Speaker 1: I'm Dana Perkins and you're listening to Switch It on
Speaker 1: the B n OF podcast. Today, Mark Taylor and I
Speaker 1: speak with Hugh Bromley about several recent surveys which tell
Speaker 1: us about how people perceive climate change and whether they
Speaker 1: see it as a top risk. Where are the divisions
Speaker 1: and do they differ by country, age, level of education,
Speaker 1: or political affiliation. Hugh, who covers consumer issues for us
Speaker 1: at B and e F, is going to speak with
Speaker 1: us today about the data that tells us some of
Speaker 1: the answers to these questions. And he analyzed this data
Speaker 1: in one of our recent consumer radar report series titled
Speaker 1: What Divides and Unites on Climate Action and Awareness. If
Speaker 1: you'd like to read it, you can find it on
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg terminal at benof Go or on BNF dot com.
Speaker 1: Quick reminder, B and e F does not provide investment
Speaker 1: or strategy advice, and we've got a full disclaimer at
Speaker 1: the end of the show. But now Mark and I
Speaker 1: are going to talk to you, Hugh. Thanks for joining
Speaker 1: us today. Thanks. Then it's graduated back, so let's start
Speaker 1: off the show today with you explaining what it is
Speaker 1: that you do for bn e F because you have
Speaker 1: a bit of a unique role and write research that
Speaker 1: you know you wouldn't necessarily typically associate with us. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I suppose that's right. It's maybe a function that people
Speaker 1: aren't even aware that exists within Bloomberginne f my role,
Speaker 1: who's really to think about the consumers and how consumers
Speaker 1: interact with the technology and the sectors that we care
Speaker 1: care about the transport, energy, and climent sustainability. So it
Speaker 1: really that's thinking about consumer behavior and demographics and who's
Speaker 1: buying the gadgets that we care about, that vendor strategy
Speaker 1: and how do you sell to consumers one of the
Speaker 1: more successful strategies there, and finally outcomes how consumes interacting
Speaker 1: and driving outcomes in these sectors. My backgrounds have been
Speaker 1: being with being there for a number of years now.
Speaker 1: I've sat within many of these technology teams. Covering the
Speaker 1: technology is how you know, covering the companies that are
Speaker 1: selling these technologies. Now certainly the other side of that
Speaker 1: thinking about you know, what are the consumers looking for
Speaker 1: here and how are they driving the outcomes? So today
Speaker 1: the title of the note is well, in addition to
Speaker 1: being part of our Humor Radar series, what divides and
Speaker 1: unites us on climate action and awareness. So where do
Speaker 1: you get that sort of information? What sort of data
Speaker 1: are you calling upon? Yes, so the Consumer RATAR something
Speaker 1: we made putting out for over a year now. It's
Speaker 1: a quarterly series and we're drawing heavily on third party
Speaker 1: surveys through out there to get an understanding and kind
Speaker 1: of monitor opinions that are shaping the energy sector and
Speaker 1: transport sector. We're trying to get some leading indicators of
Speaker 1: customer preferences and social consensus that might be changing across
Speaker 1: the energy, transport and climate. The reason for that is
Speaker 1: twofold one. Those indicators of where sales might occur in
Speaker 1: the future are really important. You know, BNF always is
Speaker 1: a great job tracking where sales are occurring or have occurred,
Speaker 1: But I'm looking for the leading indicators who's going to
Speaker 1: buy next, what demographics, what region is going to buy next?
Speaker 1: And secondly, it kind of helps us get an understanding
Speaker 1: of consumer or voter priorities and mandates. And this becomes
Speaker 1: really important when you think about kind of as ambition
Speaker 1: to decarbonize increases amongst many nations corporations, then role of
Speaker 1: consumers become was far more involved you know, households are
Speaker 1: responsible for something like three quarters of a global g
Speaker 1: h D emissions when you think that all the value
Speaker 1: changes that they rely upon. At the end of the day,
Speaker 1: there there is an consumer. There, there's a household or
Speaker 1: a consumer, and they are ultimately making the decisions that
Speaker 1: will affect you know, whether these net zero and deep
Speaker 1: decolganization targets are achievable or indeed, if they give their
Speaker 1: governments a mandate to go and set targets in the
Speaker 1: first place, these decisions seem to be based you know,
Speaker 1: and what people buy seem to be based on their
Speaker 1: beliefs right where their their perceptions of climate and sustainability.
Speaker 1: I guess can you kind of walk us through some
Speaker 1: of the key findings from the report that relate to that. Yes,
Speaker 1: so data emasion before inat report tends to have a theme,
Speaker 1: and this particular report looked at kind of what divides
Speaker 1: the units and climate action. So rather than just thinking
Speaker 1: about where are people most engaged on a climate where
Speaker 1: are we seeing greater support and mandate for government action,
Speaker 1: which I tried to this time, think about, well what
Speaker 1: separates them? Why are they're still people pushing back against
Speaker 1: the who is that. So we looked across across a
Speaker 1: number of surveys published in the last quarter and thought about, well, demographically,
Speaker 1: whereas their division between different stakeholders, and then where there's
Speaker 1: not a demographic division, can it be explained by politics.
Speaker 1: We looked at things like whether there's a generational divide
Speaker 1: and educational divide and different opinion between genders, and and
Speaker 1: it's kind of universally those things are true. You know,
Speaker 1: the younger people are more engaged on climate than older people,
Speaker 1: more educated, people with post secondary education are more engaged,
Speaker 1: more likely to believe that the climate change is an
Speaker 1: emergency than people without a secondary education and interested. The
Speaker 1: general is a little bit more complicated, but you know,
Speaker 1: in in middle income countries, men are far more likely
Speaker 1: to believe the climate changes the emergency than women, and
Speaker 1: in hiring income countries the opposite is true. Women are
Speaker 1: more likely to agree. But there are some universal law,
Speaker 1: almost universal rules, they're that kind of are worth teasing
Speaker 1: out and understanding of why this is shaping belief and opinions. Well,
Speaker 1: so let's talk about what of the study that you
Speaker 1: called upon in this report in a little more details.
Speaker 1: So one of them was the World Economic Forums Global
Speaker 1: Risk Report, and it's their one edition. Unfortunately those of
Speaker 1: you guys listening can't see it, but let's talk you
Speaker 1: through what's on there. I think there were some themes
Speaker 1: that really emerged. So it evaluated risks well, perception of impacts,
Speaker 1: on likelihood of global risk and broken down by economic, environmental, geopolitical, societal,
Speaker 1: and technological and what sorts of trends did you see
Speaker 1: regarding what things I mean, I guess to put it
Speaker 1: really bluntly, what things people are actually care about right now? Well,
Speaker 1: it's an interesting surver. This is survey conducted at the
Speaker 1: end of published in January one. Everyone's coming out of
Speaker 1: this really horrible year, where like clearly in the pandemic
Speaker 1: is going to be front of mine, and yet climate
Speaker 1: action failure is still ranked as the highest global risk,
Speaker 1: the most significant global risk in this survey. Now, yes,
Speaker 1: they rated infectious diseases as having the highest impact, climaction
Speaker 1: failure having the second highest impact, and they rated extreme
Speaker 1: weather as having the highest likelihood, climate changing the second
Speaker 1: highest likelihood. But across the board you saw all these
Speaker 1: kind of climate related themes climate action and failure, environmental damage,
Speaker 1: bio diversity, lost extreme weather all ranked very highly. In fact,
Speaker 1: you in the top five places. You see the majority
Speaker 1: of those spots are filled up by climate related issues.
Speaker 1: Was there anything that surprised you in particular about this
Speaker 1: report here? You know, a lot of things have fallen
Speaker 1: from front of mind, you know, things around terrorist attacks
Speaker 1: and technological concerns and risk that people that was very
Speaker 1: much front of mine kind of a year or two
Speaker 1: have really slipped away. Climate changes really hung in there.
Speaker 1: It's placed in the top five most impactful risk and
Speaker 1: top five most most likely since whilst all these other
Speaker 1: issues are kind of coming gone. Do you think it
Speaker 1: will help to call it something else? So? Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think calling something else is something that we've kind of
Speaker 1: picked up on a number of surveys over the last year.
Speaker 1: Is there's certain labels that the consumers absolutely resiant. Green
Speaker 1: New Deal is one of them that just has a
Speaker 1: really low support regardless of what it contains. Right now,
Speaker 1: Infrastructure seems to do better certainly across the board, and
Speaker 1: anything to do with sustainability. Certainly a lot of misunderstanding
Speaker 1: or misconceptions with consumers that are unable to differentiate between
Speaker 1: climate change issues and broader environmental topics around recycling and sustainability,
Speaker 1: they really conflate the two things. So the more that
Speaker 1: you know a policy making can almost leverage that misconception
Speaker 1: in some ways, and past climate policies that are part
Speaker 1: of a broader sustainability package or or infrastructure package better.
Speaker 1: The other thing we saw really high support levels for
Speaker 1: in in some more recent surveys and one published by
Speaker 1: Morning Console, was support amongst both Republicans and Democrats to
Speaker 1: require public companies to disclose those climate res So there
Speaker 1: is kind of a little bit of appetite their regulation
Speaker 1: around reporting. Not necessarily for action, but you know, it's
Speaker 1: a starting point just to to get some days to
Speaker 1: get the data into that those decisions can be made
Speaker 1: down the track. Can I say kind of after will question,
Speaker 1: do you think this stuff matters? I mean, like, one
Speaker 1: way I've always looked at renewable energy and maybe they're
Speaker 1: showing my cards too much to the to the public,
Speaker 1: is that one benefit of it is if you just
Speaker 1: make the energy green, people don't necessarily have to think
Speaker 1: about it so much when they turn on their light switch.
Speaker 1: So if you put an infrastructure deal through and you
Speaker 1: green things and you make things more sustainable, you let
Speaker 1: the public go on living as they were, and things
Speaker 1: just get greener and more sustainable. So does public opinion
Speaker 1: matter as much or are they actually the ones? You know?
Speaker 1: Are they going to vote people out for doing an
Speaker 1: infrastructure bill and things like that. So there's two pieces
Speaker 1: that I think kind of up until now or maybe
Speaker 1: in the near future, that kind of thought process does hold.
Speaker 1: But the moment you start to plan and go about
Speaker 1: implementing a path toward zero, it gets much more complicated. Yes,
Speaker 1: you can decarbonize the infrastructure that supplies consumers, but really
Speaker 1: it's unlikely to get you far enough, and you need
Speaker 1: to start thinking about how can you decarbonize the technologies
Speaker 1: of the consumers use themselves, or even better, how do
Speaker 1: you change consumers behavior. So in two of those three scenarios,
Speaker 1: and likely you'll need to implement all three, you really
Speaker 1: do need consumers on board. And the second part of
Speaker 1: it is that consumers aren't just there to use energy.
Speaker 1: They're also better put governments in place and said about
Speaker 1: their political priorities. So if consumers don't understand and don't
Speaker 1: drive the policies, then you know, be forever in this
Speaker 1: situation where policy makers where I'm sitting in Australia or
Speaker 1: you know, across the U S. And other countries are
Speaker 1: able to kind of, you know, see this really partisan division.
Speaker 1: What we can see is climate change remains at outwege
Speaker 1: issue in those countries. Within a Pew Research Center study
Speaker 1: that you called the Pine, just staying with the US
Speaker 1: for a moment longer, you saw some demographic leans in
Speaker 1: terms of Republican versus Democrat, and you didn't see too much.
Speaker 1: I mean, you start a breakdown between male and female,
Speaker 1: but where you really saw differences were in age and
Speaker 1: in race. What were some of the findings that we
Speaker 1: had in the regard It's interesting because you do see
Speaker 1: a division between race. It's fifty percentage points difference between
Speaker 1: the white population believes that dealing with climate change a
Speaker 1: priority versus you know, this is the Hispanic community, where
Speaker 1: the white look Caucasian community is a much lower percentage
Speaker 1: you believe that similar thing with age, you see that
Speaker 1: your younger people more likely to see that as a priority.
Speaker 1: For this year, eighteen nine year olds is just two
Speaker 1: of fifty to sixty four year olds and a little
Speaker 1: bit of a gender divide, you know, six percent men
Speaker 1: at thirty five percent. Women at forty one percent believe
Speaker 1: in climate change an issue. And we already said before
Speaker 1: that in that separate global pole produced by the UN
Speaker 1: d P, the US was really low in terms of
Speaker 1: division on education. Just having a post secondary education just
Speaker 1: makes you just one percent more likely to believe the
Speaker 1: climate change of emergency than if you don't have that
Speaker 1: post secondary education. So the US is, you know, there's
Speaker 1: there's divisions in some ways, but all of this this
Speaker 1: is really dwarfed by the partisan division forty four percent
Speaker 1: divide between Republicans and Democrats in saying the president's priority
Speaker 1: of this president in Congress to deal with climate change
Speaker 1: this year. Now for a very short break, stay with us. Well,
Speaker 1: so let's of the US for a moment, although we're
Speaker 1: going to come back and I think specifically around some
Speaker 1: of the events and recently regarding the cold snap in
Speaker 1: Texas and that how may change people's views in the
Speaker 1: United States. But let's go all the way to the
Speaker 1: other side of the world and let's look at Japan.
Speaker 1: So there was a japan awareness survey of eighteen year olds.
Speaker 1: Now you may have noticed in the news recently the
Speaker 1: Japanese government has made a carbon neutral by fifty pledge
Speaker 1: along with the number of other countries in the world. Actually,
Speaker 1: what's really interesting here is around whether or not the
Speaker 1: eighteen year olds actually believe it's going to happen. So
Speaker 1: what did we learn. It's industry survey. It's a server
Speaker 1: that the Nippon Foundation does every year of a Japanese
Speaker 1: eighteen year old and always as a theme, and this
Speaker 1: year's theme was around global warming and climate change. And
Speaker 1: what it found is that, you know, the eighteen year
Speaker 1: old understandably support that pledge. You know, sixt eighteen of
Speaker 1: Japanese eighteen year old support that pledge to be carbon
Speaker 1: neutral by But what's amazing is the only fourteen percent
Speaker 1: of them believe it will actually be achieved by There's
Speaker 1: a real belief that pledges not achievable certainly on that timeline.
Speaker 1: And even more so, there's a willingness in amongst Japanese culture,
Speaker 1: in Japanese youth culture, just to just say I don't
Speaker 1: know respondents, and I don't know whether that will be
Speaker 1: met by. And we also dug a little deeper because
Speaker 1: Japan in the UNDP Global Survey was the country that
Speaker 1: stood out as having the lowest demographic division between young
Speaker 1: and old, between different education levels, and between genders. And
Speaker 1: then how about the older population, of which is I
Speaker 1: believe the majority of the population in Japan. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: that's thoughts strange, right. We ever see other surveys across
Speaker 1: the world whether the older population is more skeptical of
Speaker 1: climate chains or see as less of a risk and
Speaker 1: certainly see less need to act upon it. But in
Speaker 1: Japan the total opposite is true. So if you look
Speaker 1: at belief that I see sales can be phased out
Speaker 1: by the mid twenty thirties amongst the older Japanese are
Speaker 1: here of talking seventy plus, it's twelve percent of the
Speaker 1: older Japanese belief that target is definitely achievable, and over
Speaker 1: a third believe it is may be not achieved by
Speaker 1: the mid twenty thirties, but but achieved very soon thereafter.
Speaker 1: So you've got quite a significant gap to all compared
Speaker 1: to young Japanese adults. I think this is an interesting
Speaker 1: one because you look at the source of this data,
Speaker 1: and it's actually the Japan Automobile Federation, so they have
Speaker 1: a vested interest in understanding how people feel about internal
Speaker 1: combustion engines versus electric vehicles. So it's it's always interesting
Speaker 1: to see, you know, who's digging a little bit deeper
Speaker 1: on each of these questions. It is, and it's such
Speaker 1: a counterintuitive result that I I dug a little deeper
Speaker 1: myself and I approached our our team in Tokyo and
Speaker 1: to kind of understand what what could be driving this
Speaker 1: sort of result when we tossed a few ideas back
Speaker 1: to the forward. But one thing that really stood out
Speaker 1: is that thinking about this generation of of older Japanese,
Speaker 1: the change that they have seen a witness in their lifetime.
Speaker 1: They have certainly seen dramatic economic change within Japan and
Speaker 1: the emergence of Japan as as a technology powerhouse. And
Speaker 1: then secondly they also suffered through a number of industrial
Speaker 1: waste crisis in the nine in fifties and sixties that
Speaker 1: resulted a number of health crises that would have shaped
Speaker 1: you in many ways their views on the pace of
Speaker 1: change and the need to change in response to environmental issues.
Speaker 1: And maybe that's something the Japanese youth, or at least
Speaker 1: young adults kind of haven't experienced the witnessed is that
Speaker 1: the key hue is it experiencing something related to climate
Speaker 1: change as you mentioned this in Japan. It seems like
Speaker 1: that's kind of what we've seen in China, although that's
Speaker 1: not included in the in the study this time, but
Speaker 1: could that be also what's happening in the US. Maybe
Speaker 1: with Texas they had the cold snap and then all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, Yeah, people maybe started teams of tune
Speaker 1: on on climate and activity or action towards it. Experience
Speaker 1: does seem to matter. So we we saw that in
Speaker 1: this survey of Japanese or it's one way to explain that,
Speaker 1: so of Japanese consumers. You're right in China that we
Speaker 1: also saw recalli belief in climate change and need for
Speaker 1: action in Australia following the wildfires at the end of
Speaker 1: and now we're starting to see data come out of
Speaker 1: Texas UM and you're absolutely right. So there's no survey
Speaker 1: unfortunately done before the cold snap in Texas that know
Speaker 1: what what the starting positions were. What we see now
Speaker 1: is that the surveys taken in the days following the polls,
Speaker 1: sixty percent of Texas Republicans believe it's now a priority
Speaker 1: to pass legislation to address climate change, compared to forty
Speaker 1: per cent of Republicans across the country, so quite a
Speaker 1: divide there. So we didn't see the same movement in Democrats.
Speaker 1: It's of Texas nationally. It is a huge jump. If
Speaker 1: this could explain it. You could also say that, you know,
Speaker 1: Texas Republicans have seen changes over the last decade or
Speaker 1: more regarding the wind turbines that have been built across
Speaker 1: across the state. But this this number is stark and
Speaker 1: um and and the fact that it was taken just
Speaker 1: after the storm suggestedly dealing with and and experiencing these
Speaker 1: sorts of climate catastrophes really can shape your belief It's unclear,
Speaker 1: and in fact, the surveys I alluded to before, past
Speaker 1: experiences in China, the US, China, Australia have made maybe
Speaker 1: even Japan kind of show this might not last forever,
Speaker 1: but in the immediate aftermath does seem that conservatives and
Speaker 1: and and skeptics more broadly views can be changed as
Speaker 1: a result of of of experience experiencing the effects of
Speaker 1: climate change. But this is interesting that you point this
Speaker 1: out because we're saying the effects of climate change, but
Speaker 1: in reality, all of these are extreme weather events that
Speaker 1: depending upon how you want to look at it, could
Speaker 1: be linked to climate change have increased the probability of
Speaker 1: these one in a hundred years one in a thousand
Speaker 1: years storms, but there's no direct causal relationship that can
Speaker 1: be unrefutedly connected. So the way that people look at
Speaker 1: climate change but then experience it is actually through weather,
Speaker 1: and as we know, whether in climate are very different.
Speaker 1: So I think one of the things that I find
Speaker 1: really interesting is people experience these extreme weather events and
Speaker 1: they say, don't want that to happen anymore. Could be
Speaker 1: the climate change is the problem, and then they have
Speaker 1: to figure out what the solution is. And you had
Speaker 1: some interesting data points in here regarding views around whether
Speaker 1: or not wind power specifically and solar could be a
Speaker 1: part of the solution, whether or not that was a
Speaker 1: direction that Texas was looking at. Even if these consumers
Speaker 1: don't don't believe they can change the weather, they have
Speaker 1: experienced blackouts, they've experienced some sort of lifestyle disruption, if
Speaker 1: not trauma over the last few weeks as a result
Speaker 1: of this, So they do need to start attributing blame
Speaker 1: and even more so looking for solutions. One of the
Speaker 1: other survey questions that was included in these boarding Console
Speaker 1: polls was thinking about these solutions that Texans would support
Speaker 1: as a result of these storms, and what we saw
Speaker 1: was across the board generally pretty high support levels amongst
Speaker 1: Republicans and Democrats, but certainly amongst Texas. Texas Republicans for
Speaker 1: modernization of the power system, energy storage, energy efficiency, and
Speaker 1: resiliency efforts really kind of nondescript, no brains, no massive
Speaker 1: political divide attached to them. But when it into clean
Speaker 1: energy and increasing the use of clean energy solars when
Speaker 1: we started, we suddenly see this partisan rift re emerge
Speaker 1: and we see that I'm fifty two percent of Republicans
Speaker 1: across the country would support increased use of renewables. Yes,
Speaker 1: it's still a majority of Republicans, but a very slim majority.
Speaker 1: That number increases the sixty percent in Texas, so there
Speaker 1: is a a an eight percent, a reasonable but not
Speaker 1: overwhelming increase in the number of Texans that would support
Speaker 1: clearly more additional clean energy. The contrast that with Democrats
Speaker 1: at eighty seven and seven national ninety Texans Texas, so
Speaker 1: a massive partisan divide there. I think really that comes
Speaker 1: down to renewables being the wedge issue that climate changes
Speaker 1: fought upon, which is really interesting and for those who
Speaker 1: are not familiar with this extreme called staff that hit
Speaker 1: you know, Texas and actually several surrounding states. We have
Speaker 1: a podcast for that that we did right after the
Speaker 1: storm happened that really explained the root causes in terms
Speaker 1: of how the power structure has and one of the
Speaker 1: things that came out very clearly was that the natural
Speaker 1: gas pipelines had a potentially bigger role to play than
Speaker 1: the wind industry did in terms of causing these power outages.
Speaker 1: So it's it's very interesting to see the actual root
Speaker 1: causes of the issue versus those things that are highly
Speaker 1: politicized in terms of what ends up making people's decisions.
Speaker 1: Moving on, actually a little bit to what do we
Speaker 1: do with this information? So if I'm listening to this
Speaker 1: and I'm working potentially at a corporation thinking about how
Speaker 1: people think and feel about different things regarding climate change
Speaker 1: and how their business should potentially act. If I'm working
Speaker 1: at maybe a let's go with a consumer discretionary brand
Speaker 1: of sorts, what sorts of things would you look for
Speaker 1: and would you take away from these sorts of studies
Speaker 1: to help influence the way you run your business. One
Speaker 1: thing I think that maybe all these poles kind of
Speaker 1: suggested aggregate is that the pace of policy change and
Speaker 1: consumers mandate ful policymakers too and at string of climate
Speaker 1: measures is related to climate change itself, and there is
Speaker 1: this feedback loop between the effects of climate change, whether
Speaker 1: effects or climate effects, changing perceptions and resulting in stronger,
Speaker 1: stronger push and strong and and tightening policy across the board.
Speaker 1: And I think that's really it's really going to be
Speaker 1: present in the massive economies that are that are highly
Speaker 1: emitting and currently divisive, and that is the US, Russia,
Speaker 1: and India. In these surveys, they're the countries that you
Speaker 1: need to watch and watch for the effects of climate
Speaker 1: change because it will shape public opinion and ultimately change
Speaker 1: change change of climate policies that the corporations are bound by. Okay,
Speaker 1: so Hugh, last question, what did you find most surprising
Speaker 1: in this round of research that you did. I think
Speaker 1: the Japanese generations of the divide is fascinating because it
Speaker 1: goes against so many other surveys we've seen in other
Speaker 1: countries where the older generations are typically less earned by
Speaker 1: climate change and its effects, and it's supportive of solutions
Speaker 1: than the younger generations. In Japan. The absolute opposite is true.
Speaker 1: But I think again that tied back to this bigger picture,
Speaker 1: which is that the lived experience, the experience of environmental
Speaker 1: catastrophe and climate change is really going to shape how
Speaker 1: you see the future and the pace of change you
Speaker 1: expect from your government. Really fascinating research. How often do
Speaker 1: you produce these? And basically when are we going to
Speaker 1: have you back on the show again. It's been great
Speaker 1: to be here. These consumer radars come out every quarter.
Speaker 1: There's always a different theme depending on kind of what's
Speaker 1: driving events at the time. Um and really we're trying
Speaker 1: to unpick kind of what what what is what is
Speaker 1: shaping preferences and giving give a leading indicator of this change.
Speaker 1: It's been great having you here today. Thank you. Today's
Speaker 1: episode of Switched on and was edited by Rex Warner,
Speaker 1: the Great Stoak Media. Bloomberginni ACA is a service provided
Speaker 1: by Bloomberg Finance LP and its affiliates. This recording does
Speaker 1: not constitute, nor should it be construed as investment advice,
Speaker 1: investment recommendations, or a recommendation as to an investment or
Speaker 1: other strategy. Bloombergin e F should not be considered as
Speaker 1: information sufficient upon which to base an investment decision. Neither
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Finance LP, nor any of its affiliates makes any
Speaker 1: representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of
Speaker 1: the information contained in this recording, and any liability as
Speaker 1: a result of this recording is expressly disclaimed