:16:03.120 --> 0:16:07.120
<v Speaker 1>and and Alameda Research. They participated in somewhere in the

0:16:07.120 --> 0:16:11.320
<v Speaker 1>neighborhood of three companies invested in three D companies either

0:16:11.400 --> 0:16:15.000
<v Speaker 1>directly or they held their treasuries. So there's gonna be

0:16:15.000 --> 0:16:18.960
<v Speaker 1>a lot of impact here both in these projects. And

0:16:18.920 --> 0:16:22.840
<v Speaker 1>the other thing is there's a lot of counterparty. Uh,

0:16:22.960 --> 0:16:26.520
<v Speaker 1>the biggest counterparties to most of these exchanges are other exchanges.

0:16:26.840 --> 0:16:29.840
<v Speaker 1>So wouldn't surprise me next week to see another shoe

0:16:29.880 --> 0:16:33.720
<v Speaker 1>to drop. What would that shoe look like? Like? How

0:16:33.760 --> 0:16:36.920
<v Speaker 1>do we know where the contagion actually might end? I

0:16:36.960 --> 0:16:38.720
<v Speaker 1>mean you might say, oh, well, people should have known

0:16:38.720 --> 0:16:41.200
<v Speaker 1>the risks, but even Scaramucci was like, I feel duped,

0:16:41.240 --> 0:16:47.120
<v Speaker 1>I feel betrayed. Yeah, I don't. I wouldn't even want

0:16:47.160 --> 0:16:51.320
<v Speaker 1>to speculate to guess where other exchanges but I'll just

0:16:51.360 --> 0:16:52.920
<v Speaker 1>give you example. And by the way, I don't think

0:16:52.920 --> 0:16:55.760
<v Speaker 1>either one of these are exchanges are in trouble binance

0:16:55.800 --> 0:16:59.480
<v Speaker 1>and coin based, but the biggest counterparties of each one

0:16:59.520 --> 0:17:04.120
<v Speaker 1>of those is each other. So uh, there's more transactions

0:17:04.119 --> 0:17:07.240
<v Speaker 1>between each other than anybody else. So I would probably

0:17:07.280 --> 0:17:10.480
<v Speaker 1>look at other places, other exchanges that have in the

0:17:10.560 --> 0:17:13.680
<v Speaker 1>past had a lot of historical transaction has been big

0:17:13.720 --> 0:17:17.439
<v Speaker 1>counterparties of FTX, and so, I mean, one of the

0:17:17.440 --> 0:17:20.600
<v Speaker 1>pushbacks that I've seen is that you know, this is

0:17:20.640 --> 0:17:24.320
<v Speaker 1>what happens when you trust a centralized exchange. This is

0:17:24.320 --> 0:17:27.400
<v Speaker 1>supposed to be decentralized finance. There's not supposed to be

0:17:27.880 --> 0:17:32.040
<v Speaker 1>this level of interconnection centrality. I mean, where do you

0:17:32.119 --> 0:17:36.000
<v Speaker 1>fall on that I don't know. Is this is this

0:17:36.119 --> 0:17:39.720
<v Speaker 1>sort of revealing the promise of defy as a myth

0:17:39.800 --> 0:17:42.920
<v Speaker 1>or would you probably not go that far? I would

0:17:42.920 --> 0:17:46.639
<v Speaker 1>say it's reviewed. I think this is probably the biggest misnomer.

0:17:47.320 --> 0:17:51.600
<v Speaker 1>These centralized exchanges are traditional finance with a crypto mask.

0:17:52.280 --> 0:17:55.280
<v Speaker 1>Um they're the same old thing where they have their

0:17:55.320 --> 0:18:00.280
<v Speaker 1>own proprietary database where they track what they owe you

0:18:00.480 --> 0:18:02.960
<v Speaker 1>and what they owe other parties. Um, that's not what

0:18:03.040 --> 0:18:06.480
<v Speaker 1>blockchain and defy was intended to be. It's that the

0:18:06.560 --> 0:18:10.560
<v Speaker 1>blockchain technology is for the first time at scale to

0:18:10.680 --> 0:18:12.800
<v Speaker 1>have the technology for you to have a one on

0:18:12.800 --> 0:18:16.560
<v Speaker 1>one relationship directly to your assets. So I think this

0:18:16.720 --> 0:18:19.720
<v Speaker 1>is very good for DEFY and crypto and the long run.

0:18:20.000 --> 0:18:24.800
<v Speaker 1>You know, our company believes strongly in non custodian self custody,

0:18:24.880 --> 0:18:29.159
<v Speaker 1>and so this is another validation as to why I

0:18:29.200 --> 0:18:31.240
<v Speaker 1>believe it's the right way to go and that on

0:18:31.480 --> 0:18:34.720
<v Speaker 1>chain processing is is the way to go. Most of

0:18:34.760 --> 0:18:37.720
<v Speaker 1>the problems with FTX have been as a result of

0:18:37.720 --> 0:18:41.560
<v Speaker 1>off chain processing. So at the end of the day,

0:18:41.720 --> 0:18:45.479
<v Speaker 1>do these kind of exchanges become thanks do they compend

0:18:45.720 --> 0:18:48.359
<v Speaker 1>brokerage firms? Like? Is that what it's eventually going to

0:18:48.440 --> 0:18:51.400
<v Speaker 1>have to in some ways look like? I think it's

0:18:51.400 --> 0:18:57.440
<v Speaker 1>gonna be a hybrid environment where you have both defied

0:18:57.640 --> 0:19:02.639
<v Speaker 1>decentralized organization and some kind of centralized but they're gonna

0:19:02.640 --> 0:19:06.080
<v Speaker 1>have to be regulated. And the reality is, you know, uh,

0:19:06.119 --> 0:19:09.000
<v Speaker 1>these central efed changes in crypto today are very there

0:19:09.720 --> 0:19:13.440
<v Speaker 1>anomalous to the exchanges that we all think of today, Fidelity,

0:19:13.440 --> 0:19:16.720
<v Speaker 1>Schwab or whoever. It's just that the ladder are very

0:19:16.760 --> 0:19:21.200
<v Speaker 1>regulated by you know, US entities and international entities. That's

0:19:21.240 --> 0:19:24.639
<v Speaker 1>not the case with crypto. So we're gonna have to

0:19:24.640 --> 0:19:29.439
<v Speaker 1>move to more more regulations. But uh, defy and self

0:19:29.480 --> 0:19:31.320
<v Speaker 1>custody is going to be a big part of the future.

0:19:32.160 --> 0:19:36.639
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk about institutions and whether this really scares away

0:19:36.760 --> 0:19:39.280
<v Speaker 1>sort of the trad five players, because again, if I

0:19:39.280 --> 0:19:42.120
<v Speaker 1>go back to a year ago, I've found myself wanting

0:19:42.160 --> 0:19:44.280
<v Speaker 1>to go back in time often this week. But let's

0:19:44.320 --> 0:19:45.720
<v Speaker 1>go back to a year ago. We were close to

0:19:45.760 --> 0:19:48.080
<v Speaker 1>a record high on bitcoin, and if I think about

0:19:48.080 --> 0:19:50.840
<v Speaker 1>the rallying cry of the bulls at that time, it

0:19:50.960 --> 0:19:54.760
<v Speaker 1>was sort of this institutional embrace. You know, we saw

0:19:54.800 --> 0:19:58.040
<v Speaker 1>the launch of the first US Bitcoin futures e t

0:19:58.240 --> 0:20:01.159
<v Speaker 1>F that was supposed to usher in a whole class

0:20:01.160 --> 0:20:03.240
<v Speaker 1>of investors who had never really been able to get

0:20:03.280 --> 0:20:07.639
<v Speaker 1>access to the crypto industry before. But I mean, after

0:20:07.680 --> 0:20:11.000
<v Speaker 1>the events of the past week, the past few months,

0:20:11.040 --> 0:20:12.840
<v Speaker 1>the summer, you know, you think back to what we

0:20:12.880 --> 0:20:16.280
<v Speaker 1>saw with three Hours Capital even I mean, is it

0:20:16.760 --> 0:20:20.840
<v Speaker 1>have you seen any indication that institutions are rattled here

0:20:20.880 --> 0:20:24.280
<v Speaker 1>and they're not coming back? Um? I don't think so.

0:20:24.359 --> 0:20:27.960
<v Speaker 1>If you look at what's happened in the last ninety days.

0:20:27.960 --> 0:20:33.320
<v Speaker 1>In particular, I think institutions committed to being all in UM.

0:20:33.840 --> 0:20:36.199
<v Speaker 1>I think we just get we get hung up on

0:20:36.320 --> 0:20:42.679
<v Speaker 1>these um UH the volatility of this asset class, in

0:20:42.720 --> 0:20:46.320
<v Speaker 1>particular about the it's the technology that's gonna win the

0:20:46.400 --> 0:20:50.359
<v Speaker 1>day at the end of the day, and crypto often

0:20:50.400 --> 0:20:52.320
<v Speaker 1>refer to it as we're in the first inning of

0:20:52.440 --> 0:20:55.280
<v Speaker 1>the uh, the first batter of the first inning of

0:20:55.320 --> 0:20:58.040
<v Speaker 1>the game. You wouldn't pick finance as a use case

0:20:58.080 --> 0:21:01.840
<v Speaker 1>if you had choice, right, we are right. There's plenty

0:21:01.880 --> 0:21:04.160
<v Speaker 1>of other use cases and that's why I think traditional

0:21:04.200 --> 0:21:07.480
<v Speaker 1>finance will move here. UM. It's a much more economical

0:21:07.560 --> 0:21:10.960
<v Speaker 1>solution for them UM. And and they're showing that over

0:21:11.000 --> 0:21:14.040
<v Speaker 1>the last ninety days in particular, you know, whether it's

0:21:14.040 --> 0:21:19.280
<v Speaker 1>Fidelity offering direct trading to their customers, etcetera. I don't

0:21:19.320 --> 0:21:22.680
<v Speaker 1>think they're going away. I think we've gotta live with there.

0:21:23.200 --> 0:21:25.960
<v Speaker 1>Timothy Telly, CEO of zel Core joining us there and

0:21:25.960 --> 0:21:28.120
<v Speaker 1>the collapse of f t X, what it means where

0:21:28.119 --> 0:21:30.080
<v Speaker 1>they broader industry kind of women get our feet out

0:21:30.080 --> 0:21:34.320
<v Speaker 1>from under us of this crisis. This is Bloomberg, this

0:21:34.600 --> 0:21:38.360
<v Speaker 1>is Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Messer and Bloomberg Quick

0:21:38.400 --> 0:21:42.800
<v Speaker 1>Takes Tim Stinovic on Bloomberg Radio less than fifteen minutes

0:21:42.800 --> 0:21:46.320
<v Speaker 1>to the closer. Trading on an insanely wild week here

0:21:46.440 --> 0:21:49.199
<v Speaker 1>in the United States. You have the SMP continuing it's

0:21:49.320 --> 0:21:51.520
<v Speaker 1>rally up by about full one percentage point, the NASTACK

0:21:51.600 --> 0:21:54.240
<v Speaker 1>up two percentage points. We had the biggest rally in

0:21:54.320 --> 0:21:56.719
<v Speaker 1>stocks yesterday that we've seen in two years. We were

0:21:56.760 --> 0:21:59.800
<v Speaker 1>able to build on that. You had you mish you

0:21:59.840 --> 0:22:03.320
<v Speaker 1>know see Michigan Sentiment Index lower than estimated, inflation expectations

0:22:03.359 --> 0:22:05.520
<v Speaker 1>a little bit higher, yet stocks were able to continue.

0:22:05.840 --> 0:22:08.600
<v Speaker 1>Uh their rally also significant as you had the Bloomberg

0:22:08.640 --> 0:22:12.400
<v Speaker 1>Dollar Index being able to drop again. Um, euro was stronger,

0:22:12.480 --> 0:22:15.639
<v Speaker 1>every G ten currency was stronger, the dollar really taking

0:22:15.640 --> 0:22:18.560
<v Speaker 1>it on the chin. Is this a real reversal that

0:22:18.600 --> 0:22:21.000
<v Speaker 1>we're finally seeing in the markets. Yes, I know we

0:22:21.080 --> 0:22:23.159
<v Speaker 1>have crypto crashing, I know we have f t X,

0:22:23.200 --> 0:22:26.240
<v Speaker 1>and that's one huge story. But the other is are

0:22:26.240 --> 0:22:27.760
<v Speaker 1>we finally going to see a FED that's going to

0:22:27.840 --> 0:22:30.639
<v Speaker 1>pair back those rate hikes or is the market in

0:22:30.680 --> 0:22:32.920
<v Speaker 1>a bit of a fake out. So let's get more

0:22:33.040 --> 0:22:36.440
<v Speaker 1>on this with Ryan Dietrich, the chief market strategist over

0:22:36.480 --> 0:22:39.040
<v Speaker 1>at the Carson Group. Ryan, what do you think the

0:22:39.119 --> 0:22:42.040
<v Speaker 1>market is pricing in right now with the kind of

0:22:42.080 --> 0:22:45.359
<v Speaker 1>moves that we've seen over the last forty eight hours. Yeah, guys,

0:22:45.400 --> 0:22:48.000
<v Speaker 1>First of all, things are having in happy veterans date everybody,

0:22:48.040 --> 0:22:51.719
<v Speaker 1>So listen, listen this historic move. I mean, here's something

0:22:51.760 --> 0:22:54.000
<v Speaker 1>to think about, guys. Assuming the SUPs up one percent

0:22:54.119 --> 0:22:56.240
<v Speaker 1>today and I know we're close, there's could be four

0:22:56.280 --> 0:23:01.280
<v Speaker 1>straight Friday's the SMP gained that's never happened in history. Okay,

0:23:01.320 --> 0:23:03.119
<v Speaker 1>we've got a lot of these never happened in history

0:23:03.160 --> 0:23:06.000
<v Speaker 1>type of deal, just yesterday's five bounce. But here's what

0:23:06.080 --> 0:23:09.360
<v Speaker 1>we think right Sure, short term overbought after this rally,

0:23:09.440 --> 0:23:12.840
<v Speaker 1>but we are optimistic. We made another major market low

0:23:12.960 --> 0:23:17.000
<v Speaker 1>in October. Six of the last seventeen bear markets ended

0:23:17.080 --> 0:23:21.240
<v Speaker 1>in October. This could be another one. And again, expectations

0:23:21.240 --> 0:23:23.840
<v Speaker 1>are so low that any good news like we saw

0:23:23.960 --> 0:23:26.919
<v Speaker 1>yesterday can continue to kind of push this beach ball higher,

0:23:28.040 --> 0:23:31.360
<v Speaker 1>push this speech ball higher. Could do like that. It's

0:23:31.400 --> 0:23:33.960
<v Speaker 1>a bit more cheerful than some of the phrases we

0:23:34.160 --> 0:23:37.119
<v Speaker 1>normally here, like dead cat bounce, that's one of my

0:23:37.200 --> 0:23:40.640
<v Speaker 1>least favorite bear market rally. A lot of animals. Nice,

0:23:40.640 --> 0:23:42.880
<v Speaker 1>get a beach ball in there, But I mean, talk

0:23:42.960 --> 0:23:47.240
<v Speaker 1>to us about that. Is it one of those horrible phrases.

0:23:47.280 --> 0:23:49.840
<v Speaker 1>Are we just pushing this speech ball higher temporarily or

0:23:49.880 --> 0:23:54.080
<v Speaker 1>they're still loads to be plumbed in the remainder of

0:23:54.800 --> 0:23:58.200
<v Speaker 1>two Now, Yeah, we're optimistic that the lowds been made.

0:23:58.240 --> 0:24:00.320
<v Speaker 1>Like I said, you know, you think about it. November

0:24:00.440 --> 0:24:03.560
<v Speaker 1>the month where now is the best month last ten years,

0:24:03.640 --> 0:24:07.119
<v Speaker 1>the best month in nineteen fifty. We know December historically strong.

0:24:07.200 --> 0:24:09.639
<v Speaker 1>Those are just seasonality things. But let's take a second

0:24:09.680 --> 0:24:11.480
<v Speaker 1>here and think about this. This is a mid term year.

0:24:11.880 --> 0:24:14.240
<v Speaker 1>Mid term years tend to bottom late in the year.

0:24:14.359 --> 0:24:16.679
<v Speaker 1>This one probably bottom in October twelfth, in our opinion,

0:24:17.040 --> 0:24:19.760
<v Speaker 1>one year off those lows. The SMP going back to

0:24:19.800 --> 0:24:22.560
<v Speaker 1>World War Two is higher thirty percent on average, a

0:24:22.680 --> 0:24:24.400
<v Speaker 1>year off the mid two year lows. So we're about

0:24:24.440 --> 0:24:27.359
<v Speaker 1>ten percent off the lows right now. Ballpark. Um. You know,

0:24:27.440 --> 0:24:29.680
<v Speaker 1>I think it's just important for investors to know if

0:24:29.680 --> 0:24:31.399
<v Speaker 1>we made a new load like we think we did,

0:24:31.640 --> 0:24:35.000
<v Speaker 1>there could be some decent, real, real decent opportunities the

0:24:35.000 --> 0:24:37.480
<v Speaker 1>rest of this year and into next year. So here's

0:24:37.560 --> 0:24:39.960
<v Speaker 1>I'm trying to understand where no one is saying that

0:24:40.000 --> 0:24:42.960
<v Speaker 1>the Fed is done with their hiking cycle. But we

0:24:43.160 --> 0:24:45.159
<v Speaker 1>feel that if they go to five percent in the

0:24:45.280 --> 0:24:48.280
<v Speaker 1>terminal rate, they just get there slower. That that justifies

0:24:48.320 --> 0:24:51.520
<v Speaker 1>the kind of move that we're seeing. Yeah. Different, that's

0:24:51.520 --> 0:24:54.400
<v Speaker 1>a difficult question. But here's how we see it. Fifteen

0:24:54.520 --> 0:24:58.320
<v Speaker 1>months ago, the Fed saw like one rate hike this year.

0:24:58.400 --> 0:25:00.679
<v Speaker 1>All right, we know what's happened. I'm not saying the

0:25:00.680 --> 0:25:02.919
<v Speaker 1>other Fed's perfect. I'm just saying the Fed is not perfect.

0:25:02.960 --> 0:25:05.600
<v Speaker 1>They're not infallible. The Fed got awfully hawk ish. The

0:25:05.640 --> 0:25:07.600
<v Speaker 1>Fed isn't always right on these things. We think the

0:25:07.640 --> 0:25:10.600
<v Speaker 1>markets priced in so much hawky ignish all these cuts,

0:25:10.600 --> 0:25:14.040
<v Speaker 1>I'm sorry, all these hikes. And yesterday's inflation data with

0:25:14.240 --> 0:25:17.280
<v Speaker 1>car use cars down ten percent, the largest monthly drop

0:25:17.359 --> 0:25:19.600
<v Speaker 1>ever in rents. These are things that are saying, listen,

0:25:19.640 --> 0:25:22.760
<v Speaker 1>inflation is gonna start likely coming back sooner or more

0:25:22.800 --> 0:25:25.400
<v Speaker 1>than people think. That could give the Fed, the Fed,

0:25:25.480 --> 0:25:28.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, leeway not to be so wildly aggressive. And again,

0:25:28.840 --> 0:25:30.920
<v Speaker 1>maybe one more hike com you know, this year, maybe

0:25:30.960 --> 0:25:33.400
<v Speaker 1>fifty basis points, and they take a look around and realize,

0:25:33.760 --> 0:25:35.760
<v Speaker 1>you know, maybe things are okay. We gave the patient

0:25:35.840 --> 0:25:39.560
<v Speaker 1>a lot of medicine, and inflation is indeed coming back down. Okay,

0:25:39.720 --> 0:25:43.000
<v Speaker 1>let's say things really are okay, Ryan, and inflation really

0:25:43.040 --> 0:25:46.120
<v Speaker 1>has crusted. The FED maybe can take its foot off

0:25:46.119 --> 0:25:49.399
<v Speaker 1>the pedal, maybe sooner rather than layer later. What is

0:25:49.400 --> 0:25:53.840
<v Speaker 1>the biggest beneficiary of that when you look cross asset? Yeah, well,

0:25:53.880 --> 0:25:55.959
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I think easy to answer stocks. I mean,

0:25:56.000 --> 0:25:57.239
<v Speaker 1>you really you think about it. I mean, we had

0:25:57.240 --> 0:25:59.400
<v Speaker 1>a twenty five per cent bear market, right you look

0:25:59.440 --> 0:26:01.320
<v Speaker 1>at let's look at D two for a second. Eighty two,

0:26:01.440 --> 0:26:04.399
<v Speaker 1>there was a twenty seven percent bear market in twenty

0:26:04.440 --> 0:26:07.760
<v Speaker 1>months as soon as inflation started the roll over back

0:26:07.800 --> 0:26:10.760
<v Speaker 1>in late eighty two. Within three and a half months,

0:26:10.800 --> 0:26:12.679
<v Speaker 1>the SMP made new highs. Now, we're not saying we're

0:26:12.680 --> 0:26:14.200
<v Speaker 1>gonna make new highs in three and a half months

0:26:14.200 --> 0:26:16.639
<v Speaker 1>this time, but we are saying, you know that that

0:26:16.760 --> 0:26:19.000
<v Speaker 1>things are really beaten down and in the economy, we

0:26:19.040 --> 0:26:21.760
<v Speaker 1>don't do a recession, right the consumers so strong, earnings

0:26:21.760 --> 0:26:24.199
<v Speaker 1>aren't great, but they're still saying, not a recession. You know,

0:26:24.240 --> 0:26:26.600
<v Speaker 1>the market has priced in a recession in a lot

0:26:26.600 --> 0:26:28.720
<v Speaker 1>of places and housing is in a recession, but the

0:26:28.760 --> 0:26:30.440
<v Speaker 1>rest of the economy is not in our view, and

0:26:30.480 --> 0:26:33.879
<v Speaker 1>we think again the consumers strong says, hey, your average

0:26:33.880 --> 0:26:37.960
<v Speaker 1>bear market without a recession pulled back. We just pulled back.

0:26:39.080 --> 0:26:42.000
<v Speaker 1>It didn't feel average at all. Unaware, but if you

0:26:42.000 --> 0:26:45.639
<v Speaker 1>look at history, maybe it was if the rally like

0:26:45.680 --> 0:26:47.800
<v Speaker 1>we had off COVID lows and just catching our breath

0:26:47.800 --> 0:26:50.119
<v Speaker 1>now and again there's those strong seasonals with the Fed's

0:26:50.160 --> 0:26:52.560
<v Speaker 1>gonna be more dublish with an economy better than expected.

0:26:53.000 --> 0:26:54.720
<v Speaker 1>Maybe you know, stocks are still the place to be

0:26:55.080 --> 0:26:57.439
<v Speaker 1>going up all month. That's our that's our cakes. So

0:26:57.480 --> 0:27:00.399
<v Speaker 1>where so what's over price the risk esson that you

0:27:00.440 --> 0:27:03.119
<v Speaker 1>want to buy. Yeah, well, we still don't like the

0:27:03.200 --> 0:27:04.840
<v Speaker 1>large cap tech names that come on with you guys

0:27:04.880 --> 0:27:06.640
<v Speaker 1>for a while, saying that those are the biggest ones

0:27:06.640 --> 0:27:08.840
<v Speaker 1>that are bouncing. We need stick with some of those cyclicals,

0:27:08.840 --> 0:27:11.840
<v Speaker 1>your industrial holes, right, your healthcare, your energy names, some

0:27:11.920 --> 0:27:13.280
<v Speaker 1>of the some of the names that kind of brought

0:27:13.280 --> 0:27:14.760
<v Speaker 1>you to the to the dance, so to speak. And

0:27:14.760 --> 0:27:17.080
<v Speaker 1>also small caps, just small caps did not violate their

0:27:17.119 --> 0:27:20.040
<v Speaker 1>June lows in October. There's some relative strength. They're they're

0:27:20.040 --> 0:27:22.080
<v Speaker 1>really cheap relative to large and there's a lot more

0:27:22.119 --> 0:27:23.800
<v Speaker 1>of them, right, there's a lot more stocks going up

0:27:23.840 --> 0:27:25.920
<v Speaker 1>now than there were over the summer, which is good.

0:27:26.000 --> 0:27:28.400
<v Speaker 1>So cyclical value and small caps are two areas we've

0:27:28.440 --> 0:27:31.560
<v Speaker 1>liked and continue to like into next year. Okay, that's

0:27:31.560 --> 0:27:35.280
<v Speaker 1>what you like. What don't you like? What's ugly here? Yeah? Well,

0:27:35.280 --> 0:27:37.480
<v Speaker 1>always stick with bonds. I mean how bonds by bounce

0:27:37.520 --> 0:27:39.120
<v Speaker 1>a little bit here, but I mean we still think

0:27:39.160 --> 0:27:41.960
<v Speaker 1>this this this inflation that's here, rates a little higher,

0:27:42.160 --> 0:27:44.400
<v Speaker 1>potentially could stick around a little longer. So we still

0:27:44.400 --> 0:27:47.040
<v Speaker 1>say maybe avoid you know, kind of avoid bonds here,

0:27:47.160 --> 0:27:49.200
<v Speaker 1>and you know, things like gold and some of those

0:27:49.240 --> 0:27:51.360
<v Speaker 1>areas we're not. We don't like some of those more

0:27:51.480 --> 0:27:56.280
<v Speaker 1>pure defensive plays. Again, we think really equities are the best.

0:27:56.480 --> 0:27:57.800
<v Speaker 1>You don't want to pick up a little bit of

0:27:57.880 --> 0:28:01.840
<v Speaker 1>yield on the tenure for ten years over pretty juicy.

0:28:01.960 --> 0:28:04.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean yeah, well, now you're right. And again we're

0:28:04.840 --> 0:28:07.399
<v Speaker 1>not saying outright avoid bonds or just at the money

0:28:07.440 --> 0:28:10.480
<v Speaker 1>that we run for our advisors here we at Carson Group,

0:28:10.520 --> 0:28:13.960
<v Speaker 1>we are we're just still underweight fixed income relative two stocks.

0:28:14.040 --> 0:28:15.520
<v Speaker 1>We think stocks do a lot better than four percent

0:28:15.560 --> 0:28:17.680
<v Speaker 1>The next in years. It's the best way to put it. Well,

0:28:17.680 --> 0:28:20.200
<v Speaker 1>what about if we do get that FED pause, maybe

0:28:20.200 --> 0:28:23.080
<v Speaker 1>even a FED pivot over the coming year, then would

0:28:23.080 --> 0:28:27.640
<v Speaker 1>you buy bonds? What would what would change your attitude? Yeah, well,

0:28:27.680 --> 0:28:29.719
<v Speaker 1>the way we have our bond structure right now, we've

0:28:29.720 --> 0:28:31.920
<v Speaker 1>shortened up duration right now. Maybe if we did get

0:28:31.920 --> 0:28:34.040
<v Speaker 1>a FED pivot, you could short you can expand your

0:28:34.080 --> 0:28:36.359
<v Speaker 1>duration a little bit. Maybe don't quite go to twenty

0:28:36.359 --> 0:28:38.800
<v Speaker 1>of your treasuries, but ten your treasuries are kind of

0:28:39.040 --> 0:28:40.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, kind of how we would how we do it.

0:28:40.880 --> 0:28:42.680
<v Speaker 1>But but still I think we just still think the

0:28:42.720 --> 0:28:45.840
<v Speaker 1>opportunity lies in inequities the next twelve months. Here, what

0:28:45.840 --> 0:28:47.760
<v Speaker 1>do you do with energy? Right now? It's had such

0:28:47.800 --> 0:28:49.640
<v Speaker 1>an amazing run. It doesn't seem to want to go

0:28:49.680 --> 0:28:52.560
<v Speaker 1>anywhere anytime soon. What do you do? Yeah, maybe you

0:28:52.600 --> 0:28:54.800
<v Speaker 1>can finally catch its breath right after the huge rally

0:28:54.840 --> 0:28:56.240
<v Speaker 1>that it's had. But I'll put it like this, we

0:28:56.280 --> 0:28:58.920
<v Speaker 1>still like energy. Any pullbacks, we'd buy it. Here's what

0:28:58.960 --> 0:29:01.239
<v Speaker 1>I like about it. It It makes up about five if

0:29:01.240 --> 0:29:04.440
<v Speaker 1>the SMP five It was over ten of the SMP

0:29:04.520 --> 0:29:07.520
<v Speaker 1>five hundred back in two thousand eight. This trend only

0:29:07.560 --> 0:29:09.720
<v Speaker 1>for two years now energies, maybe less than two years.

0:29:09.840 --> 0:29:12.040
<v Speaker 1>Energy has been going up relative to tech. You tend

0:29:12.080 --> 0:29:14.280
<v Speaker 1>to get these trends that last years. And I know

0:29:14.360 --> 0:29:16.120
<v Speaker 1>that sounds odd to a lot of people, but the

0:29:16.160 --> 0:29:18.720
<v Speaker 1>truth is these trends can last. So again, energy, it's

0:29:18.760 --> 0:29:20.480
<v Speaker 1>had a heck of a run. The least think gets

0:29:20.520 --> 0:29:22.360
<v Speaker 1>longer term next couple of years. It could still be

0:29:22.360 --> 0:29:24.160
<v Speaker 1>a group that could do quite well. You know. I

0:29:24.200 --> 0:29:26.440
<v Speaker 1>gotta say, it's interesting to hear that you're bullish on

0:29:26.560 --> 0:29:28.920
<v Speaker 1>energy when you marry that with your inflation view, that

0:29:29.000 --> 0:29:31.880
<v Speaker 1>maybe we have seen the crest, because usually I think

0:29:31.920 --> 0:29:36.360
<v Speaker 1>of energy as an inflation hedge. But maybe that's too simplistic.

0:29:36.400 --> 0:29:39.719
<v Speaker 1>Maybe I'm revealing myself here. No, you're right, I mean

0:29:39.720 --> 0:29:41.520
<v Speaker 1>there's there's a little bit of that there. And you

0:29:41.520 --> 0:29:43.440
<v Speaker 1>guys talked about the dollar a minute ago, right, I

0:29:43.440 --> 0:29:45.360
<v Speaker 1>mean we've all seen it, right, the dollar has had

0:29:45.400 --> 0:29:48.120
<v Speaker 1>a huge pullback. You know if the dollar pulls back, well,

0:29:48.160 --> 0:29:50.720
<v Speaker 1>what tends to benefit from those areas well? It is

0:29:50.760 --> 0:29:54.600
<v Speaker 1>your more materials and your potential energy. And honestly, of gold,

0:29:54.680 --> 0:29:56.520
<v Speaker 1>I said, we're not crazy about gold, but historically that

0:29:56.560 --> 0:29:58.280
<v Speaker 1>could do a little better. But a weaker dollar could

0:29:58.280 --> 0:30:01.160
<v Speaker 1>help material and energy for sure. Um, talk to me

0:30:01.200 --> 0:30:04.080
<v Speaker 1>a little bit about how you're understanding the next two months.

0:30:04.080 --> 0:30:05.960
<v Speaker 1>I heard that you said November tends to be good,

0:30:06.000 --> 0:30:08.600
<v Speaker 1>et cetera. How much of the price action that we're

0:30:08.600 --> 0:30:10.440
<v Speaker 1>going to see over the next eight weeks is going

0:30:10.480 --> 0:30:12.440
<v Speaker 1>to be the end of year book squaring. I mean

0:30:12.760 --> 0:30:15.200
<v Speaker 1>sort of rather than fundamental, we're just building on any

0:30:15.280 --> 0:30:18.200
<v Speaker 1>momentum because people got to sell the stuff by the stuff,

0:30:18.200 --> 0:30:21.760
<v Speaker 1>show their investors that they all this stuff. Yeah, well

0:30:21.840 --> 0:30:23.360
<v Speaker 1>it could be a good deal of that. That's a

0:30:23.400 --> 0:30:26.360
<v Speaker 1>great point because again, you know, in earlier in the

0:30:26.360 --> 0:30:28.600
<v Speaker 1>middle of October, you know, when the market was down,

0:30:29.440 --> 0:30:31.360
<v Speaker 1>nobody on dequities in right, we saw to put the

0:30:31.400 --> 0:30:33.400
<v Speaker 1>call ratio something like twenty year highs and puts the

0:30:33.400 --> 0:30:35.160
<v Speaker 1>call ratio as you look at how people are positioned.

0:30:35.200 --> 0:30:38.280
<v Speaker 1>Nobody was expecting an interview rally. Now we're getting some

0:30:38.400 --> 0:30:41.520
<v Speaker 1>of it, and they're absolutely could be that chase kind

0:30:41.520 --> 0:30:43.560
<v Speaker 1>of to the finish line. And you honestly kind of

0:30:43.600 --> 0:30:45.480
<v Speaker 1>see that a lot of times. And then then with

0:30:45.520 --> 0:30:48.360
<v Speaker 1>the FED that likely its pivoting with some better inflation data.

0:30:48.680 --> 0:30:51.360
<v Speaker 1>All of it kind of adds up to uh, potentially

0:30:51.400 --> 0:30:53.160
<v Speaker 1>you stock you know, a good deal higher than they

0:30:53.160 --> 0:30:55.360
<v Speaker 1>are right now by the time you know the New

0:30:55.440 --> 0:30:58.280
<v Speaker 1>Year's ball drops, Ryan, we haven't had a minute or

0:30:58.280 --> 0:31:01.080
<v Speaker 1>so left. I cannot let you go without asking about

0:31:01.120 --> 0:31:04.640
<v Speaker 1>crypto and some shape or form. I'm not gonna ask

0:31:04.680 --> 0:31:07.000
<v Speaker 1>for your bitcoin price target. But when you think about

0:31:07.040 --> 0:31:08.760
<v Speaker 1>the events of the past week, do you see any

0:31:08.800 --> 0:31:13.160
<v Speaker 1>spillover effects into traditional markets? Well, I'll tell you we

0:31:13.200 --> 0:31:15.000
<v Speaker 1>did two days ago, or guess to the election day

0:31:15.160 --> 0:31:17.280
<v Speaker 1>on Tuesday. We saw some of that. But I'll tell

0:31:17.320 --> 0:31:18.920
<v Speaker 1>you what you know. If you'd have told me that

0:31:18.960 --> 0:31:21.120
<v Speaker 1>socks are having their best week since June with the

0:31:21.160 --> 0:31:23.400
<v Speaker 1>disaster that we've seen with crypto this week, I don't

0:31:23.400 --> 0:31:24.680
<v Speaker 1>know if I would have believed you. But that's what's

0:31:24.680 --> 0:31:27.920
<v Speaker 1>happening right that's telling us the risk risk assets, specifically

0:31:27.960 --> 0:31:31.320
<v Speaker 1>equities are doing well and they're shaking off this extreme

0:31:31.360 --> 0:31:33.680
<v Speaker 1>negativity in crypto, and that's uh. I think it's one

0:31:33.720 --> 0:31:37.880
<v Speaker 1>more positive sign for investors to think that the lows

0:31:37.920 --> 0:31:41.720
<v Speaker 1>indeed like their introrequities. Real quick, what are you watching

0:31:41.760 --> 0:31:45.600
<v Speaker 1>next week? What's gonna be a catalyst here for you? Oh? Gee,

0:31:45.920 --> 0:31:48.160
<v Speaker 1>it's kind of We're heading into the end of earning

0:31:48.160 --> 0:31:49.680
<v Speaker 1>season and you know, I guess we're gonna start thinking

0:31:49.680 --> 0:31:52.600
<v Speaker 1>about eating some turkey. So it's hopefully we just catch

0:31:52.600 --> 0:31:54.840
<v Speaker 1>our breath. Honestly, after this big rally, we're gonna see

0:31:54.880 --> 0:31:56.320
<v Speaker 1>is how much of the rally we give back? Right,

0:31:56.360 --> 0:31:58.320
<v Speaker 1>we just kind of hang tough and catch our breath.

0:31:58.320 --> 0:32:01.480
<v Speaker 1>And historically the ladder half of Novembers when things are

0:32:01.680 --> 0:32:04.160
<v Speaker 1>historically stronger. So let's just catch our breath. Next week,

0:32:04.200 --> 0:32:07.400
<v Speaker 1>are ready some turkey and within to your rally will continue.

0:32:07.680 --> 0:32:09.520
<v Speaker 1>That sounds like a great plan. I'm going to take

0:32:09.560 --> 0:32:12.920
<v Speaker 1>you up on that. Thanks for listening to Bloomberg Business Week.

0:32:13.040 --> 0:32:16.600
<v Speaker 1>Download the podcast on iTunes, SoundCloud, or Bloomberg dot com,

0:32:16.640 --> 0:32:18.320
<v Speaker 1>and you can also listen to our radio show at

0:32:18.320 --> 0:32:21.400
<v Speaker 1>two pm Eastern on Bloomberg Radio or watch us on YouTube.

0:32:21.520 --> 0:32:23.000
<v Speaker 1>Search to Bloomberg Global News