WEBVTT - Bloomberg Surveillance TV: April 15, 2024

0:00:00.120 --> 0:00:06.800
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.

0:00:11.640 --> 0:00:15.440
<v Speaker 2>This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along

0:00:15.480 --> 0:00:18.720
<v Speaker 2>with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordern. Join us each day

0:00:18.720 --> 0:00:22.280
<v Speaker 2>for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics

0:00:22.440 --> 0:00:24.920
<v Speaker 2>from our global headquarters in New York City. We are

0:00:24.920 --> 0:00:27.680
<v Speaker 2>live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine

0:00:27.720 --> 0:00:31.240
<v Speaker 2>am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or

0:00:31.320 --> 0:00:33.960
<v Speaker 2>anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg

0:00:34.040 --> 0:00:37.720
<v Speaker 2>Terminal and the Bloomberg Business App. John Kirby, Admiral Kirby,

0:00:37.760 --> 0:00:39.959
<v Speaker 2>fantastic to catch up with you, sir. Busy weekend, I'm

0:00:40.000 --> 0:00:43.040
<v Speaker 2>sure for you and the administration, let's get straight into it.

0:00:43.280 --> 0:00:45.960
<v Speaker 2>We've heard from Iran at least they've indicated the matter

0:00:46.000 --> 0:00:48.559
<v Speaker 2>can be deemed concluded. I think we all want to know,

0:00:48.840 --> 0:00:51.639
<v Speaker 2>Admiral Kirby, whether Israel Is indicated the same thing.

0:00:52.960 --> 0:00:54.840
<v Speaker 3>I won't speak for the Israelis, I think you can

0:00:54.920 --> 0:00:58.520
<v Speaker 3>understand that. I believe the war cabinet is still deliberating

0:00:58.600 --> 0:01:02.640
<v Speaker 3>and making their decisions. The President had a very good

0:01:02.640 --> 0:01:05.880
<v Speaker 3>conversation with the Prime Minister right after or towards the

0:01:05.959 --> 0:01:09.040
<v Speaker 3>end of the attacks on Saturday night, and the President

0:01:10.080 --> 0:01:13.479
<v Speaker 3>was very direct that this was a.

0:01:13.440 --> 0:01:16.280
<v Speaker 4>Huge success, that Israel can be.

0:01:16.200 --> 0:01:18.319
<v Speaker 3>Proud that it doesn't stand alone, and that it has

0:01:18.360 --> 0:01:21.959
<v Speaker 3>superior military capability. Iran utterly failed and what they were

0:01:21.959 --> 0:01:25.319
<v Speaker 3>trying to achieve, and that that success alone sends a

0:01:25.319 --> 0:01:28.920
<v Speaker 3>strong message to Iran and to the region about Israel's

0:01:28.920 --> 0:01:29.400
<v Speaker 3>place there.

0:01:29.600 --> 0:01:32.720
<v Speaker 2>So could we just define success? How can we define

0:01:32.720 --> 0:01:35.679
<v Speaker 2>the weekend's events as a success. To see the first

0:01:35.840 --> 0:01:40.080
<v Speaker 2>direct strikes coming from Iranian soil on Israel, how is

0:01:40.120 --> 0:01:42.080
<v Speaker 2>that a success in any way shape or for.

0:01:42.920 --> 0:01:44.400
<v Speaker 4>Let's talk about what didn't happen.

0:01:47.560 --> 0:01:52.160
<v Speaker 3>Hardly any damage and the only impacts were to an

0:01:52.160 --> 0:01:57.040
<v Speaker 3>air base in central Israel, no real casualties except sadly,

0:01:57.960 --> 0:02:03.800
<v Speaker 3>a young civilian girl was critically injured. In the vast majority,

0:02:03.880 --> 0:02:07.080
<v Speaker 3>as the IDF have said, ninety nine percent of what

0:02:07.880 --> 0:02:11.239
<v Speaker 3>Aroon threw up in the air, drones and missiles never

0:02:11.360 --> 0:02:15.480
<v Speaker 3>landed either it failed or actually got shot down. So

0:02:15.520 --> 0:02:18.919
<v Speaker 3>that's what didn't happen. And what did happen was Israel

0:02:19.040 --> 0:02:22.880
<v Speaker 3>proved it has superior military capability and just as critically,

0:02:23.000 --> 0:02:26.079
<v Speaker 3>they don't stand alone. That the United the United States

0:02:26.120 --> 0:02:31.440
<v Speaker 3>stands with them. I think people are maybe not cognizant

0:02:31.480 --> 0:02:35.080
<v Speaker 3>of the fact that the President put US forces in

0:02:35.200 --> 0:02:37.720
<v Speaker 3>harm's way to help defend Israel for the first time,

0:02:37.760 --> 0:02:40.680
<v Speaker 3>American fighter pilots in the air shooting things down that

0:02:40.760 --> 0:02:45.400
<v Speaker 3>we're heading towards Israel, and they were extraordinarily successful in

0:02:45.440 --> 0:02:45.720
<v Speaker 3>doing so.

0:02:45.800 --> 0:02:46.720
<v Speaker 4>I think that's significant.

0:02:46.800 --> 0:02:49.400
<v Speaker 2>You're talking about a successful defense. I think a lot

0:02:49.400 --> 0:02:54.000
<v Speaker 2>of people also focused on the unsuccessful deterrents. The President said,

0:02:54.040 --> 0:02:56.760
<v Speaker 2>don't and they did, and we're trying to work out,

0:02:56.800 --> 0:02:59.000
<v Speaker 2>Admiral Kirby, in what way the US is able to

0:02:59.080 --> 0:03:00.880
<v Speaker 2>influence Iranian behavior.

0:03:01.880 --> 0:03:02.200
<v Speaker 4>Well.

0:03:02.440 --> 0:03:05.960
<v Speaker 3>The President prepositioned military forces in the region, which allowed

0:03:06.000 --> 0:03:10.400
<v Speaker 3>for that unprecedented successful defense. The President met with the

0:03:10.440 --> 0:03:14.400
<v Speaker 3>G seven leaders yesterday to talk about a unified diplomatic

0:03:14.440 --> 0:03:18.399
<v Speaker 3>response and to consider other options and alternatives to try

0:03:18.400 --> 0:03:21.840
<v Speaker 3>to hold Iran accountable for what it did on Saturday night.

0:03:22.480 --> 0:03:25.720
<v Speaker 3>Iran is increasingly isolated in the world, certainly in the region,

0:03:26.200 --> 0:03:28.280
<v Speaker 3>and Israel has proven that it has friends.

0:03:28.760 --> 0:03:31.760
<v Speaker 5>If Israel does not respond, is the new status quo

0:03:32.000 --> 0:03:35.440
<v Speaker 5>that Iran can strike Israel from its own soil and

0:03:35.960 --> 0:03:37.200
<v Speaker 5>there won't be a retaliation.

0:03:38.400 --> 0:03:39.920
<v Speaker 4>Again, I can't speak to that, Amory.

0:03:39.960 --> 0:03:41.640
<v Speaker 3>That's going to be up to the Prime Minister in

0:03:41.680 --> 0:03:43.640
<v Speaker 3>the War Cabinet to make those decisions.

0:03:43.680 --> 0:03:46.760
<v Speaker 4>We respect that it's a sovereign nation. They have to

0:03:46.760 --> 0:03:47.680
<v Speaker 4>make those decisions.

0:03:47.920 --> 0:03:50.240
<v Speaker 5>There's lots of reporting that the Biden administration that was

0:03:50.320 --> 0:03:53.320
<v Speaker 5>verbalizing to these really that they do not support a

0:03:53.400 --> 0:03:56.680
<v Speaker 5>counter strike. Isn't that in the sense taking one of

0:03:56.720 --> 0:03:59.200
<v Speaker 5>those tools out of the toolbox and brandishing it to

0:03:59.280 --> 0:03:59.960
<v Speaker 5>the world.

0:04:00.960 --> 0:04:02.600
<v Speaker 3>The tools that we took out of the toolbox were

0:04:02.600 --> 0:04:07.080
<v Speaker 3>pretty significant on Saturday night, Amory, ballistic missile destroyers in

0:04:07.120 --> 0:04:10.800
<v Speaker 3>the instrument helping shoot down ballistic missiles, fighter aircraft in

0:04:10.840 --> 0:04:13.560
<v Speaker 3>the air, other partners participating. There was a lot of

0:04:13.640 --> 0:04:16.880
<v Speaker 3>tools in the toolbox, and there's no question that Iran

0:04:17.279 --> 0:04:22.920
<v Speaker 3>recognizes the coalition that was put together to help Israel

0:04:22.920 --> 0:04:26.240
<v Speaker 3>defend itself. Again, I can't speak for what either side

0:04:26.279 --> 0:04:28.400
<v Speaker 3>will do going forward. All I can do is speak

0:04:28.400 --> 0:04:31.520
<v Speaker 3>for President Biden as commander in chief. He has since

0:04:31.560 --> 0:04:35.400
<v Speaker 3>October seventh, and he will continue going forward making sure

0:04:35.600 --> 0:04:37.919
<v Speaker 3>that we are meeting our commitments to Israel, but just

0:04:37.960 --> 0:04:40.560
<v Speaker 3>as critically that we're meeting our commitments to our own

0:04:40.640 --> 0:04:43.400
<v Speaker 3>national security interests in the region, making sure we have

0:04:43.440 --> 0:04:46.000
<v Speaker 3>the resources in place to protect our troops, our facilities,

0:04:46.160 --> 0:04:48.360
<v Speaker 3>and the missions that we're conducting there in the Middle East.

0:04:48.760 --> 0:04:52.520
<v Speaker 5>We've had sixty tons of arsenal fired upon Israel directly

0:04:52.560 --> 0:04:55.920
<v Speaker 5>from Iran. We've had six months of Iranian backed who

0:04:55.920 --> 0:04:59.160
<v Speaker 5>Thi's hitting as well, trying to hit even US vessels

0:04:59.400 --> 0:05:02.279
<v Speaker 5>in the Red Seat and disrupting global trade. We also

0:05:02.320 --> 0:05:06.120
<v Speaker 5>had an uptick of uranium enrichment by Iran. So to

0:05:06.120 --> 0:05:08.839
<v Speaker 5>get to this deterrence, what is the US willing to do?

0:05:09.360 --> 0:05:11.760
<v Speaker 5>We have sanctions in place, is the United States willing

0:05:11.760 --> 0:05:13.160
<v Speaker 5>to enforce them?

0:05:13.640 --> 0:05:15.800
<v Speaker 4>We have been enforcing sanctions, I mean, my goodness.

0:05:15.800 --> 0:05:17.640
<v Speaker 3>In the three and a half years of this administration,

0:05:18.279 --> 0:05:22.680
<v Speaker 3>we have implemented more than fifty sanctioned regimes, targeting more

0:05:22.720 --> 0:05:27.440
<v Speaker 3>than five hundred entities and individuals. And again I won't

0:05:27.640 --> 0:05:30.640
<v Speaker 3>preview coming sanctions or anything like that, but I can

0:05:30.640 --> 0:05:33.440
<v Speaker 3>tell you that additional sanctions are certainly not off the

0:05:33.480 --> 0:05:35.400
<v Speaker 3>table in terms of holding Iran accountable.

0:05:35.960 --> 0:05:37.200
<v Speaker 4>And take a look at.

0:05:37.040 --> 0:05:40.359
<v Speaker 3>The additional military resources that President Biden has added to

0:05:40.400 --> 0:05:43.479
<v Speaker 3>the region even before October seventh. This is something that

0:05:43.520 --> 0:05:47.000
<v Speaker 3>he's been keenly focused on, and as we saw from

0:05:47.000 --> 0:05:51.280
<v Speaker 3>Saturday night, Iran is increasingly isolated on the world stage.

0:05:51.480 --> 0:05:54.920
<v Speaker 3>They are increasingly making it harder for anybody in the

0:05:54.920 --> 0:05:59.280
<v Speaker 3>international community to be sympathetic to any of their inimical interests.

0:05:59.279 --> 0:06:01.200
<v Speaker 4>There Again, I think we've done a lot.

0:06:01.279 --> 0:06:03.800
<v Speaker 3>We'll continue to look at our options going forward, and

0:06:03.839 --> 0:06:07.159
<v Speaker 3>I suspect that we'll continue to hold Iran properly accountable.

0:06:07.160 --> 0:06:10.080
<v Speaker 5>Analcarry how are they isolated? They had a call with

0:06:10.240 --> 0:06:13.360
<v Speaker 5>the Saudis. They're sending all their oil to China, They're

0:06:13.400 --> 0:06:17.279
<v Speaker 5>sending Shaha drones to Russia. In March, Iranian oil output

0:06:17.360 --> 0:06:18.920
<v Speaker 5>hit a five year high.

0:06:19.040 --> 0:06:20.280
<v Speaker 4>Where is the enforcement.

0:06:21.240 --> 0:06:24.120
<v Speaker 3>There is enforcement of the sanctions. Memory again, this is

0:06:24.160 --> 0:06:27.159
<v Speaker 3>one of the most heavily sanctioned countries in the world,

0:06:27.800 --> 0:06:30.000
<v Speaker 3>and we're going to continue to look at our options

0:06:30.160 --> 0:06:33.040
<v Speaker 3>going forward to hold them properly accountable. As sanctions are

0:06:33.040 --> 0:06:36.279
<v Speaker 3>certainly not off the table, neither is going to making

0:06:36.279 --> 0:06:39.160
<v Speaker 3>sure that we've got the capabilities in the region and

0:06:39.240 --> 0:06:42.359
<v Speaker 3>we do to toward some of their destabilizing activity. You

0:06:42.440 --> 0:06:46.320
<v Speaker 3>talked about the uranium enrichment when the previous administration pulled

0:06:46.320 --> 0:06:49.279
<v Speaker 3>out of the Iran deal. It vastly accelerated the degree

0:06:49.320 --> 0:06:52.520
<v Speaker 3>to which Iran could start to spin up their centrifuges

0:06:52.560 --> 0:06:53.720
<v Speaker 3>and get closer to some.

0:06:53.640 --> 0:06:54.960
<v Speaker 4>Sort of breakout capability.

0:06:55.120 --> 0:06:58.440
<v Speaker 3>The President obviously tried, We tried, but Iran was not

0:06:58.600 --> 0:07:01.480
<v Speaker 3>negotiating any good faith to get back into that Iran deal.

0:07:01.680 --> 0:07:04.640
<v Speaker 4>But he also made clear that we will not allow

0:07:04.640 --> 0:07:06.720
<v Speaker 4>Iran to achieve a nuclear weapons capability.

0:07:06.760 --> 0:07:09.200
<v Speaker 3>We prefer to do that through diplomacy, but if not,

0:07:09.240 --> 0:07:10.520
<v Speaker 3>we've got other options available.

0:07:10.680 --> 0:07:14.960
<v Speaker 5>What's diplomacy, Bob Malley, the Iranian envoy is still under investigation.

0:07:15.120 --> 0:07:17.200
<v Speaker 5>Who is leading these diplomatic efforts.

0:07:17.560 --> 0:07:19.760
<v Speaker 3>As I said, the diplomatic efforts to get them back

0:07:19.760 --> 0:07:22.320
<v Speaker 3>into the Iran deal are no longer being pursued because

0:07:22.320 --> 0:07:25.880
<v Speaker 3>Iran wasn't negotiating in good faith, which is why we're

0:07:25.920 --> 0:07:28.080
<v Speaker 3>going to make sure we have other options available to

0:07:28.160 --> 0:07:30.800
<v Speaker 3>us to prevent them from achieving a nuclear weapons capability.

0:07:30.920 --> 0:07:33.560
<v Speaker 6>Admiral one question, and Amory did touch on this, this

0:07:33.680 --> 0:07:37.840
<v Speaker 6>question around what the response could be to Iran seizing

0:07:37.840 --> 0:07:40.160
<v Speaker 6>a vessel in the Straits of Hormu. Is the idea

0:07:40.360 --> 0:07:43.480
<v Speaker 6>of freedom of the seas. What's the US's response to that,

0:07:43.600 --> 0:07:45.560
<v Speaker 6>given the fact that a lot of companies have already

0:07:45.560 --> 0:07:48.280
<v Speaker 6>started to rejigger some of their trade routes and bacon

0:07:48.480 --> 0:07:49.640
<v Speaker 6>extra costs as a result.

0:07:50.920 --> 0:07:52.920
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I had a little trouble hearing you over the

0:07:53.000 --> 0:07:54.600
<v Speaker 3>lawnmower there, but I think I got the gist of

0:07:54.600 --> 0:07:57.840
<v Speaker 3>the question. We certainly condemned this most recent maritime attack.

0:07:57.920 --> 0:08:01.360
<v Speaker 3>This is a tack that the Iranians have used.

0:08:01.240 --> 0:08:01.840
<v Speaker 4>In the past.

0:08:02.640 --> 0:08:06.840
<v Speaker 3>We have, when able, been able to interdict, been able

0:08:06.920 --> 0:08:11.360
<v Speaker 3>to try to afford other such maritime attacks, not all

0:08:11.400 --> 0:08:13.960
<v Speaker 3>of them, of course, And we are also making a

0:08:14.000 --> 0:08:17.000
<v Speaker 3>concerted effort over time, and we have been somewhat successful

0:08:17.560 --> 0:08:21.400
<v Speaker 3>in intercepting goods that the Iranians have been trying to

0:08:21.400 --> 0:08:24.440
<v Speaker 3>ship by sea to some of their proxies in Iraq

0:08:24.480 --> 0:08:26.480
<v Speaker 3>and Syria and certainly the Huthis Iverner.

0:08:26.480 --> 0:08:28.000
<v Speaker 6>One thing that a lot of companies are saying, a

0:08:28.040 --> 0:08:31.160
<v Speaker 6>lot of executives is that they do have to make

0:08:31.240 --> 0:08:34.640
<v Speaker 6>contingency plans because they aren't sure that there can be

0:08:34.720 --> 0:08:37.360
<v Speaker 6>such safety and you've seen insurance costs go up. Is

0:08:37.360 --> 0:08:41.720
<v Speaker 6>it appropriate for the US for Israel to more directly

0:08:41.760 --> 0:08:45.240
<v Speaker 6>respond to Iran at some point, just not now.

0:08:46.240 --> 0:08:49.400
<v Speaker 3>Again, I can't speculate about future operations one way or another,

0:08:49.520 --> 0:08:51.800
<v Speaker 3>or future decisions that we might have to make. The

0:08:51.840 --> 0:08:54.960
<v Speaker 3>President has been clear we're going to hold Iran accountable

0:08:54.960 --> 0:08:58.400
<v Speaker 3>for their destabilizing activities. He's also been clear we don't

0:08:58.400 --> 0:09:00.880
<v Speaker 3>want a war with Iran. We're not looking for another

0:09:01.080 --> 0:09:02.600
<v Speaker 3>war in the Middle East or is to see the

0:09:02.640 --> 0:09:06.720
<v Speaker 3>conflict that's currently underway in Gaza broadened or deepened across

0:09:06.800 --> 0:09:09.040
<v Speaker 3>the region. Now we'll have to see how things unfold

0:09:09.120 --> 0:09:12.640
<v Speaker 3>over the next coming days here, but we don't want

0:09:12.679 --> 0:09:15.040
<v Speaker 3>to war with Iran, and everything the President has been

0:09:15.040 --> 0:09:17.480
<v Speaker 3>doing since the seventh of October has been designed to

0:09:17.600 --> 0:09:19.640
<v Speaker 3>try to bring the tensions down and to make sure

0:09:19.679 --> 0:09:22.280
<v Speaker 3>that the United States is best posture to defend our

0:09:22.320 --> 0:09:23.280
<v Speaker 3>interests there in the region.

0:09:23.679 --> 0:09:25.079
<v Speaker 2>You and a fine now with a low mama, So

0:09:25.520 --> 0:09:28.360
<v Speaker 2>we're gonna let you go. National Security accounts, SOL Communications

0:09:28.360 --> 0:09:31.040
<v Speaker 2>advice that John Kirby, John, thank you, Sir Admiral Kirby.

0:09:31.160 --> 0:09:43.520
<v Speaker 2>We appreciate your time with this amount of table together

0:09:43.520 --> 0:09:46.719
<v Speaker 2>with Shanati KPWC. TELLMA show tell me you've had a

0:09:46.760 --> 0:09:48.360
<v Speaker 2>few minutes to go over this one. What's your reaction

0:09:48.440 --> 0:09:48.640
<v Speaker 2>to this?

0:09:49.160 --> 0:09:52.640
<v Speaker 7>So Our feeling is it's two things. One is it's

0:09:52.640 --> 0:09:55.320
<v Speaker 7>what's happening in the industry. So there is a rebound

0:09:55.360 --> 0:09:58.880
<v Speaker 7>that's happening in investment banking. Investment banking was on a

0:09:58.920 --> 0:10:02.679
<v Speaker 7>real downturn over the last prior twelve months, and what

0:10:03.679 --> 0:10:06.240
<v Speaker 7>you see at Goldman is not even full power. I mean,

0:10:06.280 --> 0:10:09.920
<v Speaker 7>we still think the industry, broadly speaking, is probably operating

0:10:09.960 --> 0:10:12.840
<v Speaker 7>around seventy percent of what we would think is typical.

0:10:13.160 --> 0:10:15.600
<v Speaker 7>So as we put the COVID period behind us, get

0:10:15.640 --> 0:10:18.679
<v Speaker 7>to a more traditional moment, as IPOs pick up, m

0:10:18.720 --> 0:10:22.320
<v Speaker 7>and A comes back, and especially if we get lower rates,

0:10:23.120 --> 0:10:25.160
<v Speaker 7>we think the business has even further to go.

0:10:25.320 --> 0:10:26.079
<v Speaker 4>So that's number one.

0:10:26.160 --> 0:10:28.440
<v Speaker 7>Number two is I think it's a big moment in

0:10:28.480 --> 0:10:32.720
<v Speaker 7>the Goldman reboot. They also sold green Sky in the quarter,

0:10:33.280 --> 0:10:36.480
<v Speaker 7>which is putting some of their consumer efforts behind them

0:10:36.679 --> 0:10:38.600
<v Speaker 7>and they're going to focus really on what's been the

0:10:38.640 --> 0:10:41.559
<v Speaker 7>core of the company over the long term. We've been

0:10:41.600 --> 0:10:44.400
<v Speaker 7>really positive on the shares. My senses will continue to

0:10:44.440 --> 0:10:48.440
<v Speaker 7>recommend it even after today's move, and as the company

0:10:48.480 --> 0:10:51.959
<v Speaker 7>earns around sixteen on tangible common equity in this quarter,

0:10:52.160 --> 0:10:54.679
<v Speaker 7>it's a signal that they're starting from a very healthy

0:10:54.840 --> 0:10:56.800
<v Speaker 7>point even this reboot.

0:10:56.880 --> 0:10:59.160
<v Speaker 6>Something that Sheanali said that really stands out because it

0:10:59.200 --> 0:11:02.080
<v Speaker 6>seems like of banks are implying the same thing in

0:11:02.080 --> 0:11:04.680
<v Speaker 6>their numbers, use a balance sheet. We're hearing that again

0:11:04.720 --> 0:11:07.920
<v Speaker 6>and again, using their balance sheets more aggressively. Is this

0:11:07.920 --> 0:11:10.160
<v Speaker 6>the new model kind of going back to the old

0:11:10.200 --> 0:11:12.240
<v Speaker 6>one as they try to compete with private credit and

0:11:12.280 --> 0:11:15.200
<v Speaker 6>private asset managers, they got to use their balance sheets

0:11:15.240 --> 0:11:17.120
<v Speaker 6>and they find ways to do it even with all.

0:11:17.040 --> 0:11:19.640
<v Speaker 7>The regulatory Well, I think that that's going to be

0:11:19.720 --> 0:11:21.600
<v Speaker 7>key because we've just gone through a moment where the

0:11:21.600 --> 0:11:24.240
<v Speaker 7>banks in general of lost market shared to non banks,

0:11:24.559 --> 0:11:27.840
<v Speaker 7>and I personally believe in a five percent yield world

0:11:27.880 --> 0:11:30.400
<v Speaker 7>with a flat or inverted yield curve, it's going to

0:11:30.400 --> 0:11:32.720
<v Speaker 7>be harder to get financing than when money was free

0:11:32.800 --> 0:11:36.520
<v Speaker 7>during COVID. Okay, So having access to a balance sheet

0:11:36.520 --> 0:11:40.640
<v Speaker 7>that's reliable is going to become more important to banks clients,

0:11:40.880 --> 0:11:43.160
<v Speaker 7>and over time it could be part of the moment

0:11:43.360 --> 0:11:46.920
<v Speaker 7>that helps these banks regain some share from that moment

0:11:47.000 --> 0:11:47.400
<v Speaker 7>in time.

0:11:47.640 --> 0:11:50.040
<v Speaker 6>Forgive me, there were years when a lot of these

0:11:50.080 --> 0:11:52.280
<v Speaker 6>bank executives were saying that they can't do this, that

0:11:52.280 --> 0:11:55.560
<v Speaker 6>they are hamstrung, their hands are tied because of financial regulations.

0:11:55.920 --> 0:11:58.040
<v Speaker 4>What changed, well, I believe me.

0:11:58.559 --> 0:12:00.640
<v Speaker 7>I don't think any bank's going to stay outside of

0:12:00.640 --> 0:12:04.000
<v Speaker 7>the financial regulations. I think it's just core blocking and tackling,

0:12:04.360 --> 0:12:07.760
<v Speaker 7>which is having reliable acts. I think what's changed is

0:12:07.800 --> 0:12:11.720
<v Speaker 7>the other markets aren't as easy. So zero interest rates

0:12:11.760 --> 0:12:14.200
<v Speaker 7>meant that it was very easy for non banks to

0:12:14.200 --> 0:12:16.440
<v Speaker 7>be able to raise financing to be able to enter

0:12:16.480 --> 0:12:18.960
<v Speaker 7>the market. It's going to be harder for non banks

0:12:19.200 --> 0:12:22.280
<v Speaker 7>to raise funding to serve bank customers. So I think

0:12:22.360 --> 0:12:24.680
<v Speaker 7>that's what's changed, not the banks, but I think it's

0:12:24.679 --> 0:12:26.839
<v Speaker 7>the other items and other conditions.

0:12:26.960 --> 0:12:28.200
<v Speaker 4>You said you like Goldman's action.

0:12:28.240 --> 0:12:30.880
<v Speaker 5>Olie was talking about how Ted Pick his whole business

0:12:30.960 --> 0:12:34.600
<v Speaker 5>has been really the trading and potentially we'll read through

0:12:34.640 --> 0:12:35.480
<v Speaker 5>Morgan Standing tomorrow.

0:12:35.480 --> 0:12:36.440
<v Speaker 4>What other banks do you like?

0:12:36.920 --> 0:12:40.000
<v Speaker 7>Well, we like Truest. It's one of our favorite ideas.

0:12:40.000 --> 0:12:42.240
<v Speaker 7>It's one of the biggest banks in the nation. They

0:12:42.280 --> 0:12:46.160
<v Speaker 7>sold their insurance broker for a whopping price recently they're

0:12:46.160 --> 0:12:47.920
<v Speaker 7>going to trade in. What you don't see now is

0:12:47.960 --> 0:12:50.960
<v Speaker 7>that they haven't put the gain into their financial statements yet,

0:12:51.080 --> 0:12:54.280
<v Speaker 7>so the stock's really trading around one fifteen intangible book,

0:12:54.440 --> 0:12:56.920
<v Speaker 7>which is a very low valuation for one of the

0:12:56.960 --> 0:12:59.319
<v Speaker 7>best banks in the nation. It's got a five point

0:12:59.360 --> 0:13:02.360
<v Speaker 7>seven percent yield. The next time that dividend changes, it's

0:13:02.400 --> 0:13:05.320
<v Speaker 7>going up, not down. So our view is at a

0:13:05.320 --> 0:13:08.160
<v Speaker 7>single digit pe ratio for a bank that's got one

0:13:08.200 --> 0:13:11.320
<v Speaker 7>of the best franchises in the country. That is I

0:13:11.320 --> 0:13:14.720
<v Speaker 7>would say our largest bank idea at the moment, and

0:13:14.760 --> 0:13:16.840
<v Speaker 7>we're pretty bullish on that one. And then you know

0:13:16.840 --> 0:13:19.160
<v Speaker 7>they're also doing a restructuring. They got a little bit

0:13:19.200 --> 0:13:21.760
<v Speaker 7>off sides after their merger, and we think the new

0:13:21.760 --> 0:13:24.240
<v Speaker 7>management team is very focused on fixing things.

0:13:24.400 --> 0:13:26.240
<v Speaker 5>When you look at the loan market at the moment,

0:13:26.280 --> 0:13:27.839
<v Speaker 5>what do you make from it? Because know your notes

0:13:27.880 --> 0:13:29.800
<v Speaker 5>you talk about the seasonality is low.

0:13:30.160 --> 0:13:33.720
<v Speaker 7>Slow, it's slow what we're seeing, and all the results

0:13:33.720 --> 0:13:35.720
<v Speaker 7>that have come out loans have actually been a little

0:13:35.760 --> 0:13:39.000
<v Speaker 7>bit lower than we expected. And when I watch, you know, look,

0:13:39.040 --> 0:13:41.880
<v Speaker 7>we've had three now four banks report our firm files

0:13:41.880 --> 0:13:44.000
<v Speaker 7>two hundred and twenty five. We got a long way

0:13:44.040 --> 0:13:46.840
<v Speaker 7>to go. But what do I think. I think delay

0:13:47.280 --> 0:13:50.320
<v Speaker 7>in the pivot. So our bull case on the stocks

0:13:50.520 --> 0:13:54.640
<v Speaker 7>and we're market performed, So the bull case we're pretty balanced.

0:13:54.880 --> 0:13:56.480
<v Speaker 7>But the bull case is that we're going to get

0:13:56.480 --> 0:14:00.360
<v Speaker 7>a pivot and acceleration into earnings going into twenty twenty five.

0:14:00.600 --> 0:14:04.120
<v Speaker 7>To the extent that we get less rate cuts, less growth,

0:14:04.440 --> 0:14:07.040
<v Speaker 7>it probably pushes that back a little bit for when

0:14:07.040 --> 0:14:08.800
<v Speaker 7>we see an acceleration in earnings.

0:14:09.240 --> 0:14:11.400
<v Speaker 2>How aligned to you with the gloom of Jamie Diamond.

0:14:11.440 --> 0:14:13.160
<v Speaker 2>I've a JP Milkan What did you make of the

0:14:13.160 --> 0:14:15.679
<v Speaker 2>caution from him on Friday? Typically we're all used to

0:14:15.720 --> 0:14:17.920
<v Speaker 2>sort of beating race, beating race from JP Milkan. Then

0:14:17.960 --> 0:14:19.880
<v Speaker 2>on Friday things kind of changed. What do you make

0:14:19.880 --> 0:14:20.040
<v Speaker 2>of that?

0:14:21.000 --> 0:14:25.080
<v Speaker 7>There are still big macro risks in the marketplace. And

0:14:25.400 --> 0:14:27.960
<v Speaker 7>I'll tell you when I talked to bank management teams,

0:14:28.280 --> 0:14:30.920
<v Speaker 7>it's almost like I feel like I'm having a credit

0:14:30.960 --> 0:14:34.400
<v Speaker 7>analyst discussion more than an in equity analysts discussion. They're

0:14:34.560 --> 0:14:38.000
<v Speaker 7>very focused on their own balance sheet. I think strength

0:14:38.000 --> 0:14:41.480
<v Speaker 7>and stability seems to be a bigger presence in the

0:14:41.520 --> 0:14:45.080
<v Speaker 7>strategic boardroom of these banks. They are building these banks

0:14:45.080 --> 0:14:47.080
<v Speaker 7>to make sure they can withstand any challenge.

0:14:47.080 --> 0:14:49.120
<v Speaker 8>And Tom, if you look at the way Goldman and

0:14:49.160 --> 0:14:51.920
<v Speaker 8>Morgan Stanley have been trading, they've been bears. Morgan Stanley's

0:14:51.960 --> 0:14:54.200
<v Speaker 8>down more than seven point five percent over the last

0:14:54.240 --> 0:14:54.880
<v Speaker 8>twelve months.

0:14:55.120 --> 0:14:56.120
<v Speaker 4>Does it deserve that?

0:14:56.680 --> 0:15:00.240
<v Speaker 8>Are these kinds of investment banking and trading businesses is

0:15:00.480 --> 0:15:02.560
<v Speaker 8>just something people don't want to pick up on in

0:15:02.600 --> 0:15:03.280
<v Speaker 8>this environment.

0:15:03.640 --> 0:15:06.320
<v Speaker 7>I think for Morgan Stanley it's just a preference for

0:15:06.400 --> 0:15:08.680
<v Speaker 7>Goldman Sachs. For us, we had been really bullish on

0:15:08.720 --> 0:15:09.440
<v Speaker 7>Morgan Stanley.

0:15:09.480 --> 0:15:10.240
<v Speaker 1>We pulled back.

0:15:10.480 --> 0:15:12.880
<v Speaker 7>It's just the dynamics of what's happening in their own

0:15:12.920 --> 0:15:15.840
<v Speaker 7>earnings at the moment. We just think there's more upside

0:15:15.840 --> 0:15:18.960
<v Speaker 7>because there's more delta coming at Goldman. They can do

0:15:19.000 --> 0:15:21.520
<v Speaker 7>a little bit more self improvement, and so we like

0:15:21.600 --> 0:15:25.000
<v Speaker 7>it more. But so we're a market perform on Morgan Stanley,

0:15:25.000 --> 0:15:27.080
<v Speaker 7>but think it's a fine company. We just think the

0:15:27.200 --> 0:15:30.080
<v Speaker 7>dynamics don't have as much delta to them.

0:15:30.960 --> 0:15:33.600
<v Speaker 2>Chanie pass like that alongside tell mi shall I kyped up?

0:15:33.640 --> 0:15:34.880
<v Speaker 2>You just like to read the Number's just the ren

0:15:34.880 --> 0:15:38.080
<v Speaker 2>things sumptionalty quickly, bait bait bait. How would you frame

0:15:38.080 --> 0:15:39.880
<v Speaker 2>it any other way? The gold sacks this smalling.

0:15:39.920 --> 0:15:40.840
<v Speaker 4>There's no other way to frame it.

0:15:40.880 --> 0:15:42.920
<v Speaker 8>Remember they've only been training at one point two times

0:15:42.920 --> 0:15:46.000
<v Speaker 8>book value. Heading in today Morgan Stanley's at one point five.

0:15:46.200 --> 0:15:49.400
<v Speaker 8>It sets the bar super high for tomorrow. And remember

0:15:49.440 --> 0:15:51.760
<v Speaker 8>there's a big cloud over Morgan Stanley with a lot

0:15:51.800 --> 0:15:54.120
<v Speaker 8>of questions about the investigations that they're facing. They haven't

0:15:54.120 --> 0:15:56.720
<v Speaker 8>said anything yet, and so the earnings are one thing,

0:15:56.800 --> 0:15:59.120
<v Speaker 8>but then the story is also going to be equally

0:15:59.120 --> 0:16:00.040
<v Speaker 8>important heading into our.

0:16:00.240 --> 0:16:01.560
<v Speaker 2>Let's got to score U up on the board again

0:16:01.560 --> 0:16:03.560
<v Speaker 2>and just look at MOK and Standley and gets winning Sat.

0:16:03.600 --> 0:16:05.760
<v Speaker 2>Tomorrow morning in the pre market, it is positive off

0:16:05.800 --> 0:16:07.680
<v Speaker 2>the back of what you're saying on Goldman sacks. Goldman

0:16:07.760 --> 0:16:10.280
<v Speaker 2>up by three point four percent, just beats across the board,

0:16:10.280 --> 0:16:11.960
<v Speaker 2>and we totally so briefly about the night, sure of

0:16:12.000 --> 0:16:14.360
<v Speaker 2>the upside surprise, let's just sit on fixed sounds and

0:16:14.360 --> 0:16:16.960
<v Speaker 2>trading revenue just for a bait longer. Full point three

0:16:17.000 --> 0:16:19.880
<v Speaker 2>to two billion the estimate three point sixty four. That

0:16:20.000 --> 0:16:21.000
<v Speaker 2>is a solid.

0:16:20.680 --> 0:16:23.000
<v Speaker 6>Beat, and it really raises a question, Okay, they're using

0:16:23.040 --> 0:16:25.040
<v Speaker 6>their balance sheet more so that means they're making directional

0:16:25.080 --> 0:16:28.200
<v Speaker 6>bets or taking things down in a market that might

0:16:28.360 --> 0:16:31.000
<v Speaker 6>look like it's liquid but may not be as liquid.

0:16:31.480 --> 0:16:34.560
<v Speaker 6>And then it also raises this question about just how

0:16:34.600 --> 0:16:37.120
<v Speaker 6>much they're taking share from some of these other companies

0:16:37.240 --> 0:16:39.840
<v Speaker 6>just in terms of private asset managers, which is something

0:16:39.880 --> 0:16:40.920
<v Speaker 6>a lot of people have talked about.

0:16:41.040 --> 0:16:43.720
<v Speaker 7>But also to remember, we don't have Credit Sweee anymore.

0:16:43.960 --> 0:16:47.960
<v Speaker 7>So a year ago, Credit Suite disappeared overnight in the ubs.

0:16:48.240 --> 0:16:51.600
<v Speaker 7>So when you look at the statistics, I believe that

0:16:51.720 --> 0:16:54.920
<v Speaker 7>market share was pretty much captured by many of the

0:16:54.960 --> 0:16:57.880
<v Speaker 7>biggest other banks. So I think that's also on a

0:16:57.960 --> 0:17:00.000
<v Speaker 7>year over year basis been somewhat of a.

0:17:00.160 --> 0:17:02.520
<v Speaker 2>So when Aschinali, is the pinketting bigger or did they

0:17:02.600 --> 0:17:04.480
<v Speaker 2>just take someone else's slice? So you said that slice

0:17:04.520 --> 0:17:05.840
<v Speaker 2>belong to Credit Suite.

0:17:06.520 --> 0:17:09.200
<v Speaker 7>I would say amongst probably others, I would say they're

0:17:09.200 --> 0:17:11.479
<v Speaker 7>getting a bigger piece of the slice. Because while I

0:17:11.520 --> 0:17:13.879
<v Speaker 7>do think and I think Morgan Stanley will benefit tomorrow

0:17:13.880 --> 0:17:17.560
<v Speaker 7>from the market just being better. And believe me, is

0:17:17.560 --> 0:17:19.920
<v Speaker 7>someone who operates an investment bank, I pay attention to

0:17:20.000 --> 0:17:22.960
<v Speaker 7>league tables and market share, believe me. So the biggest

0:17:23.080 --> 0:17:26.720
<v Speaker 7>firms have probably picked up the most share, and it's

0:17:26.760 --> 0:17:29.919
<v Speaker 7>a few firms who have done that, and Morgan Stanley

0:17:29.960 --> 0:17:31.480
<v Speaker 7>and Goldman would be in that bucket.

0:17:31.600 --> 0:17:34.760
<v Speaker 6>What's good for Goldman Sachs isn't necessarily good for Science

0:17:34.800 --> 0:17:38.760
<v Speaker 6>Bank for some of the others that are smaller regional banks.

0:17:39.040 --> 0:17:42.119
<v Speaker 6>How much is the gain of big banks the loss

0:17:42.200 --> 0:17:42.919
<v Speaker 6>of regionals.

0:17:43.440 --> 0:17:46.679
<v Speaker 7>Well, well, they tend to do different things, so the

0:17:46.680 --> 0:17:49.520
<v Speaker 7>net interesting income world that they all live in is

0:17:49.600 --> 0:17:53.159
<v Speaker 7>somewhat similar. It's the investment banking piece that really is

0:17:53.200 --> 0:17:55.640
<v Speaker 7>the big delta that we've been talking about. So as

0:17:55.640 --> 0:17:58.919
<v Speaker 7>we get away from banks that report that don't have that,

0:17:59.240 --> 0:18:03.280
<v Speaker 7>they're going to be war attuned to what's happening in

0:18:03.320 --> 0:18:06.359
<v Speaker 7>the interest rate environment. The good news there though, Li

0:18:06.560 --> 0:18:09.480
<v Speaker 7>says that six months ago we would have been talking

0:18:09.480 --> 0:18:12.639
<v Speaker 7>about the quantity of deposits. It's all about deposits, the

0:18:12.720 --> 0:18:16.320
<v Speaker 7>quantity of deposits. The nice thing is that pressure has eased,

0:18:16.560 --> 0:18:18.160
<v Speaker 7>and you're already seeing it in the numbers.

0:18:18.320 --> 0:18:18.480
<v Speaker 1>Now.

0:18:18.520 --> 0:18:21.479
<v Speaker 7>It's the cost of those deposits. And we're waiting for

0:18:21.520 --> 0:18:23.680
<v Speaker 7>the Fed to cut rates a little bit to take

0:18:23.760 --> 0:18:26.040
<v Speaker 7>some of the heat off, because you know what, US

0:18:26.160 --> 0:18:30.159
<v Speaker 7>treasuries are really competitive for bank deposits. We need the

0:18:30.240 --> 0:18:32.800
<v Speaker 7>US treasury rate to back off a little bit for

0:18:32.880 --> 0:18:35.159
<v Speaker 7>the banking industry to do a little better. And it

0:18:35.240 --> 0:18:37.960
<v Speaker 7>is actually all about deposits more so than loans.

0:18:38.000 --> 0:18:39.720
<v Speaker 2>When you say we're white saying you made the banks,

0:18:39.760 --> 0:18:41.520
<v Speaker 2>because for the rest of us with money on deposit,

0:18:41.640 --> 0:18:41.920
<v Speaker 2>we're not.

0:18:42.280 --> 0:18:45.640
<v Speaker 4>We're to poss on hid by bills. Final time.

0:18:45.680 --> 0:18:46.320
<v Speaker 2>You know, I make it.

0:18:46.280 --> 0:18:47.800
<v Speaker 4>Happen on wine. It's easy to do.

0:18:49.200 --> 0:18:50.280
<v Speaker 9>Tema shot, Thank you.

0:18:50.320 --> 0:19:02.760
<v Speaker 10>So consumer spending has been strong. I think it is

0:19:02.840 --> 0:19:06.520
<v Speaker 10>driven by strong fundamentals. Job growth has been solid, We've

0:19:06.560 --> 0:19:09.760
<v Speaker 10>seen real wage gains. We're in a pretty strong economy

0:19:09.840 --> 0:19:11.720
<v Speaker 10>with good growth, So yes.

0:19:11.880 --> 0:19:13.000
<v Speaker 1>It's part of that story.

0:19:13.040 --> 0:19:17.120
<v Speaker 10>But you know, I think what we're realizing is we're

0:19:17.160 --> 0:19:20.920
<v Speaker 10>getting a nice tailwind from the supply side of the economy,

0:19:21.080 --> 0:19:25.200
<v Speaker 10>good labor force growth, strong productivity, good real wage gains.

0:19:25.400 --> 0:19:27.960
<v Speaker 1>So with that, I think, you know, consumers are spending.

0:19:28.280 --> 0:19:31.000
<v Speaker 11>What's the thinking in your office and among your colleagues

0:19:31.040 --> 0:19:34.119
<v Speaker 11>about does this last or is this a surprise that

0:19:34.440 --> 0:19:36.040
<v Speaker 11>you think could go wait at any minute.

0:19:36.200 --> 0:19:38.639
<v Speaker 10>Well, one thing that makes it really hard to forecast

0:19:38.720 --> 0:19:41.879
<v Speaker 10>is we're still feeling the effects of the after effects

0:19:41.920 --> 0:19:44.600
<v Speaker 10>of the pandemic and Russia's war in Ukraine and all

0:19:44.640 --> 0:19:47.160
<v Speaker 10>the things that have happened in between. So we're definitely still

0:19:47.200 --> 0:19:51.840
<v Speaker 10>seeing an adjustment process by the consumer in the economy overall.

0:19:52.640 --> 0:19:54.240
<v Speaker 1>But you know, overall, I think that.

0:19:54.240 --> 0:19:56.800
<v Speaker 10>The economy will continue to grow at a solid rate

0:19:56.840 --> 0:19:59.080
<v Speaker 10>this year, probably not as high as the three point

0:19:59.080 --> 0:20:01.360
<v Speaker 10>one percent we saw la year, but something like two

0:20:01.359 --> 0:20:04.000
<v Speaker 10>percent or around that. So I feel like we're still

0:20:04.000 --> 0:20:07.000
<v Speaker 10>in a good place, probably not as rapid growth as

0:20:07.040 --> 0:20:07.840
<v Speaker 10>we saw last year.

0:20:08.600 --> 0:20:11.359
<v Speaker 11>Speaking of international events, I have to ask you the

0:20:11.400 --> 0:20:13.880
<v Speaker 11>Middle East going on right now, how do you think

0:20:13.920 --> 0:20:16.439
<v Speaker 11>about the economic and policy.

0:20:17.960 --> 0:20:19.880
<v Speaker 9>Implications of these events?

0:20:20.119 --> 0:20:23.520
<v Speaker 10>Right so, obviously we're watching this very carefully. I think

0:20:23.560 --> 0:20:27.840
<v Speaker 10>the primary way you see it through is first of all,

0:20:27.880 --> 0:20:31.720
<v Speaker 10>through commodity prices, but second is what we think of

0:20:31.800 --> 0:20:35.280
<v Speaker 10>as a flight to safety, where investors, when they see

0:20:35.400 --> 0:20:38.560
<v Speaker 10>risks in the global economy, they tend to bring money

0:20:38.560 --> 0:20:41.520
<v Speaker 10>to the US dollar, and that tends to push yields

0:20:41.520 --> 0:20:44.080
<v Speaker 10>down somewhat. Right now, I think, you know, markets are

0:20:44.119 --> 0:20:47.399
<v Speaker 10>pretty pretty stable. We're not seeing big movements in that way,

0:20:47.520 --> 0:20:50.320
<v Speaker 10>but generally that's the way I would what I would

0:20:50.359 --> 0:20:53.560
<v Speaker 10>expect to see when you see heightened geopolitical tensions.

0:20:53.840 --> 0:20:56.639
<v Speaker 11>When you think about what the markets are reacting to

0:20:56.720 --> 0:20:59.200
<v Speaker 11>and what could come out of this, is this more

0:20:59.240 --> 0:21:02.160
<v Speaker 11>of an inflation worry or a growth concern.

0:21:02.760 --> 0:21:04.480
<v Speaker 1>Well, it's really hard to say.

0:21:04.520 --> 0:21:08.800
<v Speaker 10>It really depends on how the situation evolves right now.

0:21:08.840 --> 0:21:10.640
<v Speaker 10>I don't think of this as maybe in the near

0:21:10.800 --> 0:21:15.440
<v Speaker 10>term it could be effect of financial conditions and commodity prices.

0:21:15.440 --> 0:21:17.680
<v Speaker 10>As I mentioned, I don't see this as a major

0:21:17.760 --> 0:21:22.960
<v Speaker 10>driver the overall forecast or outlook for economic growth or

0:21:23.000 --> 0:21:23.560
<v Speaker 10>for inflation.

0:21:24.080 --> 0:21:27.399
<v Speaker 11>Speaking of inflation, CPI came in much hotter than expected

0:21:27.600 --> 0:21:30.119
<v Speaker 11>and sort of freaked everybody out on Wall Street and

0:21:30.200 --> 0:21:33.040
<v Speaker 11>market sort of took that as a turning point in

0:21:33.160 --> 0:21:34.040
<v Speaker 11>Fed policy.

0:21:34.080 --> 0:21:34.960
<v Speaker 1>Do you see it that way?

0:21:35.200 --> 0:21:37.040
<v Speaker 10>I don't see it as a turning point. I think

0:21:37.080 --> 0:21:39.640
<v Speaker 10>that you know, we've saw inflation come down.

0:21:39.480 --> 0:21:41.840
<v Speaker 1>Maybe quicker than we expected. Last year.

0:21:41.840 --> 0:21:45.879
<v Speaker 10>We definitely saw really lower readings and inflation in the

0:21:45.920 --> 0:21:48.840
<v Speaker 10>final six months that I never thought that that was

0:21:48.880 --> 0:21:49.960
<v Speaker 10>going to stay that low.

0:21:50.400 --> 0:21:51.720
<v Speaker 1>That was unusually low.

0:21:51.880 --> 0:21:56.720
<v Speaker 10>We're now seeing some a little bit unusually high readings. Overall,

0:21:56.800 --> 0:22:00.520
<v Speaker 10>I think the picture is one of the economy is

0:22:00.520 --> 0:22:03.760
<v Speaker 10>getting in better balance, we still have a strong labor market,

0:22:03.840 --> 0:22:06.040
<v Speaker 10>and we're seeing inflation gradually come down.

0:22:06.280 --> 0:22:06.440
<v Speaker 6>Now.

0:22:06.440 --> 0:22:09.119
<v Speaker 10>I do think that, you know, for me, what do

0:22:09.200 --> 0:22:11.120
<v Speaker 10>I see in the data, well the economy, and then

0:22:11.119 --> 0:22:14.320
<v Speaker 10>you pointed out the retail sales today, but more broadly,

0:22:14.359 --> 0:22:16.880
<v Speaker 10>the economy continues to be strong again. I think we're

0:22:16.920 --> 0:22:19.720
<v Speaker 10>being helped by strong demand and supply, and those are

0:22:20.600 --> 0:22:23.879
<v Speaker 10>helping growth, and we're seeing you know, inflation come down

0:22:23.920 --> 0:22:26.760
<v Speaker 10>a little bit slower than expected, and so you know,

0:22:26.800 --> 0:22:30.040
<v Speaker 10>I think markets are taking all that information into account

0:22:30.040 --> 0:22:32.960
<v Speaker 10>and how they how they expect policy to be. For me,

0:22:33.160 --> 0:22:35.840
<v Speaker 10>I'm you know, data dependent as always, really take the

0:22:35.880 --> 0:22:38.520
<v Speaker 10>totality of the data and think about what it means

0:22:38.520 --> 0:22:42.159
<v Speaker 10>for achieving our maximum employment and price stability goals. So

0:22:42.200 --> 0:22:44.480
<v Speaker 10>I don't see this as a game change or anythink.

0:22:44.520 --> 0:22:47.879
<v Speaker 10>I do think it's important information that will clearly, you know,

0:22:47.920 --> 0:22:50.920
<v Speaker 10>affect my thinking and my forecast.

0:22:51.240 --> 0:22:53.920
<v Speaker 11>Even those who've thought about what PCEE might be after

0:22:53.960 --> 0:22:56.400
<v Speaker 11>the p p I and cp I say inflation isn't

0:22:56.400 --> 0:22:59.880
<v Speaker 11>coming down rapidly anymore, but you do have the strong growth,

0:23:00.040 --> 0:23:04.159
<v Speaker 11>you have very low unemployment. Why cut rates if the

0:23:04.200 --> 0:23:06.439
<v Speaker 11>economy is doing fine at this level.

0:23:06.680 --> 0:23:08.919
<v Speaker 10>Well, first of all, I think Monte policy is working

0:23:09.000 --> 0:23:11.320
<v Speaker 10>at the rates that we have now, So I think

0:23:12.119 --> 0:23:14.680
<v Speaker 10>I think Monte policy is in a good place over

0:23:14.720 --> 0:23:18.080
<v Speaker 10>the past six twelve to eighteen months, we've seen all

0:23:18.119 --> 0:23:21.400
<v Speaker 10>pretty much all the measures of imbalances in the labor market,

0:23:21.440 --> 0:23:24.879
<v Speaker 10>and our economy received many of them back to levels

0:23:24.880 --> 0:23:27.120
<v Speaker 10>we saw in twenty eighteen or twenty nineteen. So we're

0:23:27.119 --> 0:23:30.280
<v Speaker 10>seeing the you know, restoring balance in the economy. We

0:23:30.320 --> 0:23:33.840
<v Speaker 10>are seeing a slow decline in inflation. So I do

0:23:33.880 --> 0:23:36.840
<v Speaker 10>think Monterey policy right now is in a good place.

0:23:36.880 --> 0:23:39.640
<v Speaker 10>I'm not fixated on where the rates need to go,

0:23:40.280 --> 0:23:42.440
<v Speaker 10>you know, over the next year. What I'm focused on

0:23:42.760 --> 0:23:45.680
<v Speaker 10>is how do we best achieve our maximum employment and

0:23:45.760 --> 0:23:48.359
<v Speaker 10>price stability goals. The data we're seeing show that the

0:23:48.359 --> 0:23:50.800
<v Speaker 10>economy is strong and that's really good news, and labor

0:23:50.800 --> 0:23:54.200
<v Speaker 10>markets strong. At the same time, we are getting better balance,

0:23:54.280 --> 0:23:57.320
<v Speaker 10>and we're seeing some decline overall and inflation. So for me,

0:23:57.520 --> 0:24:00.199
<v Speaker 10>it's really about getting that right and then whatever we

0:24:00.240 --> 0:24:03.240
<v Speaker 10>need to do to adjust monetary policy we can do

0:24:03.680 --> 0:24:05.520
<v Speaker 10>to bet you know, best continue.

0:24:05.400 --> 0:24:06.760
<v Speaker 1>The progress towards our goals.

0:24:07.320 --> 0:24:09.960
<v Speaker 10>So that's how I'm thinking about it, and we'll just

0:24:09.960 --> 0:24:12.320
<v Speaker 10>have to keep watching the data and make the decisions

0:24:12.359 --> 0:24:13.560
<v Speaker 10>based on those goals.

0:24:13.800 --> 0:24:15.920
<v Speaker 9>Well, is your base case that you will cut rates

0:24:15.920 --> 0:24:16.359
<v Speaker 9>this year?

0:24:16.880 --> 0:24:20.119
<v Speaker 10>My own view is I think that with inflation continuing

0:24:20.119 --> 0:24:22.400
<v Speaker 10>to gradually come down, and I guess I would say

0:24:22.440 --> 0:24:25.880
<v Speaker 10>gradually is the operative word here, and with the economy

0:24:25.960 --> 0:24:28.639
<v Speaker 10>remaining strong, I do think that given where the level

0:24:28.680 --> 0:24:32.840
<v Speaker 10>of rates are, real interest rates now are considerably higher

0:24:32.880 --> 0:24:34.760
<v Speaker 10>than they were before because inflation has.

0:24:34.640 --> 0:24:35.560
<v Speaker 1>Come down quite a bit.

0:24:36.080 --> 0:24:39.119
<v Speaker 10>So we will need start a process at some point

0:24:39.320 --> 0:24:41.840
<v Speaker 10>to bring interest rates back to more normal levels. And

0:24:41.960 --> 0:24:44.919
<v Speaker 10>my own view is that, well, you know that process

0:24:45.080 --> 0:24:48.200
<v Speaker 10>will likely start this year, but again it's going to

0:24:48.200 --> 0:24:51.679
<v Speaker 10>be driven driven by the data and achieving our goals.

0:24:51.760 --> 0:24:53.680
<v Speaker 9>So it's possible you don't do anything this year.

0:24:53.800 --> 0:24:56.080
<v Speaker 10>Well, again you're asking me to speculate and what they

0:24:56.119 --> 0:24:59.520
<v Speaker 10>will happen more And you know, right now, I think

0:24:59.600 --> 0:25:03.280
<v Speaker 10>Monte policies in a good place. We're seeing the progress.

0:25:03.320 --> 0:25:07.359
<v Speaker 10>We're seeing progress. It's a bumpy road on the inflation front,

0:25:07.520 --> 0:25:09.640
<v Speaker 10>and we'll just have to figure out how to best

0:25:09.680 --> 0:25:13.159
<v Speaker 10>adjust policy as needed to achieve our goals.

0:25:13.280 --> 0:25:16.600
<v Speaker 9>Now, you mentioned the real rate is policy tight?

0:25:16.960 --> 0:25:20.280
<v Speaker 10>Now, I do think we have restrictive monetary policy.

0:25:20.320 --> 0:25:21.520
<v Speaker 1>I do think policy is tight.

0:25:21.680 --> 0:25:24.800
<v Speaker 10>So what do I look for Because the economy is growing,

0:25:24.840 --> 0:25:27.680
<v Speaker 10>it grow over three percent? You know, we're adding about

0:25:27.960 --> 0:25:30.160
<v Speaker 10>two hundred and seventy five thousand jobs over the first

0:25:30.160 --> 0:25:32.480
<v Speaker 10>three months, So that seems like an economy that's really

0:25:32.480 --> 0:25:35.800
<v Speaker 10>strong and not being held back by monetary policy. But

0:25:35.840 --> 0:25:39.080
<v Speaker 10>if you take a step back, all these measures of

0:25:39.160 --> 0:25:43.159
<v Speaker 10>imbalances in the labor market, whether job openings or wage rates,

0:25:43.280 --> 0:25:46.120
<v Speaker 10>or quits rates, or all the other indicators we look at,

0:25:46.280 --> 0:25:49.199
<v Speaker 10>all of them are moving from being very tight to

0:25:49.359 --> 0:25:51.919
<v Speaker 10>less tight, and most of them back to more strong.

0:25:52.000 --> 0:25:55.200
<v Speaker 10>Labor market are getting closer there. I mean, job openings

0:25:55.200 --> 0:25:57.440
<v Speaker 10>are still high, wage growth is still a bit high,

0:25:57.600 --> 0:25:58.080
<v Speaker 10>but these.

0:25:57.920 --> 0:25:59.359
<v Speaker 1>Are all moving in the right direction.

0:26:00.119 --> 0:26:03.359
<v Speaker 10>Stance in MANTE policy has really been an important driver

0:26:03.160 --> 0:26:06.440
<v Speaker 10>of restoring balance to the economy and helping bring inflation

0:26:06.920 --> 0:26:08.320
<v Speaker 10>towards two percent.

0:26:08.480 --> 0:26:09.640
<v Speaker 9>What's left with inflation?

0:26:09.880 --> 0:26:12.880
<v Speaker 11>Is it something that you can affect or are these

0:26:13.040 --> 0:26:15.480
<v Speaker 11>non interest rate responsive sectors?

0:26:16.000 --> 0:26:19.560
<v Speaker 10>You know, MANTE policy can affect inflation in the economy.

0:26:20.280 --> 0:26:22.960
<v Speaker 10>It works through multiple channels, so there are some sectors

0:26:23.000 --> 0:26:26.240
<v Speaker 10>that maybe are not as intrasensitive, but the economy is

0:26:26.320 --> 0:26:29.200
<v Speaker 10>interest rates sensitive. We've seen that over the past couple

0:26:29.200 --> 0:26:32.760
<v Speaker 10>of years as we've moved from an accommodated.

0:26:31.840 --> 0:26:33.440
<v Speaker 1>Policy to a restrictive policy.

0:26:33.600 --> 0:26:36.160
<v Speaker 10>So Monte policy is working. To expect it to continue

0:26:36.200 --> 0:26:37.840
<v Speaker 10>to work to bring inflation down.

0:26:38.119 --> 0:26:40.520
<v Speaker 1>You're going to see it, you know, show up.

0:26:40.440 --> 0:26:42.919
<v Speaker 10>In different parts of the inflation rates, you know, goods

0:26:43.040 --> 0:26:44.320
<v Speaker 10>versus services and things.

0:26:44.480 --> 0:26:46.880
<v Speaker 1>But over the past year year and a half we have.

0:26:46.960 --> 0:26:50.400
<v Speaker 10>Seen a broad based declining inflation in all these categories.

0:26:50.480 --> 0:26:51.960
<v Speaker 10>It's just that we haven't gotten all the way to

0:26:51.960 --> 0:26:55.159
<v Speaker 10>two percent, and we just need to keep policy in

0:26:55.200 --> 0:26:57.760
<v Speaker 10>the right place to achieve that two percent goal.

0:26:58.000 --> 0:27:01.280
<v Speaker 11>The question I always ask is what companies telling you

0:27:01.359 --> 0:27:04.480
<v Speaker 11>these days about their hiring plans, about what they're having

0:27:04.520 --> 0:27:08.119
<v Speaker 11>to pay, and about inflation, whether they're raising prices or

0:27:08.160 --> 0:27:09.480
<v Speaker 11>having to pay higher prices.

0:27:09.640 --> 0:27:12.160
<v Speaker 10>Well, clearly, if you asked me this question a year

0:27:12.240 --> 0:27:14.320
<v Speaker 10>or two ago, that's all they would be talking about.

0:27:14.440 --> 0:27:20.080
<v Speaker 10>Price increases, compensation increases, the challenges of hiring employees. Today,

0:27:20.160 --> 0:27:23.240
<v Speaker 10>I think those you know, those comments are still out

0:27:23.240 --> 0:27:25.600
<v Speaker 10>there a little bit, but far less than before.

0:27:25.720 --> 0:27:27.280
<v Speaker 1>We're hearing from our context.

0:27:27.920 --> 0:27:30.159
<v Speaker 10>You know that it's easier to fill positions than it

0:27:30.280 --> 0:27:33.920
<v Speaker 10>used to be. Wage compensation pressures are less, and price

0:27:33.960 --> 0:27:36.639
<v Speaker 10>pressures are are less. I think that's consistent with what

0:27:36.680 --> 0:27:38.840
<v Speaker 10>we're seeing overall in the data.

0:27:38.960 --> 0:27:42.480
<v Speaker 9>You're the potential growth guy. Has potential growth moved up?

0:27:42.880 --> 0:27:45.760
<v Speaker 10>You know, I am being getting more optimistic about potential

0:27:46.119 --> 0:27:47.160
<v Speaker 10>growth in the economy.

0:27:47.200 --> 0:27:48.560
<v Speaker 1>I think for a couple of reasons.

0:27:48.720 --> 0:27:51.520
<v Speaker 10>One is, you know, through the pandemic and everything that

0:27:51.600 --> 0:27:54.760
<v Speaker 10>happened after that, I, like most people, had concerns that

0:27:54.840 --> 0:27:57.639
<v Speaker 10>the supply side of the economy had suffered, you know,

0:27:57.760 --> 0:28:00.560
<v Speaker 10>damage the labor force and in terms of labor force

0:28:00.560 --> 0:28:05.000
<v Speaker 10>and participation. And you know, as we've watched the data

0:28:05.240 --> 0:28:07.760
<v Speaker 10>over the past two years, we've seen an increase in

0:28:07.800 --> 0:28:11.520
<v Speaker 10>labor force participation, increase in labor force growth, and we've

0:28:11.520 --> 0:28:13.919
<v Speaker 10>seen a rebound of productivity. Now I'm not saying that

0:28:13.920 --> 0:28:18.000
<v Speaker 10>we're in some you know, new high growth kind of world,

0:28:18.160 --> 0:28:21.000
<v Speaker 10>but I do think a potential growth is probably closer

0:28:21.040 --> 0:28:23.320
<v Speaker 10>to two percent or a little higher, which is well

0:28:23.359 --> 0:28:25.880
<v Speaker 10>above a lot of estimates of the past few years.

0:28:25.920 --> 0:28:29.280
<v Speaker 10>And that's a very positive sign for us real incomes

0:28:29.320 --> 0:28:32.760
<v Speaker 10>and for the economy and honestly for helping get inflation down.

0:28:33.240 --> 0:28:35.520
<v Speaker 11>A question for all of our friends around us on

0:28:35.560 --> 0:28:38.920
<v Speaker 11>trading desks. You had a briefing on QT at the

0:28:39.000 --> 0:28:42.000
<v Speaker 11>last meeting from the FED staff and members, according to

0:28:42.040 --> 0:28:44.800
<v Speaker 11>the minutes, generally agreed that it should start soon.

0:28:45.040 --> 0:28:47.360
<v Speaker 9>Does that mean May or does.

0:28:47.240 --> 0:28:48.120
<v Speaker 1>That mean June.

0:28:48.280 --> 0:28:51.680
<v Speaker 10>Well, I think we said fairly soon, and the you know,

0:28:51.760 --> 0:28:55.400
<v Speaker 10>I think that the reasoning for slowing the pace of

0:28:55.440 --> 0:28:57.920
<v Speaker 10>reduction or balance sheet makes a lot of sense.

0:28:57.920 --> 0:28:59.640
<v Speaker 1>It's a prudent course of action.

0:29:00.280 --> 0:29:03.480
<v Speaker 10>We are decreasing the balance sheet quite rapidly, and by

0:29:03.600 --> 0:29:06.760
<v Speaker 10>slowing that we'll have more ability to monitor, assess, and

0:29:06.840 --> 0:29:10.960
<v Speaker 10>analyze as we get eventually to an ample reserves kind

0:29:11.000 --> 0:29:13.840
<v Speaker 10>of world that we're aiming for. Everything is going with

0:29:13.880 --> 0:29:16.800
<v Speaker 10>the balance sheet. Everything is going exactly as planned. Things

0:29:16.840 --> 0:29:20.880
<v Speaker 10>are going well. When we decide to slow the pace

0:29:21.200 --> 0:29:23.240
<v Speaker 10>of the balance sheet, that's a decision for the committee.

0:29:23.240 --> 0:29:24.480
<v Speaker 1>No decision was made at the.

0:29:24.480 --> 0:29:27.960
<v Speaker 10>Last meeting, but obviously we'll get together relatively soon and

0:29:28.000 --> 0:29:30.360
<v Speaker 10>discuss this further. But to me, this is a sign

0:29:30.360 --> 0:29:32.880
<v Speaker 10>of success of the plans we laid out almost two

0:29:32.960 --> 0:29:35.719
<v Speaker 10>years ago to reduce the balance sheet. We've had very

0:29:35.760 --> 0:29:40.160
<v Speaker 10>little disruption in markets. It's worked exactly as planned and

0:29:40.200 --> 0:29:43.160
<v Speaker 10>we're just executing on that plan and that's going very smoothly.

0:29:43.320 --> 0:29:46.160
<v Speaker 9>So QT could come before great boots.

0:29:46.440 --> 0:29:47.800
<v Speaker 1>These are really separate issues.

0:29:47.840 --> 0:29:50.800
<v Speaker 10>I mean our shrinking the balance, we're focused on getting

0:29:50.840 --> 0:29:53.840
<v Speaker 10>to ample reserves. On monetary policy, we're very focused in

0:29:53.960 --> 0:29:57.840
<v Speaker 10>achieving our maximum employment and priceability goals. Those are different objectives,

0:29:57.960 --> 0:30:01.800
<v Speaker 10>those instruments can, obviously in different times, in different ways.

0:30:02.360 --> 0:30:05.920
<v Speaker 2>This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast, bringing you the best

0:30:05.920 --> 0:30:09.000
<v Speaker 2>in markets, economics, and geo politics. You can watch the

0:30:09.040 --> 0:30:12.040
<v Speaker 2>show live on Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from six am

0:30:12.160 --> 0:30:15.320
<v Speaker 2>to nine am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple,

0:30:15.600 --> 0:30:18.440
<v Speaker 2>Spotify or anywhere else you listen, and as always, on

0:30:18.480 --> 0:30:20.960
<v Speaker 2>the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app