WEBVTT - Tariff-Fueled Stock Rout Caps Off Trading Week

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:07.040
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.

0:00:10.680 --> 0:00:14.040
<v Speaker 2>Welcome to the Bloomberg Daybreak Asia Podcast. I'm Doug Chrisner.

0:00:14.160 --> 0:00:17.279
<v Speaker 2>So markets in Asia are wrapping up what certainly has

0:00:17.320 --> 0:00:20.520
<v Speaker 2>been a very rough week and obviously the key driver

0:00:21.040 --> 0:00:24.040
<v Speaker 2>President Trump's latest tariff measures. Here in the States, we

0:00:24.079 --> 0:00:26.799
<v Speaker 2>had a meltdown in risk assets. The S and P

0:00:26.880 --> 0:00:29.800
<v Speaker 2>five hundred tumbled more than four point eight percent. We

0:00:29.920 --> 0:00:33.680
<v Speaker 2>closed very near session lows. It was the worst single

0:00:33.760 --> 0:00:36.120
<v Speaker 2>day drop for the S and P since twenty twenty,

0:00:36.600 --> 0:00:39.800
<v Speaker 2>and in the process this selloff wiped out about two

0:00:40.040 --> 0:00:43.560
<v Speaker 2>trillion dollars in market value. We also saw a great

0:00:43.560 --> 0:00:46.159
<v Speaker 2>deal of dollar weakness, with the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index

0:00:46.240 --> 0:00:49.160
<v Speaker 2>down one and a half percent in New York. Trading

0:00:49.520 --> 0:00:53.240
<v Speaker 2>oil joined in on a selloff in commodities, with WTI

0:00:53.440 --> 0:00:57.280
<v Speaker 2>falling six point six percent in New York. And in

0:00:57.320 --> 0:00:59.600
<v Speaker 2>a moment we'll be hearing from Steve Brice. He is

0:00:59.600 --> 0:01:02.880
<v Speaker 2>the c IO at Standard Chartered Wealth Solutions Group. But

0:01:02.960 --> 0:01:06.280
<v Speaker 2>we begin this morning in Sydney. Joining me now is

0:01:06.360 --> 0:01:10.399
<v Speaker 2>Garfield Reynolds, who leads Bloomberg's Markets live coverage for the

0:01:10.440 --> 0:01:14.400
<v Speaker 2>Asia Pacific. Garfield joining from our studios in Sydney. Talk

0:01:14.440 --> 0:01:17.360
<v Speaker 2>to me a little bit about what you witnessed yesterday, Garfield,

0:01:17.360 --> 0:01:20.640
<v Speaker 2>with the price action across the Asia Pacific and what

0:01:20.680 --> 0:01:22.280
<v Speaker 2>we're seeing now in early trading.

0:01:22.800 --> 0:01:26.520
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, the price action in Asia yesterday was extraordinary, but

0:01:27.319 --> 0:01:33.360
<v Speaker 1>it was fed by an announcement that was confusing, in

0:01:33.480 --> 0:01:40.640
<v Speaker 1>a paque, in the presentation, in the methodology, which ultimately

0:01:40.760 --> 0:01:44.560
<v Speaker 1>ended up being based on a very simplistic and not

0:01:44.680 --> 0:01:49.280
<v Speaker 1>really credible on an economic basis formula. So you just

0:01:49.320 --> 0:01:52.520
<v Speaker 1>sort of had waves of reaction every time you thought

0:01:52.600 --> 0:01:57.080
<v Speaker 1>maybe the market'spite consolidated, either fresh investors came in as

0:01:57.080 --> 0:02:01.840
<v Speaker 1>the time zones changed, or right a realization came through

0:02:02.200 --> 0:02:06.680
<v Speaker 1>just how potentially damaging this is. And you were saying

0:02:06.760 --> 0:02:09.560
<v Speaker 1>that the sell off for US stocks was the biggest

0:02:09.560 --> 0:02:12.880
<v Speaker 1>since the pandemic, as it should have been, given that

0:02:13.120 --> 0:02:16.360
<v Speaker 1>this is the biggest shock to the global economy since

0:02:16.600 --> 0:02:17.639
<v Speaker 1>the pandemic.

0:02:17.360 --> 0:02:19.880
<v Speaker 2>And the question now is whether or not it precipitates

0:02:19.919 --> 0:02:23.280
<v Speaker 2>a recession. Was it very interesting today that President Trump

0:02:23.320 --> 0:02:27.320
<v Speaker 2>said he's open to reducing these tariffs if other nations

0:02:27.360 --> 0:02:29.839
<v Speaker 2>were willing to offer something. And I think the word

0:02:29.880 --> 0:02:33.040
<v Speaker 2>he used here was phenomenal, that says to me that

0:02:33.240 --> 0:02:35.799
<v Speaker 2>there is the room to negotiate, but we may have

0:02:35.960 --> 0:02:39.040
<v Speaker 2>to accept the fact that in that process that could

0:02:39.120 --> 0:02:42.760
<v Speaker 2>be quite lengthy, tariffs may be in place for a while.

0:02:43.240 --> 0:02:43.760
<v Speaker 3>Is that fair?

0:02:44.600 --> 0:02:48.080
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, that's fair, And it actually adds to there's an

0:02:48.160 --> 0:02:51.200
<v Speaker 1>argument to be made if you wanted to raise the

0:02:51.400 --> 0:02:54.320
<v Speaker 1>average tariff rate in the US to something like twenty

0:02:54.400 --> 0:02:59.120
<v Speaker 1>five to thirty percent, then just do it and and

0:02:59.800 --> 0:03:03.800
<v Speaker 1>move on. And you know, that's the the avowed aims

0:03:03.960 --> 0:03:08.239
<v Speaker 1>of the Trump administration to increase revenue from tariffs and

0:03:08.400 --> 0:03:14.040
<v Speaker 1>also to push foreigners to bring manufacturing back to the

0:03:14.200 --> 0:03:17.079
<v Speaker 1>US because otherwise they will be priced out of the

0:03:17.200 --> 0:03:19.919
<v Speaker 1>US market. If you think that's the way to go,

0:03:20.200 --> 0:03:23.960
<v Speaker 1>then you do big tariffs and you stick with them

0:03:24.040 --> 0:03:26.519
<v Speaker 1>for at least a while. Maybe you give a timetable,

0:03:26.600 --> 0:03:28.160
<v Speaker 1>you say these are going to be in for a year.

0:03:28.600 --> 0:03:33.200
<v Speaker 1>But instead we have a situation where nobody knows how

0:03:33.400 --> 0:03:36.800
<v Speaker 1>long these tariffs will be in for what they will

0:03:36.880 --> 0:03:40.720
<v Speaker 1>actually entail. So for businesses, you've got a lot of

0:03:40.800 --> 0:03:43.400
<v Speaker 1>pain but also a lot of clarity. You know, do

0:03:43.480 --> 0:03:46.520
<v Speaker 1>you And for most companies it'll be okay, I'm going

0:03:46.600 --> 0:03:49.120
<v Speaker 1>to punt my business plans for what six months a

0:03:49.200 --> 0:03:52.240
<v Speaker 1>year until I can be sure what I'm dealing with.

0:03:52.880 --> 0:03:54.800
<v Speaker 2>So the selloff that we had here in the US

0:03:54.960 --> 0:03:59.000
<v Speaker 2>makes for an unusual setup for what is really the

0:03:59.120 --> 0:04:02.000
<v Speaker 2>most closely watch data point of the month at being

0:04:02.120 --> 0:04:05.560
<v Speaker 2>the government's report on employment. So in addition to that,

0:04:05.720 --> 0:04:08.360
<v Speaker 2>tomorrow we're going to be hearing from FED share J. Powell.

0:04:09.000 --> 0:04:12.320
<v Speaker 2>Obviously the story on tariff's will make the Fed's job

0:04:12.400 --> 0:04:16.240
<v Speaker 2>a lot more complicated. It seems a case of either

0:04:16.480 --> 0:04:19.240
<v Speaker 2>the Fed lower's interest rates to support the economy or

0:04:19.440 --> 0:04:22.880
<v Speaker 2>it keeps them elevated to contain inflation. Where do you

0:04:22.960 --> 0:04:26.480
<v Speaker 2>see the greater risk right now economic weakness or stubborn

0:04:26.520 --> 0:04:29.040
<v Speaker 2>inflation or are they kind of evenly balanced.

0:04:29.400 --> 0:04:32.840
<v Speaker 1>Well, I think economic weakness is the greater risk. But

0:04:33.440 --> 0:04:36.960
<v Speaker 1>part of the risks there are precisely that the FED

0:04:38.080 --> 0:04:42.320
<v Speaker 1>has the potential to sit where it is while it

0:04:42.440 --> 0:04:46.560
<v Speaker 1>wastes to see what happens. There's definitely an increase in

0:04:46.600 --> 0:04:51.400
<v Speaker 1>inflation expectations. They were already concerned that there were signs

0:04:51.480 --> 0:04:56.000
<v Speaker 1>that this inflationary trend was stalling out. They had been

0:04:57.120 --> 0:05:00.800
<v Speaker 1>talking about the idea that interest rates now are in

0:05:00.880 --> 0:05:03.880
<v Speaker 1>a good place, and they don't see any reason to

0:05:04.080 --> 0:05:08.280
<v Speaker 1>rush to change them. And when you've got this, as

0:05:08.320 --> 0:05:11.440
<v Speaker 1>I said, very confusing introduction of tariffs that could have

0:05:11.720 --> 0:05:14.480
<v Speaker 1>major impacts on the US economy, you're going to have

0:05:14.600 --> 0:05:17.840
<v Speaker 1>a lot of volatility about the data coming in and

0:05:18.080 --> 0:05:22.880
<v Speaker 1>uncertainty about all sorts of data and what the long

0:05:23.000 --> 0:05:25.680
<v Speaker 1>term impacts are actually going to be.

0:05:26.400 --> 0:05:29.440
<v Speaker 2>In terms of retaliation. What do we know about what

0:05:29.560 --> 0:05:33.320
<v Speaker 2>we're hearing from governments in Asian I'm particularly curious about

0:05:33.560 --> 0:05:34.640
<v Speaker 2>the Chinese response.

0:05:35.200 --> 0:05:39.600
<v Speaker 1>Well, China's response has also been pretty opaque. It's not

0:05:39.720 --> 0:05:43.280
<v Speaker 1>a little clear exactly what they are going to do.

0:05:43.480 --> 0:05:47.159
<v Speaker 1>They do have a track record of actually waiting until

0:05:47.240 --> 0:05:50.880
<v Speaker 1>the tariffs are imposed before they announced their response. Now

0:05:51.720 --> 0:05:55.080
<v Speaker 1>that means we could be waiting till April nine, because

0:05:55.240 --> 0:05:59.040
<v Speaker 1>the ten percent on everybody comes in April five, and

0:05:59.200 --> 0:06:02.320
<v Speaker 1>then the addition tariffs come in on top of that

0:06:02.520 --> 0:06:06.400
<v Speaker 1>on April nine. So does China renounce some stuff April

0:06:06.480 --> 0:06:09.360
<v Speaker 1>five and then more on April nine, or just everything

0:06:09.440 --> 0:06:13.520
<v Speaker 1>on April nine. We've also got no real clarity on

0:06:14.520 --> 0:06:18.440
<v Speaker 1>whether a TikTok deal will actually happen. A lot of

0:06:18.520 --> 0:06:20.720
<v Speaker 1>talk from the US side that one is coming and

0:06:20.800 --> 0:06:23.799
<v Speaker 1>that that could lead to tariff relief. If that a curse,

0:06:23.920 --> 0:06:27.640
<v Speaker 1>then that would take China retaliation off the table, you

0:06:27.640 --> 0:06:30.720
<v Speaker 1>would think. But there's no clarity as to where this.

0:06:30.880 --> 0:06:32.360
<v Speaker 1>We don't really have much of a clue as to

0:06:32.400 --> 0:06:37.400
<v Speaker 1>whether China is really interested in letting TikTok essentially slip

0:06:37.440 --> 0:06:38.080
<v Speaker 1>out of its hands.

0:06:38.240 --> 0:06:41.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I think that TikTok deadline is this weekend here

0:06:41.200 --> 0:06:43.599
<v Speaker 2>in the US. Garfield, thank you so much for taking

0:06:43.640 --> 0:06:46.280
<v Speaker 2>the time to chat with us. Garfield Reynolds there. He

0:06:46.480 --> 0:06:50.640
<v Speaker 2>leads Bloomberg's markets live coverage for the Asia Pacific and

0:06:51.000 --> 0:06:53.760
<v Speaker 2>Garfield joining today from our studios in Sydney here on

0:06:53.800 --> 0:07:08.160
<v Speaker 2>the Daybreak Asia podcast. Welcome back to the Daybreak Asia Podcast.

0:07:08.360 --> 0:07:11.520
<v Speaker 2>I'm Doug Prisner. We're seeing further downside from markets in

0:07:11.560 --> 0:07:14.600
<v Speaker 2>the Asia Pacific. This is after US equities and the

0:07:14.720 --> 0:07:18.640
<v Speaker 2>dollar suffered their worst day in years. Shares in Australia

0:07:18.680 --> 0:07:21.960
<v Speaker 2>and Japan fell right at the open. For some market perspective,

0:07:22.040 --> 0:07:24.640
<v Speaker 2>we heard earlier from Steve Brice. He is the CIO

0:07:24.840 --> 0:07:28.400
<v Speaker 2>at Standard Chartered Wealth Solutions Group. He spoke with Bloomberg's

0:07:28.440 --> 0:07:30.360
<v Speaker 2>Paul Allen and Heidi Stroud Watts.

0:07:30.960 --> 0:07:34.080
<v Speaker 1>So it doesn't feel like we're going to see the

0:07:34.200 --> 0:07:36.240
<v Speaker 1>volatility abate anytime soon.

0:07:37.280 --> 0:07:39.800
<v Speaker 2>How do you sort of progress from here? What's your

0:07:39.920 --> 0:07:42.160
<v Speaker 2>take on how to navigate these markets?

0:07:42.760 --> 0:07:48.280
<v Speaker 4>Yes, I guess everybody's now just adjusting to these peak

0:07:48.360 --> 0:07:51.400
<v Speaker 4>tariffs that we've been seeing implemented in the US and

0:07:51.560 --> 0:07:53.400
<v Speaker 4>just trying to figure out what the next steps are,

0:07:53.480 --> 0:07:56.200
<v Speaker 4>whether it's going to be retaliatory or whether we're going

0:07:56.280 --> 0:08:00.160
<v Speaker 4>to see some sort of negotiations taking place. The likely is,

0:08:00.200 --> 0:08:02.640
<v Speaker 4>of course, it's going to be a bit of both,

0:08:03.240 --> 0:08:07.280
<v Speaker 4>and then the openness or willingness of the US administration

0:08:07.480 --> 0:08:12.600
<v Speaker 4>to renegotiate these tariffs lower. So I guess everybody realizes

0:08:12.680 --> 0:08:14.440
<v Speaker 4>this is bad for growth and good for it and

0:08:14.760 --> 0:08:18.280
<v Speaker 4>picks up inflation. So the question everybody needs to ask is,

0:08:18.360 --> 0:08:21.120
<v Speaker 4>you know, what are the scenarios from here from a

0:08:21.160 --> 0:08:26.680
<v Speaker 4>growth perspective? Is President Trump? Is he an idiot or

0:08:26.840 --> 0:08:29.320
<v Speaker 4>is he being is he unconstrained? I don't believe he's

0:08:29.360 --> 0:08:32.600
<v Speaker 4>either of those things. So you know, he's clearly using

0:08:32.679 --> 0:08:36.840
<v Speaker 4>this or most likely using this as a negotiating tool

0:08:37.360 --> 0:08:39.600
<v Speaker 4>to try and get a better trade agreements with different

0:08:40.000 --> 0:08:45.199
<v Speaker 4>different counterparties. And we're also seeing in Congress the Republicans

0:08:45.240 --> 0:08:48.079
<v Speaker 4>have a voice again, so it's certainly not a majority

0:08:48.559 --> 0:08:51.480
<v Speaker 4>questioning his leadership, but certain people now started asking the

0:08:51.559 --> 0:08:54.480
<v Speaker 4>question as to whether this is the appropriate thing, and

0:08:54.880 --> 0:08:57.280
<v Speaker 4>that leads to the point of do we still have

0:08:57.360 --> 0:08:59.920
<v Speaker 4>a Trump put And we believe the answer to that

0:09:00.280 --> 0:09:03.319
<v Speaker 4>is yet it is yes. The question is when does

0:09:03.360 --> 0:09:06.959
<v Speaker 4>that kick in? So for individual investors, you know, with

0:09:07.080 --> 0:09:09.240
<v Speaker 4>a long term time horizon, this is where you make

0:09:09.280 --> 0:09:14.280
<v Speaker 4>your money. You buy on weakness, whether we'll see further downside.

0:09:14.320 --> 0:09:16.520
<v Speaker 4>We still think we might see something further downside in

0:09:16.559 --> 0:09:19.640
<v Speaker 4>the short term, but these are the great opportunities when

0:09:19.679 --> 0:09:22.120
<v Speaker 4>markets go on sale for people to build long term wealth.

0:09:23.080 --> 0:09:24.800
<v Speaker 1>Where are you buying the dip then if you were

0:09:24.880 --> 0:09:25.600
<v Speaker 1>in that scenario.

0:09:26.920 --> 0:09:28.679
<v Speaker 4>So for the S and P five hundred, we're actually

0:09:28.720 --> 0:09:31.120
<v Speaker 4>challenging one of the key supports that we highlighted yesterday,

0:09:31.160 --> 0:09:33.959
<v Speaker 4>so five four hundred, so we just marginally below that

0:09:34.960 --> 0:09:38.760
<v Speaker 4>at the close last night. Next one is around five

0:09:38.800 --> 0:09:42.240
<v Speaker 4>to one twenty, so obviously that's a decent way away.

0:09:42.800 --> 0:09:45.160
<v Speaker 4>So the way we would suggest this is saying, look,

0:09:45.200 --> 0:09:48.120
<v Speaker 4>you know, we should be diversified across different asset classes,

0:09:48.480 --> 0:09:53.000
<v Speaker 4>across geographers in the world as well. But you know,

0:09:53.200 --> 0:09:55.560
<v Speaker 4>if you look at the US on a standalone basis,

0:09:55.920 --> 0:09:58.439
<v Speaker 4>you know, averaging to you know, from now down to

0:09:58.520 --> 0:10:01.320
<v Speaker 4>those sort of levels probably make sense. Assuming we're right

0:10:01.440 --> 0:10:02.959
<v Speaker 4>that that Trump put is still there.

0:10:04.200 --> 0:10:06.600
<v Speaker 3>I want to take a look at the Magnificent seven,

0:10:06.640 --> 0:10:08.840
<v Speaker 3>although in this chat on the Bloomberg terminal we're now

0:10:08.880 --> 0:10:11.640
<v Speaker 3>referring it to it as the Lag seven. But there's

0:10:11.640 --> 0:10:15.360
<v Speaker 3>some really quality names here in bear market territory. Now,

0:10:15.400 --> 0:10:18.319
<v Speaker 3>if you're willing to take a long term view, is

0:10:18.400 --> 0:10:19.400
<v Speaker 3>this the moment to get.

0:10:19.280 --> 0:10:22.480
<v Speaker 4>In so certainly. I mean, you know, obviously we've seen

0:10:22.559 --> 0:10:25.800
<v Speaker 4>valuations come off quite dramatically, so that was always the

0:10:25.880 --> 0:10:29.719
<v Speaker 4>concern with these names was that valuations are are a

0:10:29.760 --> 0:10:33.720
<v Speaker 4>big challenge, and now that's becoming less of a concern.

0:10:33.840 --> 0:10:37.120
<v Speaker 4>They still have very strong fundamentals by and large. I think,

0:10:37.160 --> 0:10:41.679
<v Speaker 4>you know, names affiliated with Elon Musk obviously have different

0:10:41.760 --> 0:10:45.640
<v Speaker 4>headwinds potentially than some of the other companies. So that's

0:10:45.760 --> 0:10:47.319
<v Speaker 4>you know, that's something that you have to factor into

0:10:47.360 --> 0:10:50.440
<v Speaker 4>your decision making process. But from our perspective, we are

0:10:50.920 --> 0:10:53.600
<v Speaker 4>overweight tech looking to buy the dip in the tech

0:10:53.640 --> 0:10:56.679
<v Speaker 4>set in the US tech sector as well, so that

0:10:56.760 --> 0:10:59.680
<v Speaker 4>would fit into this mag seven rebound at some point.

0:11:00.480 --> 0:11:03.439
<v Speaker 3>You're also overweight China. Now the market there is closed today,

0:11:03.440 --> 0:11:06.160
<v Speaker 3>but we saw some pretty modest declines yesterday compared to

0:11:06.200 --> 0:11:08.959
<v Speaker 3>what we saw in the US. What's your outbook for

0:11:09.559 --> 0:11:10.240
<v Speaker 3>China stocks?

0:11:11.160 --> 0:11:13.199
<v Speaker 4>So, I mean, we do feel that China will probably

0:11:13.200 --> 0:11:15.000
<v Speaker 4>weaken a little bit in the in the near term.

0:11:15.679 --> 0:11:19.199
<v Speaker 4>Obviously the tariff effect. You know, they ha been pretty resilient. Obviously,

0:11:19.240 --> 0:11:22.079
<v Speaker 4>the market's done very well so far this year, so

0:11:22.440 --> 0:11:24.839
<v Speaker 4>you know, but we would be buying on dips there

0:11:24.920 --> 0:11:28.560
<v Speaker 4>as well. You know, we believe that the technology sector

0:11:28.600 --> 0:11:32.200
<v Speaker 4>in particular is an area of key interest for US.

0:11:32.360 --> 0:11:35.720
<v Speaker 4>You know, obviously the deep Seek revelation still feeding into

0:11:36.000 --> 0:11:39.800
<v Speaker 4>a more bullish environment for tech sector. Valuations in the

0:11:40.080 --> 0:11:43.319
<v Speaker 4>in China are pretty cheap still, so from that perspective,

0:11:43.840 --> 0:11:46.160
<v Speaker 4>we like their hang sending in decks, you know, buying

0:11:46.240 --> 0:11:48.400
<v Speaker 4>down you know, maybe three five percent there than we

0:11:48.480 --> 0:11:50.320
<v Speaker 4>are today, and the same on the tech sector as

0:11:50.360 --> 0:11:51.280
<v Speaker 4>well for the Hang Seng.

0:11:52.120 --> 0:11:55.200
<v Speaker 3>Southeast Asia, Emerging Asia obviously as part of that channel

0:11:55.240 --> 0:11:57.520
<v Speaker 3>plus one strategy, some of the hardest.

0:11:57.240 --> 0:12:00.079
<v Speaker 2>Hits in these tariffs. Do you still see opportunities to

0:12:00.160 --> 0:12:02.200
<v Speaker 2>use when it comes to in this region.

0:12:03.160 --> 0:12:06.600
<v Speaker 4>So we're underweight Asian, so from you know, so we're

0:12:06.600 --> 0:12:08.760
<v Speaker 4>overweight China, underweight Assien at the moment, and I think

0:12:08.800 --> 0:12:10.600
<v Speaker 4>that's one of one of the reasons was we felt

0:12:10.640 --> 0:12:14.120
<v Speaker 4>that the China was probably better prepared for the tariffs

0:12:14.160 --> 0:12:17.120
<v Speaker 4>than maybe Asian. Obviously that China plus one strategy was

0:12:17.200 --> 0:12:19.640
<v Speaker 4>a huge boon to the region, but I think that's

0:12:19.679 --> 0:12:21.880
<v Speaker 4>something that's in the cross hairs of US policy now.

0:12:22.640 --> 0:12:25.120
<v Speaker 4>So and you know, obviously the formula being used by

0:12:25.280 --> 0:12:27.959
<v Speaker 4>the by the US to determine what tariff should be,

0:12:28.720 --> 0:12:31.920
<v Speaker 4>it's sort of symptomatic of that, and that's why Asian

0:12:32.040 --> 0:12:35.880
<v Speaker 4>is probably facing significant headwinds at the moment. So yeah,

0:12:35.960 --> 0:12:38.400
<v Speaker 4>it's it's it's not an area of focus for US. Obviously,

0:12:38.520 --> 0:12:40.760
<v Speaker 4>value will be created through this in our opinion if

0:12:40.800 --> 0:12:43.319
<v Speaker 4>we think that tariffs are going to be transitory or

0:12:43.360 --> 0:12:45.080
<v Speaker 4>at least not at these levels or so we were

0:12:45.080 --> 0:12:48.080
<v Speaker 4>at peak tariff's, But for us, our focus is elsewhere.

0:12:48.720 --> 0:12:51.920
<v Speaker 2>That was Steve Bryce, chief investment officer at Standard Chartered

0:12:51.960 --> 0:12:55.679
<v Speaker 2>Wealth Management, speaking earlier with Bloomberg's Paul Allen and Heidi

0:12:55.760 --> 0:13:02.040
<v Speaker 2>Stroud Watts here on the Daybreak Asia podcast. Thanks for

0:13:02.160 --> 0:13:06.719
<v Speaker 2>listening to today's episode of the Bloomberg Daybreak Asia Edition podcast.

0:13:07.080 --> 0:13:10.199
<v Speaker 2>Each weekday, we look at the story shaping markets, finance,

0:13:10.559 --> 0:13:13.640
<v Speaker 2>and geopolitics in the Asia Pacific. You can find us

0:13:13.679 --> 0:13:17.880
<v Speaker 2>on Apple, Spotify, the Bloomberg Podcast YouTube channel, or anywhere

0:13:17.920 --> 0:13:20.959
<v Speaker 2>else you listen. Join us again tomorrow for insight on

0:13:21.040 --> 0:13:25.160
<v Speaker 2>the market moves from Hong Kong to Singapore and Australia.

0:13:25.600 --> 0:13:28.079
<v Speaker 2>I'm Doug Chrisner, and this is Bloomberg