WEBVTT - Ex-Treasury Secretary and Comptroller Attempts to Rescue NYCB

0:00:02.920 --> 0:00:11.360
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. This is Bloomberg Business

0:00:11.400 --> 0:00:14.640
<v Speaker 1>Wait inside from the reporters and editors who bring you

0:00:14.680 --> 0:00:19.000
<v Speaker 1>America's most trusted business magazine plus global business, finance and

0:00:19.079 --> 0:00:23.520
<v Speaker 1>tech news. The Bloomberg Business Week Podcast with Carol Messer

0:00:23.680 --> 0:00:26.480
<v Speaker 1>and Tim Stenebeck from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:27.840 --> 0:00:29.960
<v Speaker 2>Your Community Bank or Tim continues to be on our

0:00:30.040 --> 0:00:33.440
<v Speaker 2>radar because it's soaring again and there's a great story.

0:00:33.440 --> 0:00:35.440
<v Speaker 2>It's a most read story in the Bloomberg really giving

0:00:35.520 --> 0:00:39.199
<v Speaker 2>us some insight into the deal and kind of the

0:00:39.240 --> 0:00:42.760
<v Speaker 2>instant paper profit that these individuals are making.

0:00:42.880 --> 0:00:45.919
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, we're talking about individuals such as US Treasury Secretary

0:00:45.920 --> 0:00:48.919
<v Speaker 3>Steve Menushan, who along with his Liberty Strategic Capital, led

0:00:48.920 --> 0:00:51.720
<v Speaker 3>a group of investors that injected more than one billion

0:00:51.760 --> 0:00:55.760
<v Speaker 3>dollars into New York Community Bank. And this could only

0:00:55.840 --> 0:00:58.240
<v Speaker 3>be the beginning with more on the Menution playbook and

0:00:58.240 --> 0:01:00.200
<v Speaker 3>what is a most read story on the Bloomberg with

0:01:00.280 --> 0:01:04.440
<v Speaker 3>us as Bloomberg's Catherine Doherty, finance reporter off at Bloomberg

0:01:04.520 --> 0:01:07.040
<v Speaker 3>News here in our studio. So, Catherine, it was interesting

0:01:07.080 --> 0:01:09.200
<v Speaker 3>as this all played out yesterday Carol and I were

0:01:09.240 --> 0:01:11.280
<v Speaker 3>on air and the stock was halted multiple times. But

0:01:11.600 --> 0:01:15.080
<v Speaker 3>one thing that we did notice after our Bloomberg News

0:01:15.120 --> 0:01:17.240
<v Speaker 3>team broke the story was that by the time it

0:01:17.280 --> 0:01:20.040
<v Speaker 3>started trading again, it was above the price of two dollars,

0:01:20.520 --> 0:01:22.960
<v Speaker 3>which is the price where Manution and team were able

0:01:22.959 --> 0:01:23.560
<v Speaker 3>to buy in at.

0:01:23.720 --> 0:01:26.759
<v Speaker 4>That's right, they've already minted quite a profit on paper.

0:01:27.200 --> 0:01:30.520
<v Speaker 4>On paper, but it looks like it's holding out today.

0:01:30.959 --> 0:01:33.240
<v Speaker 4>So it's been twenty four hours or so, or as

0:01:33.240 --> 0:01:36.360
<v Speaker 4>we're getting to that point. So it's not to say

0:01:36.400 --> 0:01:41.840
<v Speaker 4>that this is a forever proven strategy. They're going to

0:01:41.880 --> 0:01:44.440
<v Speaker 4>have a lot of work to do. It's not just

0:01:44.560 --> 0:01:47.400
<v Speaker 4>the investment and the number, but it's actually how do

0:01:47.440 --> 0:01:50.200
<v Speaker 4>you turn this ship around and how do you get

0:01:50.240 --> 0:01:52.280
<v Speaker 4>your heads together and bring in the best of the

0:01:52.280 --> 0:01:54.720
<v Speaker 4>best to make sure that this bank has a future.

0:01:55.400 --> 0:02:00.400
<v Speaker 4>But the share price is reflecting investors' sentiment, a positive sentiment,

0:02:00.840 --> 0:02:04.040
<v Speaker 4>and their belief that these leaders and it's not just

0:02:04.080 --> 0:02:06.400
<v Speaker 4>about the money, it's the people that are behind it

0:02:06.840 --> 0:02:12.640
<v Speaker 4>that presumably the bet is that they will succeed in

0:02:12.720 --> 0:02:13.560
<v Speaker 4>turning the ship around.

0:02:13.639 --> 0:02:16.120
<v Speaker 2>Let's talk about that and the Minutian Steve Manushan playbook,

0:02:16.120 --> 0:02:17.720
<v Speaker 2>because this is what's interesting and this was some of

0:02:17.720 --> 0:02:19.880
<v Speaker 2>what we were getting yesterday, that these are people who

0:02:19.919 --> 0:02:23.200
<v Speaker 2>are respected investors, kind of know how to deal with

0:02:23.240 --> 0:02:26.160
<v Speaker 2>this kind of situation. What's the playbook? And let's kind

0:02:26.160 --> 0:02:28.959
<v Speaker 2>of maybe go backwards right to Indie Mac because right

0:02:29.080 --> 0:02:31.800
<v Speaker 2>kind of bringing the gang back together, it seems.

0:02:31.600 --> 0:02:35.320
<v Speaker 4>So back in two thousand and eight Indie Mac which

0:02:35.639 --> 0:02:40.079
<v Speaker 4>eventually turned into West West Bank, I believe was the name,

0:02:40.160 --> 0:02:44.359
<v Speaker 4>and Joseph Auding was the CEO of West of one,

0:02:44.400 --> 0:02:49.040
<v Speaker 4>west of that firm. But today again bringing the back

0:02:49.080 --> 0:02:54.320
<v Speaker 4>together band back together, Adding is the CEO of NYCB

0:02:54.520 --> 0:02:57.840
<v Speaker 4>now And clearly this is the relationships that have been

0:02:57.840 --> 0:03:01.880
<v Speaker 4>built in the past, the trust and the knowledge that

0:03:02.320 --> 0:03:06.639
<v Speaker 4>these leaders have gained in not just finance but in banking,

0:03:07.160 --> 0:03:10.240
<v Speaker 4>which is a very specific industry to have some of

0:03:10.280 --> 0:03:13.520
<v Speaker 4>these very strategic plans that they're going to need to

0:03:13.520 --> 0:03:16.080
<v Speaker 4>set forth in terms of how to diversify the bank,

0:03:16.400 --> 0:03:19.480
<v Speaker 4>how to deal with the existing problems that they've already identified.

0:03:20.080 --> 0:03:22.760
<v Speaker 4>And today they started talking about that to investors.

0:03:22.360 --> 0:03:24.360
<v Speaker 3>Well, that's what I want to hear from you. And

0:03:24.400 --> 0:03:26.520
<v Speaker 3>what do we understand now that they're talking about this,

0:03:26.600 --> 0:03:29.080
<v Speaker 3>how they shore up the balance sheet especially exposure to

0:03:29.120 --> 0:03:30.040
<v Speaker 3>commercial real estate.

0:03:30.200 --> 0:03:33.480
<v Speaker 4>So executives today talked about the main issue being the

0:03:33.520 --> 0:03:37.280
<v Speaker 4>loan portfolio and this portion that is specifically linked to

0:03:37.760 --> 0:03:41.880
<v Speaker 4>New York Office. So they're saying that their goal over

0:03:41.960 --> 0:03:44.600
<v Speaker 4>time is to diversify the bank. Essentially, what they want

0:03:44.640 --> 0:03:47.520
<v Speaker 4>to do is make this bank look more like the

0:03:47.560 --> 0:03:51.120
<v Speaker 4>other regional banks because right now there's so much concentration

0:03:51.640 --> 0:03:56.000
<v Speaker 4>in real estate, in lending to the landlords of New

0:03:56.040 --> 0:03:56.560
<v Speaker 4>York City.

0:03:57.200 --> 0:03:59.520
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and we've talked about this that the law changes

0:03:59.520 --> 0:04:03.040
<v Speaker 2>and stuff has really kind of changed the financial outlook,

0:04:03.040 --> 0:04:05.880
<v Speaker 2>if you will, of these assets or the profitability one

0:04:05.880 --> 0:04:07.680
<v Speaker 2>thing I want to ask you about. So as they

0:04:07.760 --> 0:04:10.920
<v Speaker 2>kind of move forward, investors, the stocks app thirteen fourteen

0:04:10.960 --> 0:04:13.920
<v Speaker 2>percent just in the last two days alone. But you know,

0:04:14.520 --> 0:04:17.320
<v Speaker 2>the Indiemac deal go backwards for a second. There was

0:04:17.360 --> 0:04:22.240
<v Speaker 2>some criticism of the duo and their past link up ultimately,

0:04:22.400 --> 0:04:25.640
<v Speaker 2>so it'll be interesting to see how they kind of

0:04:25.640 --> 0:04:29.039
<v Speaker 2>deal with all these assets that not any deal going

0:04:29.040 --> 0:04:31.200
<v Speaker 2>forward is ever maybe perfect, that's right.

0:04:31.279 --> 0:04:35.880
<v Speaker 4>And so that deal with Indiemac was linked to mortgages. Correct,

0:04:35.920 --> 0:04:40.880
<v Speaker 4>This is lending, so it's a different business essentially, the

0:04:41.240 --> 0:04:47.360
<v Speaker 4>lending to real estate firms in two buildings, both for

0:04:48.440 --> 0:04:52.600
<v Speaker 4>businesses and for landlords, so for commercial real estate and

0:04:52.640 --> 0:04:56.599
<v Speaker 4>also for housing. Again, these are going to be that's

0:04:56.720 --> 0:04:59.920
<v Speaker 4>different than lending out or giving a mortgage to some

0:05:00.080 --> 0:05:01.480
<v Speaker 4>one if they're buying a home.

0:05:01.920 --> 0:05:04.800
<v Speaker 3>What do we know about where the money came from

0:05:04.839 --> 0:05:08.760
<v Speaker 3>for Liberty Strategic Capital at this point and what the

0:05:08.800 --> 0:05:10.960
<v Speaker 3>former treasure sectary has been doing over the past few

0:05:11.000 --> 0:05:12.760
<v Speaker 3>years when it comes to fundraising.

0:05:12.440 --> 0:05:17.640
<v Speaker 4>So Mnuchin, there has been some pushback which was referenced

0:05:17.640 --> 0:05:21.160
<v Speaker 4>in this story. There's been some critique because after he

0:05:21.600 --> 0:05:25.920
<v Speaker 4>left being Treasury he was raising money for Liberty from

0:05:26.080 --> 0:05:29.360
<v Speaker 4>sovereign wealth funds in the Middle East, and that includes

0:05:29.760 --> 0:05:33.400
<v Speaker 4>Saudi Arabia's public Investment fund. That is something that was

0:05:33.480 --> 0:05:37.000
<v Speaker 4>under scrutiny. What I found interesting is that with this deal,

0:05:37.400 --> 0:05:41.160
<v Speaker 4>Mnuchan was saying that they initially went out with around

0:05:41.200 --> 0:05:44.920
<v Speaker 4>seven hundred and there was so much interest that then

0:05:44.920 --> 0:05:47.520
<v Speaker 4>they raised it to the one billion mark. So it

0:05:47.680 --> 0:05:52.880
<v Speaker 4>just showed that the enthusiasm that were seen reflected in

0:05:52.920 --> 0:05:56.920
<v Speaker 4>the stock price from other investors was also there when

0:05:56.960 --> 0:06:00.440
<v Speaker 4>they were pitching this deal to the street.

0:06:00.880 --> 0:06:02.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it is interesting, like kind of when you go

0:06:02.560 --> 0:06:05.240
<v Speaker 2>through it and you look backwards in terms of the

0:06:05.279 --> 0:06:08.800
<v Speaker 2>Indiemac deal and just these individuals that have been assembled

0:06:08.839 --> 0:06:11.200
<v Speaker 2>to kind of again not apples to apples in terms

0:06:11.279 --> 0:06:13.520
<v Speaker 2>of the bank, but dealing kind of with a I

0:06:13.520 --> 0:06:15.120
<v Speaker 2>don't want to use the word crisis, but certainly a

0:06:15.200 --> 0:06:17.440
<v Speaker 2>very troubled situation and trying to figure it kind of

0:06:17.480 --> 0:06:18.120
<v Speaker 2>the way forward.

0:06:18.200 --> 0:06:22.120
<v Speaker 4>Right Well, financially it's a troubled situation, and they're buying

0:06:22.160 --> 0:06:24.840
<v Speaker 4>in at such a cheap price. These are the types

0:06:24.839 --> 0:06:28.560
<v Speaker 4>of deals. Think about Warren Buffett coming in and supporting

0:06:28.600 --> 0:06:32.359
<v Speaker 4>Bank of America in its time of crisis way back

0:06:32.440 --> 0:06:34.760
<v Speaker 4>in two thousand and seven, two thousand and eight period,

0:06:34.920 --> 0:06:37.680
<v Speaker 4>and look how that turned out for him. Again, that

0:06:37.839 --> 0:06:40.440
<v Speaker 4>was a windfall and it was also a lifeline for

0:06:40.520 --> 0:06:43.920
<v Speaker 4>Bank of America. So it's a very similar narrative that

0:06:43.960 --> 0:06:46.240
<v Speaker 4>I think a lot of people are comparing this moment

0:06:46.320 --> 0:06:49.440
<v Speaker 4>in time too. You have a bank that has fallen

0:06:49.480 --> 0:06:53.120
<v Speaker 4>on tough times. The share price is showing that, and

0:06:53.240 --> 0:06:57.680
<v Speaker 4>already the deal and the investors that bought in early

0:06:57.720 --> 0:06:58.679
<v Speaker 4>have minted a profit.

0:06:58.960 --> 0:07:02.240
<v Speaker 3>It's on paper going to say it's only day two, right,

0:07:02.480 --> 0:07:04.880
<v Speaker 3>day one, I guess you could say day one full day,

0:07:05.600 --> 0:07:07.120
<v Speaker 3>and they're not out of the woods yet, Kat.

0:07:07.080 --> 0:07:10.920
<v Speaker 4>No, they're gonna need to prove that they have the

0:07:11.080 --> 0:07:13.880
<v Speaker 4>strategies in place. They outlined them this morning, So I

0:07:13.920 --> 0:07:16.640
<v Speaker 4>think that that is another reason that you've seen the

0:07:16.680 --> 0:07:20.600
<v Speaker 4>share price remain at a higher level. It didn't jump

0:07:20.760 --> 0:07:24.560
<v Speaker 4>significantly from where it already jumped yesterday. It's still around

0:07:24.600 --> 0:07:27.840
<v Speaker 4>the four dollar mark, just below last time that I checked.

0:07:28.840 --> 0:07:33.960
<v Speaker 4>But you're you're absolutely right. This is a strategic playbook

0:07:34.000 --> 0:07:36.000
<v Speaker 4>that is needed there. They're going to need time to

0:07:36.080 --> 0:07:40.200
<v Speaker 4>show that it's actually working. And I find it interesting

0:07:40.320 --> 0:07:43.720
<v Speaker 4>the goal of being more like their peers. But this

0:07:43.880 --> 0:07:47.520
<v Speaker 4>is a large organization because they bought assets from Signature

0:07:47.920 --> 0:07:51.480
<v Speaker 4>earlier and they've grown rapidly. That was part of its struggle.

0:07:51.480 --> 0:07:53.840
<v Speaker 4>They didn't know how to deal with that size that

0:07:53.920 --> 0:07:55.760
<v Speaker 4>they a lot of pieces there, a lot of pieces

0:07:55.760 --> 0:07:57.640
<v Speaker 4>of the puzzle. All right, Kat Doherty, Financial Porter, a

0:07:57.680 --> 0:07:59.360
<v Speaker 4>Blomberg News. Thank you so much.

0:08:00.360 --> 0:08:03.880
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week podcast. Catch us

0:08:03.920 --> 0:08:07.160
<v Speaker 1>live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern Listen

0:08:07.200 --> 0:08:09.360
<v Speaker 1>on Apple car Play and then brout Auto with a

0:08:09.400 --> 0:08:15.200
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Business app, or want us Live on YouTube.

0:08:16.320 --> 0:08:19.000
<v Speaker 2>Well, you might recall that Bloomberg News was reporting out

0:08:19.040 --> 0:08:22.440
<v Speaker 2>last month on Florida's southwestern coast, long one of America's

0:08:22.520 --> 0:08:25.440
<v Speaker 2>fastest growing regions, and how it is losing some of

0:08:25.480 --> 0:08:29.080
<v Speaker 2>its boomtown swagger as a home insurance crisis and other

0:08:29.160 --> 0:08:32.439
<v Speaker 2>staring costs make homes unaffordable. It's a serious situation, it is.

0:08:32.480 --> 0:08:34.200
<v Speaker 3>And at the same time, Carol, we've also talked about

0:08:34.240 --> 0:08:37.439
<v Speaker 3>how the migration of financial types down south, think Citadel's

0:08:37.480 --> 0:08:41.160
<v Speaker 3>Ked Griffin Moore are now calling South Florida home and

0:08:41.200 --> 0:08:44.640
<v Speaker 3>pushing up prices not just of residential real estate, but

0:08:44.720 --> 0:08:46.160
<v Speaker 3>also commercial real estate too.

0:08:46.200 --> 0:08:48.080
<v Speaker 2>All Right, so there's a lot going down down south,

0:08:48.120 --> 0:08:50.199
<v Speaker 2>specifically in the state of Florida. With all this in mind,

0:08:50.240 --> 0:08:53.720
<v Speaker 2>joining us to talk about the Miami market specifically with

0:08:53.800 --> 0:08:56.640
<v Speaker 2>us as Dina Golden Tayer, she's executive director of sales

0:08:56.679 --> 0:09:00.360
<v Speaker 2>over at Douglas Element. She joins us from Miamia to

0:09:00.400 --> 0:09:03.360
<v Speaker 2>have you here a lot to talk about. First up,

0:09:03.440 --> 0:09:06.240
<v Speaker 2>how are you and how would you describe the luxury

0:09:06.280 --> 0:09:09.000
<v Speaker 2>market in Miami. I mean, technically you're known as an

0:09:09.080 --> 0:09:11.959
<v Speaker 2>ultra luxury specialist, So talk us a little bit about

0:09:11.960 --> 0:09:13.680
<v Speaker 2>demand pricing, what you are seeing.

0:09:15.280 --> 0:09:18.000
<v Speaker 5>Thank you so much for having me today. I am

0:09:18.040 --> 0:09:23.120
<v Speaker 5>indeed ultra luxury specialists focusing on property's ten million and

0:09:23.200 --> 0:09:27.200
<v Speaker 5>up and our market, as they say, is calliente. And

0:09:27.360 --> 0:09:30.040
<v Speaker 5>there is no sign of a slow down for the

0:09:30.080 --> 0:09:32.200
<v Speaker 5>ten million plus marketplace.

0:09:31.840 --> 0:09:35.680
<v Speaker 2>All right, drilled down a little bit, so no slowing down.

0:09:35.800 --> 0:09:38.360
<v Speaker 2>So the same as six months ago, twelve months ago.

0:09:38.480 --> 0:09:40.319
<v Speaker 2>Give us some more color with Bloomberg. We'd love to

0:09:40.320 --> 0:09:42.959
<v Speaker 2>dig a little bit deeper. Give us an idea of

0:09:43.400 --> 0:09:45.440
<v Speaker 2>how it's playing out and how it compares.

0:09:46.000 --> 0:09:49.000
<v Speaker 5>Absolutely this time last year, we in fact had a

0:09:49.080 --> 0:09:52.520
<v Speaker 5>much slower high season, high season being defined as the

0:09:52.600 --> 0:09:56.679
<v Speaker 5>months of December, January, February, March April, when the snowbirds

0:09:56.679 --> 0:09:59.079
<v Speaker 5>will want to be here. And this year we're having

0:09:59.080 --> 0:10:01.560
<v Speaker 5>the type of high seat that we had hoped for

0:10:01.640 --> 0:10:05.040
<v Speaker 5>last year, which is pending sales almost every other day

0:10:05.679 --> 0:10:10.360
<v Speaker 5>for high quality assets that are appropriately priced. So if

0:10:10.360 --> 0:10:12.240
<v Speaker 5>you're watching Zilla, you're going to see a lot of

0:10:12.240 --> 0:10:13.160
<v Speaker 5>stuff go pending.

0:10:14.520 --> 0:10:17.120
<v Speaker 3>Who are the buyers right now and how are they buying?

0:10:17.200 --> 0:10:20.280
<v Speaker 3>Are these all cash buyers? Where are they coming from?

0:10:20.800 --> 0:10:22.000
<v Speaker 3>Give us insight there.

0:10:22.760 --> 0:10:25.600
<v Speaker 5>They're the usual suspects. They are coming from New York

0:10:25.679 --> 0:10:29.440
<v Speaker 5>from other Northeastern states. They're coming from California and other

0:10:29.559 --> 0:10:33.560
<v Speaker 5>Western states, and they're coming from Canada. The European buyer

0:10:33.600 --> 0:10:36.880
<v Speaker 5>has slowly trickled back into the marketplace post COVID, but

0:10:36.920 --> 0:10:39.480
<v Speaker 5>they're not as strong as they were in prior years.

0:10:39.800 --> 0:10:42.959
<v Speaker 3>What about buyers from Asia and buyers from Russia.

0:10:44.520 --> 0:10:47.560
<v Speaker 5>No, and no, and the buyers that I'm working with

0:10:47.800 --> 0:10:50.320
<v Speaker 5>are not getting mortgages, or at least the deals are

0:10:50.360 --> 0:10:51.640
<v Speaker 5>not finance contingent.

0:10:52.520 --> 0:10:55.440
<v Speaker 2>What's a typical deal on the high end of Miami.

0:10:55.520 --> 0:10:57.560
<v Speaker 2>You used ten million dollars as a price point. Is

0:10:57.559 --> 0:11:01.120
<v Speaker 2>that kind of the mean? The median give us an

0:11:01.160 --> 0:11:03.200
<v Speaker 2>idea because I know that they can go a lot higher,

0:11:03.240 --> 0:11:05.440
<v Speaker 2>especially if you do something like Indian Creek Village, which

0:11:05.440 --> 0:11:09.079
<v Speaker 2>Bloomberg has written about as being a place where millions

0:11:09.080 --> 0:11:11.240
<v Speaker 2>don't matter. It's all about billions and billionaires.

0:11:11.559 --> 0:11:17.880
<v Speaker 5>Great article, great job, Felipe. Ten million gets you a

0:11:18.000 --> 0:11:21.199
<v Speaker 5>nice condo. It gets you a nice house, a very

0:11:21.320 --> 0:11:23.600
<v Speaker 5>nice house, not in the water, an average house on

0:11:23.679 --> 0:11:25.960
<v Speaker 5>the water. Twenty million is where it's at if you

0:11:26.000 --> 0:11:29.760
<v Speaker 5>want something better than nice and my twenty million plus product,

0:11:29.800 --> 0:11:32.319
<v Speaker 5>I have the shortest days on market than any other

0:11:32.400 --> 0:11:35.200
<v Speaker 5>sector that I represent. In fact, it takes me longer

0:11:35.240 --> 0:11:38.720
<v Speaker 5>to sell properties five to fifteen million than homes that

0:11:38.760 --> 0:11:41.240
<v Speaker 5>are over twenty million, where I average about one hundred

0:11:41.240 --> 0:11:43.480
<v Speaker 5>and twenty to one hundred and fifty days on market.

0:11:44.120 --> 0:11:46.679
<v Speaker 3>Do you know who's selling right now? Who doesn't want

0:11:46.679 --> 0:11:48.880
<v Speaker 3>to be there and who wants to sell for these prices?

0:11:49.559 --> 0:11:49.880
<v Speaker 6>Sure?

0:11:50.000 --> 0:11:53.160
<v Speaker 5>I mean that is a broad question because people selling

0:11:53.200 --> 0:11:56.160
<v Speaker 5>don't necessarily not want to be in Miami. They may

0:11:56.200 --> 0:11:58.439
<v Speaker 5>be expanding their family, or they may be going through

0:11:58.440 --> 0:12:01.679
<v Speaker 5>a divorce. A lot of the people that from whom myself,

0:12:01.800 --> 0:12:04.160
<v Speaker 5>or they are staying locally, just in a different asset

0:12:04.200 --> 0:12:07.439
<v Speaker 5>class like downsizing or upsizing, or moving from a house

0:12:07.440 --> 0:12:08.760
<v Speaker 5>to a condo or vice versa.

0:12:09.160 --> 0:12:11.960
<v Speaker 2>You know, Tim was asking earlier Diana about who's doing

0:12:11.960 --> 0:12:14.200
<v Speaker 2>the buying, and we've talked. You know, Bloomberg has done

0:12:14.240 --> 0:12:16.520
<v Speaker 2>a lot of reporting about kind of Wall Street South

0:12:16.559 --> 0:12:20.000
<v Speaker 2>and the amount of financial folks that have moved down

0:12:20.040 --> 0:12:22.480
<v Speaker 2>there not only to live or buy a second home,

0:12:22.480 --> 0:12:24.360
<v Speaker 2>but to actually set up shop and do work, and

0:12:24.360 --> 0:12:26.640
<v Speaker 2>that has certainly had an impact on the Eric. Give

0:12:26.720 --> 0:12:28.120
<v Speaker 2>us a little bit more color if you can around

0:12:28.160 --> 0:12:30.840
<v Speaker 2>what you are seeing on that front specifically, is the

0:12:30.880 --> 0:12:33.800
<v Speaker 2>pace continuing, is it picking up? Is it slowing down

0:12:33.840 --> 0:12:34.160
<v Speaker 2>at all?

0:12:35.600 --> 0:12:38.480
<v Speaker 5>I think if we compare the pace to the COVID times,

0:12:38.720 --> 0:12:41.440
<v Speaker 5>it will always feel like a slowdown. Now Miami and

0:12:41.480 --> 0:12:44.360
<v Speaker 5>Miami Beach, where I specifically focus on, has found a

0:12:44.400 --> 0:12:47.400
<v Speaker 5>new rhythm. We continue to have an influx of the

0:12:47.800 --> 0:12:51.080
<v Speaker 5>Wall Street types and other financiers from around the country.

0:12:51.280 --> 0:12:54.640
<v Speaker 5>They are still taking prime positions at the schools for

0:12:54.720 --> 0:12:57.560
<v Speaker 5>their children and the top reservations in town because we

0:12:57.679 --> 0:13:00.920
<v Speaker 5>have pretty much the same restaurants New York City does,

0:13:01.000 --> 0:13:04.680
<v Speaker 5>if not better right now. So the pace is healthy,

0:13:04.720 --> 0:13:06.960
<v Speaker 5>It's just not a COVID pace, and to compare it

0:13:07.000 --> 0:13:09.280
<v Speaker 5>to that would always look like we're in the run.

0:13:09.880 --> 0:13:12.560
<v Speaker 3>What about folks with backgrounds in crypto right now, especially

0:13:12.600 --> 0:13:15.560
<v Speaker 3>given the rise in crypto that we've seen last year

0:13:15.559 --> 0:13:16.439
<v Speaker 3>and in recent months.

0:13:17.800 --> 0:13:20.199
<v Speaker 5>I'm glad you bring it up, because crypto certainly has

0:13:20.200 --> 0:13:22.920
<v Speaker 5>had a great couple of weeks, but I have not

0:13:23.120 --> 0:13:26.880
<v Speaker 5>seen the complete return of the crypto bros. And in fact,

0:13:26.880 --> 0:13:29.800
<v Speaker 5>when I did work with that fire class, they always

0:13:29.800 --> 0:13:31.320
<v Speaker 5>paid cash.

0:13:31.400 --> 0:13:35.840
<v Speaker 2>Well yeah you know, it's cash is cash? Yeah, got it? Yeah,

0:13:36.040 --> 0:13:38.920
<v Speaker 2>no problem here. Easy clothes, quick clothes.

0:13:39.000 --> 0:13:41.920
<v Speaker 5>But I haven't gotten a few calls lately asking if

0:13:41.920 --> 0:13:44.440
<v Speaker 5>a seller would take crypto, so it is starting to

0:13:44.480 --> 0:13:46.240
<v Speaker 5>come back as a subject point.

0:13:46.360 --> 0:13:48.080
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and I guess I was more interested in just

0:13:48.080 --> 0:13:49.920
<v Speaker 3>the crypto bro's part of it. But I'm surprised that

0:13:50.240 --> 0:13:52.080
<v Speaker 3>you know, you haven't seen the return of crypto bros

0:13:52.120 --> 0:13:53.280
<v Speaker 3>completely that we saw a couple.

0:13:53.160 --> 0:13:53.640
<v Speaker 1>Of years ago.

0:13:54.679 --> 0:13:57.680
<v Speaker 5>No, and even you know they're already down here, they've

0:13:57.720 --> 0:14:01.680
<v Speaker 5>already established residency. So if they're going to be perhaps

0:14:01.840 --> 0:14:04.960
<v Speaker 5>upgrading because they're cryptos high, great, I'm excited to work

0:14:05.000 --> 0:14:08.680
<v Speaker 5>with them again. But they're not the conversation at the

0:14:08.679 --> 0:14:11.160
<v Speaker 5>height of the topics that are being discussed around town.

0:14:11.240 --> 0:14:13.040
<v Speaker 2>Dana. This is a market you've been in since two

0:14:13.080 --> 0:14:14.880
<v Speaker 2>thousand and five, so if you've seen a fair amount

0:14:14.880 --> 0:14:18.520
<v Speaker 2>of cycles, including the Great Financial Crisis, you've seen obviously

0:14:18.520 --> 0:14:22.920
<v Speaker 2>the pandemic and then some I am curious about how

0:14:22.960 --> 0:14:25.400
<v Speaker 2>this market has evolved, how it's changed in terms of

0:14:25.440 --> 0:14:27.720
<v Speaker 2>pricing and demand. What can you tell us about that,

0:14:27.760 --> 0:14:31.360
<v Speaker 2>because that's a fairly long tenure and some great insight.

0:14:33.040 --> 0:14:35.920
<v Speaker 5>Absolutely, I mean, the market has completely changed the type

0:14:35.960 --> 0:14:38.640
<v Speaker 5>of buyers that were attracting to our marketplace. I don't

0:14:38.680 --> 0:14:42.440
<v Speaker 5>think anyone thought that Miami would be competing with buyers

0:14:42.520 --> 0:14:45.720
<v Speaker 5>looking at London, New York, Hong Kong, that they would

0:14:45.760 --> 0:14:49.320
<v Speaker 5>look to us as their first home. It's very clear

0:14:49.320 --> 0:14:52.120
<v Speaker 5>that Miami is the top city in the country right now.

0:14:52.360 --> 0:14:55.320
<v Speaker 5>LA and New York don't have anything on us. Clearly,

0:14:55.360 --> 0:14:58.600
<v Speaker 5>I'm a cheerleader for my marketplace, but having traveled around

0:14:58.600 --> 0:15:02.720
<v Speaker 5>the country to the cities where buyers are fleeing from,

0:15:02.800 --> 0:15:04.320
<v Speaker 5>I can understand, why.

0:15:04.640 --> 0:15:07.400
<v Speaker 3>Do you see? You said you saw a slow down

0:15:08.160 --> 0:15:11.560
<v Speaker 3>in sub ten million dollar listings? Is that the case?

0:15:12.600 --> 0:15:15.720
<v Speaker 5>I would say, there's higher inventory and higher days on market.

0:15:16.040 --> 0:15:19.040
<v Speaker 5>I guess you could call that a slowdown, or I

0:15:19.040 --> 0:15:21.680
<v Speaker 5>would just say it's not as high as homes.

0:15:21.520 --> 0:15:23.880
<v Speaker 3>Of twenty Let's phrase it a different way. Where are

0:15:23.880 --> 0:15:25.520
<v Speaker 3>they're buying opportunities right now?

0:15:26.640 --> 0:15:30.400
<v Speaker 5>Sure they are buying opportunities, definitely in the ten to

0:15:30.400 --> 0:15:33.840
<v Speaker 5>fifteen million range, because those properties are having higher days

0:15:33.880 --> 0:15:37.320
<v Speaker 5>on market. There are neighborhoods that are let's call them

0:15:37.520 --> 0:15:40.120
<v Speaker 5>one notch below the A level, neighborhoods like B plus

0:15:40.120 --> 0:15:44.320
<v Speaker 5>neighborhoods like Miami Shores or Sam Sushi or a keystone

0:15:44.440 --> 0:15:47.760
<v Speaker 5>where there are opportunities, whereas in really established neighborhoods like

0:15:47.960 --> 0:15:51.640
<v Speaker 5>Miami Beach, Golden Beach and Coral Gables, those owners are

0:15:51.680 --> 0:15:52.880
<v Speaker 5>just holding.

0:15:53.480 --> 0:15:55.880
<v Speaker 2>Rates interest rates. Does it even matter? Just got about

0:15:56.160 --> 0:15:57.120
<v Speaker 2>twenty seconds here.

0:15:58.720 --> 0:16:01.600
<v Speaker 5>If interest rates were low, all the buyers would jump

0:16:01.680 --> 0:16:04.400
<v Speaker 5>back in as opposed to the cash buyers having.

0:16:04.120 --> 0:16:07.360
<v Speaker 2>Free ring interesting, so it would kind of give more

0:16:07.640 --> 0:16:10.120
<v Speaker 2>buyers certainly into the market there, all right, Dina, good

0:16:10.120 --> 0:16:12.360
<v Speaker 2>to check in with. You really appreciate it, Dina Golden Tear.

0:16:12.600 --> 0:16:15.520
<v Speaker 2>She's executive director of sales over at Douglas Ellaman. Joining

0:16:15.600 --> 0:16:16.640
<v Speaker 2>us there from Miami.

0:16:18.560 --> 0:16:22.440
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week podcast. Listen live

0:16:22.520 --> 0:16:25.440
<v Speaker 1>each weekday starting at two pm Eastern on Apple car

0:16:25.440 --> 0:16:28.400
<v Speaker 1>Play and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. You

0:16:28.440 --> 0:16:31.720
<v Speaker 1>can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship

0:16:31.760 --> 0:16:35.560
<v Speaker 1>New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.

0:16:36.720 --> 0:16:39.240
<v Speaker 3>Well, as I mentioned the socks, the Philadelphia semi conductor

0:16:39.280 --> 0:16:41.720
<v Speaker 3>Indeck sitting an all time high today is chipstocks in

0:16:41.800 --> 0:16:45.480
<v Speaker 3>March higher, Broadcom reports after the belt also trading near

0:16:45.560 --> 0:16:48.240
<v Speaker 3>records Carol. At the same time, there are big questions

0:16:48.240 --> 0:16:51.640
<v Speaker 3>about how chip companies are going to navigate Washington's crackdown

0:16:52.040 --> 0:16:54.800
<v Speaker 3>on exports of advanced technologies. That's right.

0:16:54.840 --> 0:16:57.400
<v Speaker 2>Bloomberg was first to report overnight that the US government

0:16:57.520 --> 0:17:01.000
<v Speaker 2>is pressing allies, including the Netherlands, Germany, South Korea, and Japan,

0:17:01.440 --> 0:17:05.240
<v Speaker 2>to further titan restrictions on China's access to semiconductor technology,

0:17:05.520 --> 0:17:09.080
<v Speaker 2>a controversial effort that is drawing resistance in some countries.

0:17:09.119 --> 0:17:11.600
<v Speaker 2>This is at least according to people familiar with that matter.

0:17:11.640 --> 0:17:13.480
<v Speaker 3>To So for what we need to know about how

0:17:13.520 --> 0:17:16.080
<v Speaker 3>companies navigate this delicate balance, we bring in the economic

0:17:16.200 --> 0:17:19.040
<v Speaker 3>historian Chris Miller. He's Associate Professor of International history at

0:17:19.080 --> 0:17:21.879
<v Speaker 3>Tufts University. He's also the author of Chip War, The

0:17:21.960 --> 0:17:24.240
<v Speaker 3>Fight for the World's Most Critical Technology. It's a New

0:17:24.320 --> 0:17:28.280
<v Speaker 3>York Times bestseller. Chris back with us from Boston. Chris,

0:17:28.320 --> 0:17:29.560
<v Speaker 3>good to have you back. How are you.

0:17:31.040 --> 0:17:32.440
<v Speaker 7>Doing well? Thank you for having me back.

0:17:32.520 --> 0:17:34.119
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, well, thanks so much for joining us. We always

0:17:34.119 --> 0:17:35.479
<v Speaker 3>love it when you come on the program. I mean

0:17:35.520 --> 0:17:37.280
<v Speaker 3>talk about timing with your book. It came out in

0:17:37.320 --> 0:17:40.800
<v Speaker 3>twenty twenty two. Since then, the euphoria around chips as

0:17:40.800 --> 0:17:43.560
<v Speaker 3>they relate to AI just has reached fever pitch. I mean,

0:17:43.600 --> 0:17:46.880
<v Speaker 3>look no further than Nvidia super micro computer and more.

0:17:47.400 --> 0:17:50.640
<v Speaker 3>How are you watching this as an academic, as a consultant,

0:17:50.800 --> 0:17:51.560
<v Speaker 3>what are your thoughts?

0:17:53.600 --> 0:17:56.679
<v Speaker 7>Well, you're certainly right that AI has really transformed the

0:17:56.680 --> 0:18:00.680
<v Speaker 7>ship industry. It's the key demand driver go going forward.

0:18:00.720 --> 0:18:04.640
<v Speaker 7>And the big question hanging over AI is when will

0:18:04.680 --> 0:18:08.000
<v Speaker 7>we start to see large scale modernization, How soon will

0:18:08.000 --> 0:18:11.560
<v Speaker 7>that happen? And at what's scaled? Because ultimately, the reason

0:18:11.600 --> 0:18:14.800
<v Speaker 7>why all the hyperscalers are investing tens of billions of

0:18:14.880 --> 0:18:18.920
<v Speaker 7>dollars and building up AI infrastructure and buying lots of

0:18:19.040 --> 0:18:21.680
<v Speaker 7>Nvidia GPUs is because they believe there's money that will

0:18:21.680 --> 0:18:24.040
<v Speaker 7>be made at the end of this process. And that's

0:18:24.080 --> 0:18:27.760
<v Speaker 7>why questions like well how much does Microsoft make off

0:18:27.840 --> 0:18:31.080
<v Speaker 7>Copilot or what does open AI's revenue look like? These

0:18:31.080 --> 0:18:33.679
<v Speaker 7>are the key indicators that investors are looking at to

0:18:33.800 --> 0:18:37.520
<v Speaker 7>assess what will be the implication of AI for corporate profits.

0:18:37.720 --> 0:18:40.439
<v Speaker 2>All right in the tech world, though, sometimes you got

0:18:40.480 --> 0:18:42.480
<v Speaker 2>to build it and then they will come kind of thing.

0:18:42.840 --> 0:18:45.520
<v Speaker 2>Having said that, you've got a socks Chris that was

0:18:45.600 --> 0:18:47.919
<v Speaker 2>up about sixty five percent last year, and let me

0:18:47.960 --> 0:18:49.600
<v Speaker 2>just pull it up on the Bloomberg. But you've got

0:18:50.000 --> 0:18:53.399
<v Speaker 2>the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index up about twenty three percent so

0:18:53.440 --> 0:18:57.080
<v Speaker 2>far here in twenty twenty four. It's just one measurement.

0:18:57.119 --> 0:18:59.440
<v Speaker 2>Maybe it's not the right one. But would you say

0:18:59.480 --> 0:19:02.760
<v Speaker 2>that all the enthusiasm has gotten ahead of itself just

0:19:02.840 --> 0:19:04.840
<v Speaker 2>based on the moves and the share price or it's

0:19:04.840 --> 0:19:07.560
<v Speaker 2>still kind of hard to tell. As I said, you

0:19:07.680 --> 0:19:09.840
<v Speaker 2>need to build it and then they may come.

0:19:11.520 --> 0:19:13.800
<v Speaker 7>Well, I think it does make sense that companies are

0:19:13.800 --> 0:19:17.080
<v Speaker 7>investing very heavily in this infrastructure given all of the

0:19:17.119 --> 0:19:20.160
<v Speaker 7>advances that we've seen in AI and all of the

0:19:20.200 --> 0:19:23.960
<v Speaker 7>product ideas that are currently being tested and explored by

0:19:24.080 --> 0:19:26.520
<v Speaker 7>tech companies, and the infrastructure is expensive, there's no way

0:19:26.560 --> 0:19:28.760
<v Speaker 7>around it, which is why if you're a big tech company,

0:19:28.800 --> 0:19:31.760
<v Speaker 7>you've got to invest literally tens of billions or else

0:19:31.800 --> 0:19:35.000
<v Speaker 7>you fall behind in your data center build out. But

0:19:35.359 --> 0:19:37.880
<v Speaker 7>the question again is going to be how long can

0:19:37.920 --> 0:19:41.879
<v Speaker 7>this be sustained without monetization And the good news is

0:19:41.920 --> 0:19:44.800
<v Speaker 7>that there are early signs that it is possible to

0:19:44.800 --> 0:19:46.520
<v Speaker 7>make money off of AI products. We just need to

0:19:46.520 --> 0:19:49.080
<v Speaker 7>see more evidence of this at more companies to justify

0:19:49.480 --> 0:19:51.120
<v Speaker 7>ongoing expended shares of this level.

0:19:51.200 --> 0:19:53.280
<v Speaker 2>Well, Chris, how do you distinguish between the names in

0:19:53.320 --> 0:19:55.320
<v Speaker 2>the space, and when you talk about monetization and video

0:19:55.359 --> 0:19:56.800
<v Speaker 2>is certainly the one that we bring up right, and

0:19:56.840 --> 0:19:59.680
<v Speaker 2>their numbers continue to surprise to the upside and give

0:19:59.720 --> 0:20:02.280
<v Speaker 2>us some of that affirmation if you will, about maybe

0:20:02.280 --> 0:20:04.760
<v Speaker 2>the potential for AI. It's not just dreams, it's it

0:20:05.200 --> 0:20:07.280
<v Speaker 2>could be a reality because you see it in their numbers.

0:20:07.440 --> 0:20:10.040
<v Speaker 2>Having said that, go back to distinguishing the names in

0:20:10.080 --> 0:20:12.600
<v Speaker 2>the space. You've got the once giants or leaders. I'm

0:20:12.600 --> 0:20:16.040
<v Speaker 2>thinking of Intel, Texas instruments, the new leaders, Nvidia, AMD

0:20:16.200 --> 0:20:19.840
<v Speaker 2>has come so far, the company that seems to stand alone, TSMC,

0:20:21.119 --> 0:20:23.760
<v Speaker 2>the semicon depwork companies, the equipment makers, Like, how do

0:20:23.760 --> 0:20:26.600
<v Speaker 2>you distinguish How should the Bloomberg audience be thinking about

0:20:26.640 --> 0:20:29.280
<v Speaker 2>a space that's got a lot of different names in them.

0:20:30.720 --> 0:20:33.800
<v Speaker 7>Well, the good news is that as AI advances, you

0:20:33.840 --> 0:20:37.560
<v Speaker 7>actually need more types of chips in larger quantities to

0:20:37.600 --> 0:20:40.240
<v Speaker 7>take advantage. It's not just the AI processors that you

0:20:40.359 --> 0:20:43.840
<v Speaker 7>need that in Vidia produces. It's also more memory, especially

0:20:43.840 --> 0:20:46.840
<v Speaker 7>the high bandwidth memory produced by companies like Skahi x

0:20:46.920 --> 0:20:49.880
<v Speaker 7>or Samsung. And you also end up needing more mixed

0:20:49.880 --> 0:20:52.240
<v Speaker 7>signal and analog chips because these are the chips that

0:20:52.320 --> 0:20:56.760
<v Speaker 7>collect the data that's then being processed by AI systems

0:20:56.800 --> 0:20:59.800
<v Speaker 7>and semi autonomous cars, for example. So that's why the

0:21:00.400 --> 0:21:03.280
<v Speaker 7>boom and AI has benefited most companies in the industry,

0:21:03.320 --> 0:21:06.160
<v Speaker 7>even if they're not directly producing the GPUs that are

0:21:06.480 --> 0:21:09.400
<v Speaker 7>at the center of AI. And it's also why it's

0:21:09.400 --> 0:21:12.320
<v Speaker 7>not just the chip designers themselves, also the tool makers

0:21:12.320 --> 0:21:15.720
<v Speaker 7>from ASML to apply materials that are benefiting as chip

0:21:15.760 --> 0:21:18.960
<v Speaker 7>making companies buy even more tools. But ultimately all of

0:21:19.000 --> 0:21:21.600
<v Speaker 7>these do depend on their end customers continuing to invest

0:21:21.640 --> 0:21:24.760
<v Speaker 7>in more and more semiconductors, and that's where the capital

0:21:24.800 --> 0:21:28.680
<v Speaker 7>expenditure decisions of the big tech firms Microsoft, Google, Amazon

0:21:28.680 --> 0:21:31.800
<v Speaker 7>and others will be e to sustaining this level of

0:21:31.840 --> 0:21:32.879
<v Speaker 7>investment going forward.

0:21:33.280 --> 0:21:35.080
<v Speaker 3>Chris, I want to go back to monetization, and I'm

0:21:35.119 --> 0:21:36.639
<v Speaker 3>so glad you brought it up, because it's something that

0:21:37.080 --> 0:21:39.840
<v Speaker 3>we talk about a lot. We understand the beneficiaries on

0:21:39.880 --> 0:21:42.520
<v Speaker 3>the chip side of AI, but at the same time

0:21:42.560 --> 0:21:45.240
<v Speaker 3>we do see company stocks near all time highs for

0:21:45.280 --> 0:21:48.639
<v Speaker 3>companies investing in this type of technology, including meta platforms,

0:21:48.760 --> 0:21:52.399
<v Speaker 3>Microsoft on the private side, Open AI, and others. What

0:21:52.480 --> 0:21:55.240
<v Speaker 3>are the indications to you that we are seeing monetization

0:21:55.320 --> 0:21:58.399
<v Speaker 3>at this point and when, in your opinion, do you

0:21:58.400 --> 0:22:01.240
<v Speaker 3>think we're going to start seeing real eff efficiencies as

0:22:01.280 --> 0:22:02.600
<v Speaker 3>the result of AI.

0:22:04.840 --> 0:22:06.399
<v Speaker 7>Well, I think the good news is that if you

0:22:06.440 --> 0:22:09.360
<v Speaker 7>look across a much broader cross section of companies, take

0:22:09.400 --> 0:22:12.760
<v Speaker 7>the forty five hundred in aggregate, most companies on that

0:22:12.840 --> 0:22:16.159
<v Speaker 7>list are at least exploring ways that they can use AI,

0:22:16.359 --> 0:22:19.760
<v Speaker 7>either to refine their products or to drive down costs.

0:22:19.800 --> 0:22:21.320
<v Speaker 7>And so the key it's not going to be I

0:22:21.359 --> 0:22:24.399
<v Speaker 7>don't think any individual company or even any individual sector

0:22:24.440 --> 0:22:27.359
<v Speaker 7>it's going to be, and many different sectors learn to

0:22:27.400 --> 0:22:30.800
<v Speaker 7>apply AI for many different use cases and that makes

0:22:30.840 --> 0:22:34.120
<v Speaker 7>it harder to measure, But it also makes AI probably

0:22:34.160 --> 0:22:36.520
<v Speaker 7>more sustainable in the long run, if it's not one

0:22:36.600 --> 0:22:39.760
<v Speaker 7>or two killer applications, but rather a lot of uses

0:22:39.840 --> 0:22:43.600
<v Speaker 7>that end up being a creative either to company's profits

0:22:43.680 --> 0:22:47.359
<v Speaker 7>or to driving down their costs. But for investors looking

0:22:47.400 --> 0:22:49.600
<v Speaker 7>at this base trying to understand how real is this

0:22:49.760 --> 0:22:52.560
<v Speaker 7>and how sustainable is the investment, it means you've got

0:22:52.560 --> 0:22:55.080
<v Speaker 7>to look at a much broader cross section of companies

0:22:55.160 --> 0:22:58.359
<v Speaker 7>to ascertain where is AI actually gaining traction?

0:22:58.840 --> 0:23:00.919
<v Speaker 2>And how do you roll into something like you know,

0:23:01.000 --> 0:23:06.480
<v Speaker 2>Apple's making chips, Microsoft alphabet Google right, Like, it's just

0:23:06.600 --> 0:23:09.080
<v Speaker 2>kind of getting crowded, you know, more crowded if you will.

0:23:09.160 --> 0:23:12.359
<v Speaker 2>I mean, how do you roll those guys into the

0:23:12.400 --> 0:23:16.080
<v Speaker 2>already established, established players. Do you see them in the

0:23:16.119 --> 0:23:18.680
<v Speaker 2>near future or in the longer term as being really

0:23:18.720 --> 0:23:21.720
<v Speaker 2>pretty formidable in this industry?

0:23:22.400 --> 0:23:24.560
<v Speaker 7>Well, I think they are in some ways already competitors

0:23:24.600 --> 0:23:29.080
<v Speaker 7>to companies like AMD or in Nvidia, and companies that

0:23:29.119 --> 0:23:31.720
<v Speaker 7>are big enough to have scale the data center business

0:23:31.880 --> 0:23:34.679
<v Speaker 7>like those that you mentioned, have a strong incentive to

0:23:34.720 --> 0:23:37.720
<v Speaker 7>design their own ships, both because they can own their

0:23:37.760 --> 0:23:40.960
<v Speaker 7>design so that they specifically match the workloads that those

0:23:41.000 --> 0:23:44.680
<v Speaker 7>companies are running the data centers, but also because the

0:23:44.680 --> 0:23:47.480
<v Speaker 7>more choice they have both in house design ships and

0:23:47.560 --> 0:23:50.719
<v Speaker 7>externally designed ships, the more pricing power they hope they

0:23:50.720 --> 0:23:53.680
<v Speaker 7>can win. Visa be their biggest suppliers companies like in

0:23:53.760 --> 0:23:56.640
<v Speaker 7>Nvidia for example, And so there's a market rationale as

0:23:56.680 --> 0:23:59.520
<v Speaker 7>well as the technical rationale for companies to design their

0:23:59.520 --> 0:24:02.040
<v Speaker 7>own in how ships and what we've seen that, as

0:24:02.040 --> 0:24:04.280
<v Speaker 7>you said, as a trend where almost every big tech

0:24:04.280 --> 0:24:07.920
<v Speaker 7>company is now designing not just often one ship for themselves,

0:24:07.920 --> 0:24:10.400
<v Speaker 7>but multiple different types of chips for their own data

0:24:10.400 --> 0:24:11.040
<v Speaker 7>center efforts.

0:24:11.080 --> 0:24:13.120
<v Speaker 2>We want to move on to the actual chip war,

0:24:13.160 --> 0:24:14.720
<v Speaker 2>which is what your book was all about, because we

0:24:14.760 --> 0:24:16.720
<v Speaker 2>feel like it just is picking up tensions. But before

0:24:16.720 --> 0:24:19.679
<v Speaker 2>we do, which among the semiconductor companies that are out

0:24:19.720 --> 0:24:22.680
<v Speaker 2>there do you find most interesting that you think we

0:24:22.840 --> 0:24:26.280
<v Speaker 2>must I think about the investing audience of Limerick must

0:24:26.320 --> 0:24:27.600
<v Speaker 2>always keep on your radar.

0:24:29.640 --> 0:24:32.640
<v Speaker 7>You know, a lot of people who are only paying

0:24:32.680 --> 0:24:35.240
<v Speaker 7>attention to the space and alongside the rest of the

0:24:35.280 --> 0:24:38.880
<v Speaker 7>tech sector don't often focus enough on the tool makers,

0:24:38.880 --> 0:24:41.880
<v Speaker 7>the companies that make the tools that make the chips possible.

0:24:42.000 --> 0:24:45.520
<v Speaker 7>But if you look at the extraordinary growth and the

0:24:45.520 --> 0:24:47.840
<v Speaker 7>industry over the past several years, it's not just the

0:24:47.920 --> 0:24:50.560
<v Speaker 7>chip designers like in Video or AMD, it's also the

0:24:50.560 --> 0:24:54.080
<v Speaker 7>companies that produce the tools ASML or Land Research or

0:24:54.080 --> 0:24:59.040
<v Speaker 7>Applied Materials that are benefiting just as much from a

0:24:59.080 --> 0:25:00.520
<v Speaker 7>lot of the growth industry.

0:25:00.760 --> 0:25:03.520
<v Speaker 3>Okay, so let's you mentioned ASML, So we're going to

0:25:03.520 --> 0:25:08.080
<v Speaker 3>talk about related to that company, some of the tensions

0:25:08.400 --> 0:25:11.280
<v Speaker 3>that we reported at the top. The US China battle

0:25:11.320 --> 0:25:14.359
<v Speaker 3>for tech supremacy. Chips are certainly at the top of

0:25:14.359 --> 0:25:18.199
<v Speaker 3>the list. AMD hitting roadblock this week because of US rules.

0:25:19.240 --> 0:25:21.960
<v Speaker 3>Take a step back and just give us your impression

0:25:22.040 --> 0:25:26.399
<v Speaker 3>about why the US is now pressing allies to make

0:25:26.440 --> 0:25:29.280
<v Speaker 3>sure that China doesn't get its hands on certain types

0:25:29.320 --> 0:25:32.240
<v Speaker 3>of chips, Like big picture, what's worst case scenario here?

0:25:32.280 --> 0:25:33.760
<v Speaker 3>Like why does the US and its allies want to

0:25:33.800 --> 0:25:35.320
<v Speaker 3>keep China from getting this technology?

0:25:37.080 --> 0:25:39.639
<v Speaker 7>The US strategy, I think is pretty straightforward, and the

0:25:39.680 --> 0:25:42.880
<v Speaker 7>dilemma of the US faces is this, by any metric,

0:25:43.080 --> 0:25:47.560
<v Speaker 7>China will quantitatively outproduce the US in terms of military systems,

0:25:47.560 --> 0:25:51.040
<v Speaker 7>whether it's ships or missiles or drones. China already has

0:25:51.119 --> 0:25:53.840
<v Speaker 7>more and it will have even more of a quantitative

0:25:53.920 --> 0:25:55.800
<v Speaker 7>edge in the future. So the US is hoping it

0:25:55.800 --> 0:25:59.040
<v Speaker 7>can retain its qualitative edge in terms of defense and

0:25:59.040 --> 0:26:03.240
<v Speaker 7>intelligence system by applying advanced computing and AI to defense,

0:26:03.680 --> 0:26:06.800
<v Speaker 7>and doing so requires having better advanced computing and better

0:26:06.840 --> 0:26:09.639
<v Speaker 7>AI than China. And that's at the core of what

0:26:09.680 --> 0:26:12.280
<v Speaker 7>the US is trying to accomplish here. It's laser focused

0:26:12.320 --> 0:26:15.399
<v Speaker 7>on AI chips and the machines that are capable of

0:26:15.400 --> 0:26:18.480
<v Speaker 7>making cutting ANGI chips with the aim of restraining the

0:26:18.480 --> 0:26:22.040
<v Speaker 7>growth of China's AI ecosystem and keeping a technological edge

0:26:22.240 --> 0:26:24.600
<v Speaker 7>that the United States has had for the past several decades.

0:26:24.840 --> 0:26:28.760
<v Speaker 2>Well, having said that too, you know, with that in mind,

0:26:28.760 --> 0:26:31.760
<v Speaker 2>and I keep thinking about TSMC, you know, the ultimate fabricator.

0:26:31.760 --> 0:26:33.639
<v Speaker 2>I mean, people can design chips, but ultimately they go

0:26:33.680 --> 0:26:36.560
<v Speaker 2>to TSMC to make them and spit them out. How

0:26:36.600 --> 0:26:39.680
<v Speaker 2>critical is it for the United States or other countries,

0:26:40.080 --> 0:26:44.080
<v Speaker 2>you know, to back off of their dependency on TSMC.

0:26:46.320 --> 0:26:48.119
<v Speaker 7>Well, I think you see a lot of interest in

0:26:48.160 --> 0:26:50.280
<v Speaker 7>the US and Europe and Japan and elsewhere to have

0:26:50.320 --> 0:26:55.080
<v Speaker 7>a more diversified manufacturing footprint, which is partly why TSMC

0:26:55.160 --> 0:26:58.280
<v Speaker 7>is building new plants in the US, in Japan and

0:26:58.400 --> 0:27:00.639
<v Speaker 7>in Germany. But the reality is, when it comes to

0:27:00.720 --> 0:27:04.000
<v Speaker 7>AI processors in particular, like the GPUs that in video makes,

0:27:04.240 --> 0:27:08.240
<v Speaker 7>almost all of them are manufactured by TSC in Taiwan.

0:27:08.640 --> 0:27:12.560
<v Speaker 7>So thus far we haven't actually seen much diversification, at

0:27:12.640 --> 0:27:14.959
<v Speaker 7>least when it comes to these ultra cutting edge chips.

0:27:15.000 --> 0:27:18.240
<v Speaker 2>So how critical is it for the US to reduce

0:27:18.280 --> 0:27:19.040
<v Speaker 2>that dependency.

0:27:20.400 --> 0:27:22.600
<v Speaker 7>Well, I think you see that the United States spending

0:27:22.600 --> 0:27:25.679
<v Speaker 7>a fair amount of money trying that Chips Act is

0:27:25.720 --> 0:27:29.680
<v Speaker 7>going to spend forty billion dollars precisely on incentivizing firms

0:27:29.680 --> 0:27:31.800
<v Speaker 7>to build factories in the United States, and Japan and

0:27:31.840 --> 0:27:33.000
<v Speaker 7>Europe are doing the same thing.

0:27:33.320 --> 0:27:36.080
<v Speaker 3>Does it go far enough here in the US, because

0:27:36.119 --> 0:27:40.080
<v Speaker 3>we have seen some prominent players pull back and scale

0:27:40.080 --> 0:27:41.720
<v Speaker 3>back on some of these plans in the US.

0:27:43.960 --> 0:27:47.000
<v Speaker 7>Well, I think it's never going to be easy to

0:27:47.040 --> 0:27:49.560
<v Speaker 7>see supply chains shift in a big way over a

0:27:49.600 --> 0:27:52.119
<v Speaker 7>short period of time. The chip supply chain and the

0:27:52.160 --> 0:27:55.520
<v Speaker 7>role of SMC was built up over many decades, and

0:27:55.560 --> 0:27:58.719
<v Speaker 7>so it's just implausible to imagine the shift is going

0:27:58.760 --> 0:28:01.840
<v Speaker 7>to happen quickly, and it's not going to happen quickly,

0:28:01.840 --> 0:28:04.399
<v Speaker 7>both because it's hard and slow, but also because the

0:28:04.440 --> 0:28:08.760
<v Speaker 7>reason TSMC has such an entrenched position is because its

0:28:08.920 --> 0:28:12.639
<v Speaker 7>economies of scale have given it a technological edge, and

0:28:12.680 --> 0:28:16.000
<v Speaker 7>so it's not just about any individual type of technology

0:28:16.080 --> 0:28:18.919
<v Speaker 7>or subsidy for any individual factory. It's the entire business

0:28:18.920 --> 0:28:23.080
<v Speaker 7>model that gives TSMC its position, and that's why TSMC

0:28:23.160 --> 0:28:25.000
<v Speaker 7>is going to be very hard for any of its

0:28:25.040 --> 0:28:28.280
<v Speaker 7>competitors to dislodge at the top of the foundry market.

0:28:28.280 --> 0:28:29.960
<v Speaker 7>And why I really think most of the industry is

0:28:29.960 --> 0:28:33.000
<v Speaker 7>expecting TSMC to remain the dominant player for a very

0:28:33.000 --> 0:28:33.600
<v Speaker 7>long time to come.

0:28:33.880 --> 0:28:36.520
<v Speaker 3>Is it realistic to think that if the US is

0:28:36.560 --> 0:28:39.960
<v Speaker 3>successful in cutting off this technology to China, that China

0:28:40.000 --> 0:28:43.200
<v Speaker 3>will not develop this on its own. I mean, after all,

0:28:43.280 --> 0:28:46.120
<v Speaker 3>last August we got the news that in this Huawei

0:28:46.120 --> 0:28:49.479
<v Speaker 3>phone there was a chip developed that was more than

0:28:49.520 --> 0:28:52.239
<v Speaker 3>a generation ahead of where the US had sought to

0:28:52.280 --> 0:28:53.800
<v Speaker 3>halt China's progress.

0:28:55.800 --> 0:28:57.600
<v Speaker 7>Well, I think China is no doubt going to try

0:28:57.600 --> 0:29:02.120
<v Speaker 7>to keep developing it's both semiconductor and at AI capabilities,

0:29:02.120 --> 0:29:05.880
<v Speaker 7>and there are a very large number of very well trained,

0:29:05.920 --> 0:29:07.520
<v Speaker 7>intelligent people in the country who are going to be

0:29:07.560 --> 0:29:11.240
<v Speaker 7>focused on this effort. I think the question is really

0:29:11.240 --> 0:29:14.560
<v Speaker 7>what's the technological gap between, for example, the tips that

0:29:14.560 --> 0:29:16.360
<v Speaker 7>can be made in Taiwan and the tips that can

0:29:16.400 --> 0:29:19.600
<v Speaker 7>be made in China. And what you find if you

0:29:19.680 --> 0:29:22.320
<v Speaker 7>look closely, is that for certain types of chip that

0:29:22.400 --> 0:29:25.720
<v Speaker 7>gap has closed someone but there still at least four

0:29:25.760 --> 0:29:28.440
<v Speaker 7>year gap, maybe a five year gap between the cutting

0:29:28.520 --> 0:29:33.240
<v Speaker 7>edge Taiwanese capabilities and the most advanced capabilities today in China.

0:29:33.320 --> 0:29:35.680
<v Speaker 7>And we'll see if China can close that further, but

0:29:35.720 --> 0:29:39.080
<v Speaker 7>the US is trying to prevent that, both by incentivizing

0:29:39.120 --> 0:29:42.760
<v Speaker 7>it companies to race forward technologically via the TIPS Act

0:29:42.800 --> 0:29:45.200
<v Speaker 7>and other R and D funts, but also by making

0:29:45.200 --> 0:29:47.840
<v Speaker 7>it harder and harder for China access cutting edge chip

0:29:47.880 --> 0:29:48.560
<v Speaker 7>making tools.

0:29:48.720 --> 0:29:50.680
<v Speaker 2>Chris, forgive me if I sound naive, I mean the

0:29:50.720 --> 0:29:53.080
<v Speaker 2>stakes I understand as you lay it out very high.

0:29:53.120 --> 0:29:56.040
<v Speaker 2>We know we've been reporting all the stories for countries,

0:29:56.080 --> 0:29:59.040
<v Speaker 2>for companies right this tech battle for supremacy. Why does

0:29:59.080 --> 0:30:01.200
<v Speaker 2>it have to be a fight. Why is it a fight?

0:30:03.200 --> 0:30:06.720
<v Speaker 7>Well, the first ships that were invented were emerged essentially

0:30:06.760 --> 0:30:10.080
<v Speaker 7>for use in guiding nuclear missiles more accurately, and since then,

0:30:10.600 --> 0:30:14.760
<v Speaker 7>militaries and intelligence apts have seen computing as core to

0:30:14.800 --> 0:30:17.920
<v Speaker 7>their ability to produce next generation systems. And at a

0:30:18.000 --> 0:30:21.200
<v Speaker 7>time when you see every major defense ministry, whether it's

0:30:21.240 --> 0:30:24.160
<v Speaker 7>in Beijing or in Washington or Tokyo anywhere on the world,

0:30:24.440 --> 0:30:27.480
<v Speaker 7>they're all right now trying to deploy AI to military

0:30:27.520 --> 0:30:31.040
<v Speaker 7>systems to make them more capable, more efficient, more accurate.

0:30:31.360 --> 0:30:33.120
<v Speaker 7>And this means that AI is not only going to

0:30:33.120 --> 0:30:35.520
<v Speaker 7>be powering systems like chat GPT, It's also going to

0:30:35.560 --> 0:30:38.400
<v Speaker 7>be used in military and intelligence uce cases as well,

0:30:38.440 --> 0:30:40.640
<v Speaker 7>and that is a sphere where there's a really severe

0:30:40.680 --> 0:30:43.719
<v Speaker 7>competition right now between China and the United States.

0:30:43.800 --> 0:30:46.120
<v Speaker 3>Hey, Chris, we only have thirty seconds left. But you're

0:30:46.120 --> 0:30:50.040
<v Speaker 3>also a consultant for several different firms or in depth

0:30:50.040 --> 0:30:51.920
<v Speaker 3>several different capacities. I should know what's the number one

0:30:52.000 --> 0:30:55.240
<v Speaker 3>question you get from executives at the companies you work with.

0:30:57.280 --> 0:30:59.720
<v Speaker 7>The key question companies are asking is both what's next

0:30:59.720 --> 0:31:03.160
<v Speaker 7>and and also what's next in Washington in terms of

0:31:03.160 --> 0:31:05.120
<v Speaker 7>the types of regulation that we're going to see either

0:31:05.120 --> 0:31:07.880
<v Speaker 7>from Congress or from the next presidential administration.

0:31:08.040 --> 0:31:09.520
<v Speaker 2>We'll see if we get any clues in the State

0:31:09.560 --> 0:31:14.560
<v Speaker 2>of the Union tonight when President Biden takes to the country.

0:31:14.640 --> 0:31:17.360
<v Speaker 2>All right, listen, Chris. Incredible. Chris Miller Associate professor of

0:31:17.440 --> 0:31:20.800
<v Speaker 2>international history at Tufts University. His book Chip War, The

0:31:20.840 --> 0:31:23.280
<v Speaker 2>Fight for the World's most Critical Technology. Feel like every

0:31:23.360 --> 0:31:27.040
<v Speaker 2>day there's a story somehow on the industry or about

0:31:27.360 --> 0:31:29.640
<v Speaker 2>kind of the battle between nations and the concerns and

0:31:29.680 --> 0:31:30.400
<v Speaker 2>the constraints. You know.

0:31:30.440 --> 0:31:32.480
<v Speaker 3>It's one of Barack Obama's favorite books last year.

0:31:32.640 --> 0:31:36.160
<v Speaker 2>That's pretty cool, Chris, Thanks so much. This is Bloomberg.

0:31:37.880 --> 0:31:41.400
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week podcast. Catch us

0:31:41.440 --> 0:31:44.680
<v Speaker 1>live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern. Listen

0:31:44.720 --> 0:31:46.880
<v Speaker 1>on Apple card Play and then brout Auto with a

0:31:46.880 --> 0:31:52.720
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.

0:31:54.640 --> 0:31:57.400
<v Speaker 3>Let's get a big picture outlook from Tersey McMillian, head

0:31:57.400 --> 0:32:00.880
<v Speaker 3>of Global Acid Allocation Strategy at the Wells Spargo Investment Institute,

0:32:00.920 --> 0:32:04.240
<v Speaker 3>joining us from Winston Salem, North Carolina. Tracy, how are you.

0:32:05.160 --> 0:32:06.360
<v Speaker 6>I'm well, Thank you well.

0:32:06.320 --> 0:32:08.520
<v Speaker 3>It's good to have you back with us. I do

0:32:08.600 --> 0:32:10.880
<v Speaker 3>want to remind everyone since October the S and B

0:32:10.880 --> 0:32:13.400
<v Speaker 3>five hundred is up more than twenty five percent. We

0:32:13.440 --> 0:32:16.760
<v Speaker 3>do have lots of market voices coming on saying there's

0:32:16.800 --> 0:32:19.680
<v Speaker 3>still room to run higher this year. You argue, though,

0:32:19.880 --> 0:32:22.720
<v Speaker 3>that now is the time to start being defensive when

0:32:22.760 --> 0:32:24.800
<v Speaker 3>it comes to equities and fixed income.

0:32:24.840 --> 0:32:28.160
<v Speaker 6>Why that's right. We are a little more cautious here,

0:32:28.400 --> 0:32:30.560
<v Speaker 6>and you know, it does look like this is going

0:32:30.600 --> 0:32:34.920
<v Speaker 6>to be the seventeenth positive week out of the last

0:32:35.160 --> 0:32:37.959
<v Speaker 6>nineteen weeks for the S and P five hundred, So

0:32:38.400 --> 0:32:41.480
<v Speaker 6>you know, we think a pullback is probably due here

0:32:41.920 --> 0:32:44.520
<v Speaker 6>and it's probably going to come in conjunction with an

0:32:44.560 --> 0:32:48.480
<v Speaker 6>economic slowdown that we see emerging over the next couple

0:32:48.520 --> 0:32:51.120
<v Speaker 6>of quarters. So you know, we might see a spring

0:32:51.400 --> 0:32:55.520
<v Speaker 6>summer soft patch and that would set the stage for

0:32:55.600 --> 0:32:58.560
<v Speaker 6>a rebound towards the end of the year, and we

0:32:58.640 --> 0:33:01.960
<v Speaker 6>think that will be the out opportunity for investors to

0:33:02.040 --> 0:33:04.080
<v Speaker 6>broaden out their equity exposure.

0:33:04.960 --> 0:33:06.960
<v Speaker 2>Well, it's interesting, all right, So a little bit of

0:33:07.000 --> 0:33:09.680
<v Speaker 2>a pullback, So you're just saying, yeah, so how much

0:33:09.720 --> 0:33:11.360
<v Speaker 2>of a pullback did you say? Or did you not?

0:33:12.400 --> 0:33:15.400
<v Speaker 6>I did not, But a ten percent pullback is not

0:33:15.600 --> 0:33:18.960
<v Speaker 6>at all uncommon. We typically do see about a ten

0:33:19.040 --> 0:33:20.760
<v Speaker 6>percent pullback every year.

0:33:21.160 --> 0:33:24.760
<v Speaker 2>All right, So just normal, nothing fundamentally wrong. It's just

0:33:24.800 --> 0:33:26.320
<v Speaker 2>a case of taking some of the fluff out of

0:33:26.320 --> 0:33:28.160
<v Speaker 2>the market or the run up, right, Just a little

0:33:28.200 --> 0:33:31.120
<v Speaker 2>bit of kind of taking some of that out, correct.

0:33:31.840 --> 0:33:32.360
<v Speaker 3>That's right.

0:33:32.440 --> 0:33:35.880
<v Speaker 6>Yes, I'm just looking for, you know, some of the

0:33:36.560 --> 0:33:40.200
<v Speaker 6>accesses to come out of the market. And if we

0:33:40.200 --> 0:33:42.160
<v Speaker 6>were to see a pullback in the S and P.

0:33:42.360 --> 0:33:45.040
<v Speaker 6>Five hundred, we think that some of the other areas

0:33:45.080 --> 0:33:48.160
<v Speaker 6>of the market that have been underperforming large caps, like

0:33:48.240 --> 0:33:52.680
<v Speaker 6>small caps, emerging markets, the riskier corners of the markets

0:33:53.160 --> 0:33:56.840
<v Speaker 6>might perform even worse and provide a better entry point.

0:33:56.920 --> 0:33:59.960
<v Speaker 6>So at this point, we've been cautious over the path

0:34:00.040 --> 0:34:04.440
<v Speaker 6>just a couple of years now and been overweighted large caps,

0:34:04.840 --> 0:34:07.080
<v Speaker 6>and that's been the right place to be. But we're

0:34:07.120 --> 0:34:10.040
<v Speaker 6>just looking for that opportunity to take something out of

0:34:10.080 --> 0:34:14.120
<v Speaker 6>fixed income, move it into small caps, perhaps even emerging

0:34:14.160 --> 0:34:15.520
<v Speaker 6>markets down the line.

0:34:16.960 --> 0:34:18.440
<v Speaker 3>I want to go back to this idea of there

0:34:18.480 --> 0:34:21.400
<v Speaker 3>being an economic slowdown later this year. We're going to

0:34:21.400 --> 0:34:27.080
<v Speaker 3>get the February employment report tomorrow. We got CPI next week. Tracy,

0:34:27.080 --> 0:34:29.319
<v Speaker 3>what are the indications now that we're starting to see

0:34:29.320 --> 0:34:32.120
<v Speaker 3>a slowdown that could emerge in the next couple of quarters.

0:34:32.160 --> 0:34:33.560
<v Speaker 3>What do you see?

0:34:34.160 --> 0:34:36.680
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, there are a couple of things. So we are

0:34:37.200 --> 0:34:42.160
<v Speaker 6>seeing the labor markets starting to weaken on the fringes.

0:34:42.680 --> 0:34:46.080
<v Speaker 6>So what we saw yesterday in the JOLTS data was

0:34:46.200 --> 0:34:50.400
<v Speaker 6>that there were fewer quits. We've also seen that current

0:34:50.760 --> 0:34:54.160
<v Speaker 6>job holders are more concerned about getting a job if

0:34:54.200 --> 0:34:58.160
<v Speaker 6>they were to lose their job, and so we're starting

0:34:58.200 --> 0:35:02.720
<v Speaker 6>to see some weakness there in the labor markets around

0:35:02.719 --> 0:35:06.600
<v Speaker 6>the edges. Tomorrow, we're going to be watching for the

0:35:06.800 --> 0:35:12.520
<v Speaker 6>number of hours, the weekly hours that employers are asking

0:35:12.640 --> 0:35:14.879
<v Speaker 6>of their employees. We're going to be looking at temp

0:35:14.960 --> 0:35:18.279
<v Speaker 6>workers to see if that's an early sign that maybe

0:35:18.600 --> 0:35:23.080
<v Speaker 6>some layoffs are ahead. So labor markets starting to cool

0:35:23.160 --> 0:35:28.040
<v Speaker 6>a little bit. We're seeing some rising default rates in

0:35:28.200 --> 0:35:31.960
<v Speaker 6>the consumer credit markets, and so that's giving us a

0:35:32.000 --> 0:35:35.920
<v Speaker 6>little bit of pause as well. But we're again just

0:35:36.040 --> 0:35:40.080
<v Speaker 6>probably a summer soft patch, a slow down here. Take

0:35:40.120 --> 0:35:44.160
<v Speaker 6>the opportunity to reposition a bit. But you know, we

0:35:44.440 --> 0:35:47.040
<v Speaker 6>aren't seeing anything at this point more severe than that.

0:35:47.480 --> 0:35:50.800
<v Speaker 2>But time to be defensive, correct in both your equity

0:35:51.000 --> 0:35:52.400
<v Speaker 2>and fixed income postures.

0:35:53.880 --> 0:35:58.840
<v Speaker 6>Yes, yes, so we're just cautious here ahead of a

0:35:58.880 --> 0:36:02.880
<v Speaker 6>potential pullback. So cautious to us means looking for higher

0:36:03.040 --> 0:36:08.480
<v Speaker 6>quality equities and higher quality fixed income. We're positioned on

0:36:08.560 --> 0:36:11.400
<v Speaker 6>the short end of the fixed income curve because we

0:36:11.480 --> 0:36:14.480
<v Speaker 6>do think rates could move higher towards the end of

0:36:14.520 --> 0:36:18.720
<v Speaker 6>the year, and so we'd rather be more short term focused.

0:36:18.800 --> 0:36:23.080
<v Speaker 6>So that's more defensive, and that defensive positioning and fixed

0:36:23.080 --> 0:36:25.840
<v Speaker 6>income we think will give us the dry powder to

0:36:26.080 --> 0:36:29.080
<v Speaker 6>move into other areas of the market when we get

0:36:29.640 --> 0:36:31.439
<v Speaker 6>more attractive buying opportunity.

0:36:32.000 --> 0:36:35.839
<v Speaker 3>Hey, Tracy, it's Women's History month, and one thing that

0:36:35.880 --> 0:36:38.480
<v Speaker 3>we were talking about and we've been talking about, is

0:36:38.520 --> 0:36:41.920
<v Speaker 3>the idea that when it comes to women and investing,

0:36:42.280 --> 0:36:44.480
<v Speaker 3>we don't see the same participation as we do when

0:36:44.560 --> 0:36:46.640
<v Speaker 3>we see that we see with men. But also at

0:36:46.640 --> 0:36:49.640
<v Speaker 3>the same time, it's even more important because women often

0:36:49.760 --> 0:36:52.440
<v Speaker 3>outlive men and need to be planning for the future

0:36:52.920 --> 0:36:54.880
<v Speaker 3>for even more years on average. Talk to us a

0:36:54.920 --> 0:36:56.759
<v Speaker 3>little bit about what you folks are doing at the

0:36:56.760 --> 0:36:58.840
<v Speaker 3>Wells Fargo Investment Institute.

0:36:59.400 --> 0:37:02.759
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, happy to. So I've been really following this for

0:37:02.960 --> 0:37:08.080
<v Speaker 6>about the past fifteen years, and we've done several studies

0:37:08.160 --> 0:37:12.359
<v Speaker 6>of actual accounts that are managed by women, and what

0:37:12.440 --> 0:37:16.839
<v Speaker 6>we find is that women consistently outperform on a risk

0:37:16.880 --> 0:37:21.520
<v Speaker 6>adjusted basis. So we think that's a really important message

0:37:21.640 --> 0:37:24.000
<v Speaker 6>to get out to women that when they take the

0:37:24.120 --> 0:37:28.160
<v Speaker 6>step to invest, they're doing a pretty good job managing

0:37:28.200 --> 0:37:32.520
<v Speaker 6>their assets. But we do also see that they tend

0:37:32.560 --> 0:37:36.400
<v Speaker 6>to say they feel less confident about investing, and a

0:37:36.440 --> 0:37:40.760
<v Speaker 6>recent study that we've just performed showed that fewer women

0:37:40.920 --> 0:37:44.080
<v Speaker 6>felt that now was a good time to invest, and

0:37:44.120 --> 0:37:47.239
<v Speaker 6>there was a fourteen percent gap when it came to

0:37:47.320 --> 0:37:51.040
<v Speaker 6>being confident about where to invest, with only about a

0:37:51.160 --> 0:37:56.000
<v Speaker 6>third of women, saying that they felt confident. So we

0:37:56.080 --> 0:37:59.320
<v Speaker 6>think part of that might be that women are less

0:37:59.520 --> 0:38:04.160
<v Speaker 6>likely to engage in conversations about money. Gen Z says

0:38:04.239 --> 0:38:07.319
<v Speaker 6>that they feel judged when they talk about money, and

0:38:07.360 --> 0:38:10.440
<v Speaker 6>the older generations feel like it's a private topic. So

0:38:10.800 --> 0:38:12.680
<v Speaker 6>we need to get those conversations started.

0:38:12.800 --> 0:38:14.719
<v Speaker 2>Tracy, twenty seconds here, why do you think the women

0:38:14.719 --> 0:38:15.480
<v Speaker 2>have outperformed?

0:38:16.239 --> 0:38:20.560
<v Speaker 6>Oh, we think that they've outperformed because they tend to

0:38:20.880 --> 0:38:24.520
<v Speaker 6>generate a plan and stick with that plan. They tend

0:38:24.560 --> 0:38:28.040
<v Speaker 6>to be more disciplined about saving, and they also tend

0:38:28.080 --> 0:38:31.160
<v Speaker 6>to trade less. So we think that contributes to those

0:38:31.239 --> 0:38:32.920
<v Speaker 6>higher risk aggested returns.

0:38:33.040 --> 0:38:34.840
<v Speaker 2>Wait did you say because we're the better sex? Is

0:38:34.880 --> 0:38:35.479
<v Speaker 2>that what you said?

0:38:36.360 --> 0:38:39.240
<v Speaker 3>I just want to make sure that silent.

0:38:40.640 --> 0:38:42.600
<v Speaker 2>Hey, I'm not going to make sure we get all

0:38:42.640 --> 0:38:43.120
<v Speaker 2>of the data.

0:38:43.280 --> 0:38:46.360
<v Speaker 3>Night's not going to do any Tim's splaining men's planning.

0:38:46.000 --> 0:38:51.400
<v Speaker 2>Here better not international women's data is tomorrow. It's our day, Tracy,

0:38:51.440 --> 0:38:53.520
<v Speaker 2>Thank you so much, really appreciate you sharing that insight.

0:38:53.600 --> 0:38:57.600
<v Speaker 2>Tracy McMillian, head of Global Asset Allocation Strategy, Wells Fargo

0:38:57.680 --> 0:39:01.239
<v Speaker 2>Investment Institute, joining us from our Carolina. You're listening and

0:39:01.280 --> 0:39:04.480
<v Speaker 2>watching Bloomberg Business Week and this is Bloomberg.

0:39:07.520 --> 0:39:12.200
<v Speaker 1>This is the Bloomberg Business Week podcast, available on Apple, Spotify,

0:39:12.320 --> 0:39:16.040
<v Speaker 1>and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live weekday

0:39:16.080 --> 0:39:19.680
<v Speaker 1>afternoons from two to five pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot com,

0:39:19.719 --> 0:39:23.040
<v Speaker 1>the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App.

0:39:23.080 --> 0:39:26.040
<v Speaker 1>You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube

0:39:26.280 --> 0:39:28.280
<v Speaker 1>and always on the Bloomberg terminal