WEBVTT - 2025 New Year's Eve Special

0:00:02.960 --> 0:00:06.360
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Daybreak Asia Podcast. I'm Doug Chrisner.

0:00:06.800 --> 0:00:09.320
<v Speaker 1>So it's New Year's Eve, the final day of trading

0:00:09.320 --> 0:00:12.480
<v Speaker 1>in twenty twenty four across the Eightpac region, and when

0:00:12.480 --> 0:00:15.800
<v Speaker 1>markets return from the holiday, there will be no shortage

0:00:15.840 --> 0:00:18.560
<v Speaker 1>of new forces to confront. Joining me now for a

0:00:18.600 --> 0:00:22.120
<v Speaker 1>look ahead is Vishnu Varathan, head of Economics and Strategy

0:00:22.360 --> 0:00:26.520
<v Speaker 1>at Misoho Securities, joining us from Singapore. Vishnu, Happy New

0:00:26.560 --> 0:00:29.160
<v Speaker 1>Year to you. It's always a pleasure to benefit from

0:00:29.200 --> 0:00:32.800
<v Speaker 1>your insight. I think we can agree that right across

0:00:32.840 --> 0:00:35.839
<v Speaker 1>the APAC, twenty twenty four has been a year of

0:00:35.960 --> 0:00:39.440
<v Speaker 1>dramatic events, and certainly when you look at things like

0:00:39.680 --> 0:00:42.160
<v Speaker 1>the end carry trade, when you look at what happened

0:00:42.200 --> 0:00:45.720
<v Speaker 1>in China, a struggling economy, additional stimulus, and a lot

0:00:45.760 --> 0:00:48.800
<v Speaker 1>of equity market volatility, I'm curious as to whether you

0:00:48.880 --> 0:00:51.680
<v Speaker 1>think twenty twenty five will be a similar story.

0:00:52.400 --> 0:00:55.160
<v Speaker 2>At twenty twenty five has the potential to be just

0:00:55.200 --> 0:00:59.360
<v Speaker 2>as dramatic. Maybe the reasons for that might differ, but

0:00:59.520 --> 0:01:02.280
<v Speaker 2>I think you know, if someone thought that this is

0:01:02.360 --> 0:01:06.479
<v Speaker 2>just platooing off, then that's probably not going to play out.

0:01:07.040 --> 0:01:09.680
<v Speaker 2>And one example, and I won't drawn on about this

0:01:09.760 --> 0:01:12.760
<v Speaker 2>is the Japanese ye and I think for a while

0:01:12.800 --> 0:01:18.360
<v Speaker 2>their markets thought we're over the carry trade volatility, primarily

0:01:18.400 --> 0:01:22.479
<v Speaker 2>because there would be greater convergence between you know, US

0:01:22.560 --> 0:01:26.560
<v Speaker 2>and Japanese raids. Whereas two big things have changed. One

0:01:26.600 --> 0:01:32.040
<v Speaker 2>is the FED is now far less dubbish, you know,

0:01:32.080 --> 0:01:35.680
<v Speaker 2>the delta there has been hawkish, whereas in contrast, the

0:01:36.000 --> 0:01:39.960
<v Speaker 2>BOG is far more guarded about tightening, and the tariffs

0:01:40.040 --> 0:01:43.440
<v Speaker 2>will have a negative impact on the end, which might

0:01:43.520 --> 0:01:47.520
<v Speaker 2>induce more on and off territory and certainly volatility around it.

0:01:47.560 --> 0:01:48.720
<v Speaker 2>So that's that's one example.

0:01:49.200 --> 0:01:51.280
<v Speaker 1>So do you think in both of those cases maybe

0:01:51.280 --> 0:01:55.840
<v Speaker 1>they share in common the possibility of a minor policy error.

0:01:56.160 --> 0:01:58.200
<v Speaker 1>In the case of the FED that maybe that first

0:01:58.280 --> 0:02:00.520
<v Speaker 1>rate cut was too generous, and in the case of

0:02:00.600 --> 0:02:03.320
<v Speaker 1>the Bank of Japan, maybe the boj has waited too

0:02:03.360 --> 0:02:04.040
<v Speaker 1>long to titan.

0:02:04.600 --> 0:02:08.600
<v Speaker 2>I think in many cases the trouble is if we

0:02:08.600 --> 0:02:11.239
<v Speaker 2>were to, you know, in isolation, look at each of

0:02:11.280 --> 0:02:14.760
<v Speaker 2>the central banks, the moves appear to be reasonable, but

0:02:14.800 --> 0:02:18.080
<v Speaker 2>the dilemma for them is their policy moves are not

0:02:18.919 --> 0:02:22.560
<v Speaker 2>in a vacuum and certainly depend a lot on what

0:02:22.639 --> 0:02:26.640
<v Speaker 2>goes on elsewhere, primarily driven by the FED. So the

0:02:26.760 --> 0:02:30.679
<v Speaker 2>moment the FED started on you know, much earlier, the

0:02:31.120 --> 0:02:34.040
<v Speaker 2>Cocomo rate hikes, you know, get their fast, take it slow,

0:02:34.680 --> 0:02:41.440
<v Speaker 2>after which, you know, US exceptionalism persisted, that inherently created

0:02:41.680 --> 0:02:44.800
<v Speaker 2>you know, huge policy dilemmas for central banks elsewhere. The

0:02:44.840 --> 0:02:48.440
<v Speaker 2>only question is the positioning that allowed them to stand that.

0:02:49.160 --> 0:02:52.800
<v Speaker 2>And I think for the BOJ, markets are going to

0:02:52.840 --> 0:02:56.200
<v Speaker 2>continue to have a problem because the boj's time horizon

0:02:56.200 --> 0:02:58.919
<v Speaker 2>when they give signals and references are far longer than

0:02:58.919 --> 0:03:02.160
<v Speaker 2>what markets perceive uh and and you know take it

0:03:02.200 --> 0:03:05.880
<v Speaker 2>to be elsewhere uh in the developed world, And I

0:03:05.880 --> 0:03:09.399
<v Speaker 2>think that's going to lead to a lot more miscommunication,

0:03:09.480 --> 0:03:12.480
<v Speaker 2>which translates into mispricing from policy.

0:03:12.760 --> 0:03:16.120
<v Speaker 1>Well, does that necessarily mean that we'll see persistent dollar

0:03:16.240 --> 0:03:19.040
<v Speaker 1>strength and a much weaker Japanese currency going forward.

0:03:19.560 --> 0:03:22.920
<v Speaker 2>It certainly is the far greater risk for the first

0:03:22.960 --> 0:03:26.320
<v Speaker 2>half of the year, at least, beyond which I think

0:03:26.360 --> 0:03:31.520
<v Speaker 2>a lot will come down to a whether you know,

0:03:31.680 --> 0:03:37.800
<v Speaker 2>US exceptionalism continues to defy gravity. Our side bet is

0:03:37.840 --> 0:03:41.320
<v Speaker 2>it might not because of consumer strains uh and and

0:03:41.360 --> 0:03:45.600
<v Speaker 2>how a lot of the policies may not be unequivocally

0:03:46.120 --> 0:03:49.080
<v Speaker 2>reflationary to the point where it's it's super good for

0:03:49.160 --> 0:03:51.280
<v Speaker 2>growth and and for that reason, we do see a

0:03:51.360 --> 0:03:54.640
<v Speaker 2>case to be made whether the FED could start cutting

0:03:54.680 --> 0:03:57.520
<v Speaker 2>back and that could allow the dollar to mellow at

0:03:57.560 --> 0:04:01.000
<v Speaker 2>most of a soft lending but not crash. The yen

0:04:01.200 --> 0:04:05.400
<v Speaker 2>is going to hinge a lot more on a fat convergence,

0:04:05.400 --> 0:04:07.520
<v Speaker 2>so they're going to wait for the you know, the

0:04:07.600 --> 0:04:10.240
<v Speaker 2>yen's problem has always been it's it's a bog problem, right,

0:04:10.280 --> 0:04:12.560
<v Speaker 2>but it's got a fat solution. And so the fat

0:04:12.600 --> 0:04:16.720
<v Speaker 2>solution will start taking shape, but that the tariff outcomes

0:04:16.800 --> 0:04:21.080
<v Speaker 2>will have a huge bearing, and so it necessarily needs

0:04:21.080 --> 0:04:22.520
<v Speaker 2>to be the case that the bite is you know,

0:04:22.520 --> 0:04:25.280
<v Speaker 2>the bark is worse than the bite, and we end

0:04:25.360 --> 0:04:28.400
<v Speaker 2>up with a negotiated outcome rather than going nuclear on it.

0:04:29.080 --> 0:04:32.440
<v Speaker 2>And that's where I think we could see that narrative

0:04:32.560 --> 0:04:35.320
<v Speaker 2>changing and a lot more relief coming for the bog

0:04:36.040 --> 0:04:39.360
<v Speaker 2>as things start to converge globally rather than you know,

0:04:39.680 --> 0:04:41.240
<v Speaker 2>apprasively diverge.

0:04:41.400 --> 0:04:43.480
<v Speaker 1>Well, let's take a closer look at what that means

0:04:43.480 --> 0:04:47.479
<v Speaker 1>for China, especially whether or not tariffs are ultimately kind

0:04:47.480 --> 0:04:50.359
<v Speaker 1>of a bargaining ploy here, a way to get what

0:04:50.480 --> 0:04:54.720
<v Speaker 1>the US, specifically the Trump administration would like to extract

0:04:55.040 --> 0:04:58.200
<v Speaker 1>from Beijing. Talk to me about how you're viewing the

0:04:58.600 --> 0:05:01.120
<v Speaker 1>macro picture in China right now now, especially when you

0:05:01.200 --> 0:05:05.200
<v Speaker 1>begin to discount the impact of potential potential tariffs.

0:05:05.680 --> 0:05:09.279
<v Speaker 2>Well, I think the tariff situation for for China, there

0:05:09.320 --> 0:05:10.320
<v Speaker 2>are two thoughts around it.

0:05:10.400 --> 0:05:13.799
<v Speaker 3>One is, China has you know, done its homework.

0:05:13.839 --> 0:05:17.880
<v Speaker 2>They've watched this, they've watched the prequel, and so they're

0:05:17.920 --> 0:05:20.880
<v Speaker 2>in a far stronger position to negotiate. And I also

0:05:20.920 --> 0:05:24.080
<v Speaker 2>think the current administration is not just going to roll

0:05:24.080 --> 0:05:27.200
<v Speaker 2>over and concede all ground. As much as they are

0:05:27.240 --> 0:05:32.080
<v Speaker 2>intent on and on you know, coming to a negotiated compromise, UH,

0:05:32.120 --> 0:05:34.320
<v Speaker 2>they're not going to do this in a fashion that

0:05:34.360 --> 0:05:37.159
<v Speaker 2>looks like they've you know, thrown in the towel either.

0:05:37.600 --> 0:05:41.080
<v Speaker 2>So China will have a lot more to negotiate with UH.

0:05:41.120 --> 0:05:43.200
<v Speaker 2>And they also have got Plan B in place already.

0:05:43.200 --> 0:05:46.000
<v Speaker 2>They've already started diversifying, which is why if you look

0:05:46.000 --> 0:05:49.600
<v Speaker 2>at China's share of global exports, it's not declined. And

0:05:49.720 --> 0:05:54.800
<v Speaker 2>for that reason, I think that is where UH the

0:05:55.040 --> 0:05:57.800
<v Speaker 2>execution on the part of the US administration.

0:05:58.000 --> 0:06:00.200
<v Speaker 3>Can you know and and and the thought behind.

0:06:00.040 --> 0:06:04.039
<v Speaker 2>And it will be very important. I think to a

0:06:04.120 --> 0:06:10.200
<v Speaker 2>large extent, the ability to strike particular compromises is silver

0:06:10.279 --> 0:06:12.000
<v Speaker 2>lining here. I think China is willing to concede a

0:06:12.000 --> 0:06:14.640
<v Speaker 2>lot of grounds, but they're very clear on their strategic

0:06:14.720 --> 0:06:18.479
<v Speaker 2>goals and objectives which they probably will not relent on.

0:06:18.880 --> 0:06:23.040
<v Speaker 1>So if Beijing is surprised, let's say, by a deterioration

0:06:23.839 --> 0:06:29.120
<v Speaker 1>further deterioration in the domestic economy, does that necessarily erode

0:06:29.480 --> 0:06:32.919
<v Speaker 1>some of the leverage that you perceive authorities in China

0:06:32.960 --> 0:06:33.800
<v Speaker 1>may have at the moment.

0:06:34.320 --> 0:06:36.640
<v Speaker 3>That's That's a wonderful question and something that bugs me.

0:06:37.720 --> 0:06:43.360
<v Speaker 2>So, you know, the basic premise of economics is to oversimplify.

0:06:43.440 --> 0:06:45.680
<v Speaker 3>Something has got to give, And.

0:06:47.200 --> 0:06:49.680
<v Speaker 2>If you want to look at it that way, my

0:06:49.880 --> 0:06:53.680
<v Speaker 2>sense is what has got to give is Beijing needs

0:06:53.720 --> 0:06:56.560
<v Speaker 2>to really lower his hurdles in terms of their worries

0:06:56.600 --> 0:07:02.040
<v Speaker 2>about moral hazards, competing factions in the political sphere, so

0:07:02.120 --> 0:07:04.640
<v Speaker 2>on and so forth. And to some extent, I think

0:07:04.680 --> 0:07:07.800
<v Speaker 2>the central government needs to almost issue a blank check.

0:07:08.520 --> 0:07:11.880
<v Speaker 2>Does that create problems for the future, you bet, But

0:07:12.040 --> 0:07:14.480
<v Speaker 2>does it then stop the wolf at the door. It

0:07:14.520 --> 0:07:18.400
<v Speaker 2>gives them a lot more breathing space where they need it.

0:07:18.920 --> 0:07:21.640
<v Speaker 2>And I think this is where the prioritization of key

0:07:21.760 --> 0:07:27.080
<v Speaker 2>tech industries, the new engines of growth will probably start

0:07:27.080 --> 0:07:29.240
<v Speaker 2>to reveal itself whether it has really got the kind

0:07:29.280 --> 0:07:33.200
<v Speaker 2>of prominence that people make it out to have from

0:07:33.280 --> 0:07:34.280
<v Speaker 2>China's growth mantra.

0:07:34.600 --> 0:07:38.360
<v Speaker 1>So, do you think authorities in China are misjudging the

0:07:38.440 --> 0:07:41.560
<v Speaker 1>impact that deflation is having and what a problem it

0:07:41.680 --> 0:07:45.640
<v Speaker 1>is and how difficult it is to kind of extract

0:07:45.800 --> 0:07:47.400
<v Speaker 1>an economy from that state.

0:07:49.280 --> 0:07:55.160
<v Speaker 2>At the risk of sounding almost disrespectful, that's my fear.

0:07:55.360 --> 0:07:59.240
<v Speaker 2>I think they do, because my sense is that they're

0:07:59.240 --> 0:08:01.840
<v Speaker 2>looking back and saying, look, we need to put an

0:08:02.160 --> 0:08:06.600
<v Speaker 2>x amount of fiscal stimulus, X amount of money to stimulus,

0:08:06.600 --> 0:08:08.760
<v Speaker 2>and then these would be the economic outcomes based on

0:08:08.800 --> 0:08:13.840
<v Speaker 2>our models before. However, given the chronic confidence deficit after

0:08:13.880 --> 0:08:17.720
<v Speaker 2>the wealth destruction and the huge income shocks from local

0:08:17.720 --> 0:08:20.720
<v Speaker 2>governments being unable to pay, and you know, the whole

0:08:20.760 --> 0:08:26.480
<v Speaker 2>slew of things from conspicous consumption being knocked back in

0:08:26.560 --> 0:08:28.200
<v Speaker 2>terms of bankers base on and so forth.

0:08:28.280 --> 0:08:28.960
<v Speaker 3>So if you've got.

0:08:28.800 --> 0:08:32.960
<v Speaker 2>Both a simultaneous income and balance sheet shock. Then my

0:08:33.120 --> 0:08:37.400
<v Speaker 2>postulation is the growth multipliers have been decimated far beyond

0:08:37.559 --> 0:08:41.880
<v Speaker 2>what the historical models will lead us to believe, so Beijing,

0:08:42.360 --> 0:08:45.600
<v Speaker 2>and that that might partly explain why Beijing continues to

0:08:45.640 --> 0:08:48.480
<v Speaker 2>disappoint with the drip feed of stimulus, because at each

0:08:48.480 --> 0:08:51.520
<v Speaker 2>point they think this should lift it sufficiently such that

0:08:51.600 --> 0:08:53.480
<v Speaker 2>we balance all our constraints and it doesn't.

0:08:53.960 --> 0:08:55.800
<v Speaker 1>Bishnu, before I let you go, if we can take

0:08:56.080 --> 0:08:58.559
<v Speaker 1>a step back and look at the global economy right now,

0:08:58.559 --> 0:09:02.360
<v Speaker 1>I'm curious about the risk, the greatest risk that you

0:09:02.440 --> 0:09:05.240
<v Speaker 1>perceive globally as we look to twenty twenty five.

0:09:06.000 --> 0:09:10.160
<v Speaker 2>For me, one of the greatest risks is a further

0:09:10.280 --> 0:09:15.240
<v Speaker 2>breakdown of diplomacy and trust, which would then lead to

0:09:15.400 --> 0:09:18.640
<v Speaker 2>far worse fiscal outcomes all over because governments would need

0:09:18.679 --> 0:09:23.800
<v Speaker 2>to placate the social fabric and so on and so forth,

0:09:24.160 --> 0:09:26.800
<v Speaker 2>and that's going to lead us down a far greater

0:09:27.600 --> 0:09:29.360
<v Speaker 2>economic turmoil down the road.

0:09:29.679 --> 0:09:31.920
<v Speaker 1>Vishnu, it's always a pleasure. Thank you for being with

0:09:32.040 --> 0:09:35.560
<v Speaker 1>us on this special edition of the Daybreak Asia podcast.

0:09:35.559 --> 0:09:39.040
<v Speaker 1>Happy New Year two. Vishnu Verarathan, head of Economics and

0:09:39.080 --> 0:09:42.880
<v Speaker 1>Strategy at Misoho Securities, joining from Singapore. Here on the

0:09:42.920 --> 0:09:53.840
<v Speaker 1>Daybreak Asia Podcast. Welcome back to a special New Year's

0:09:53.840 --> 0:09:57.360
<v Speaker 1>Eve edition of the Daybreak Asia Podcast. I'm Doug Chrisner.

0:09:57.760 --> 0:09:59.840
<v Speaker 1>We want to end the year with a look at Japan.

0:10:00.160 --> 0:10:03.560
<v Speaker 1>The latest inflation ratings for the month of December really

0:10:03.600 --> 0:10:06.240
<v Speaker 1>support the case for a January rate hike by the

0:10:06.280 --> 0:10:09.320
<v Speaker 1>Bank of Japan. For more, we heard from Ed Rodgers.

0:10:09.440 --> 0:10:12.800
<v Speaker 1>He is the CEO and Chief Investment Officer at Rogers

0:10:12.920 --> 0:10:16.440
<v Speaker 1>Investment Advisors. He spoke with bloomberg'shust Linda Ahman.

0:10:16.760 --> 0:10:19.360
<v Speaker 4>Let's take a water perspective of the Japanese market. We

0:10:19.400 --> 0:10:22.280
<v Speaker 4>had Goldman coming out to say that given the en

0:10:22.400 --> 0:10:25.600
<v Speaker 4>way it is hovering close to one sixty, it is

0:10:25.679 --> 0:10:28.520
<v Speaker 4>probably a sweet spot for investors to be buying into

0:10:28.559 --> 0:10:31.000
<v Speaker 4>Japanese stocks. Do you agree? I do.

0:10:31.200 --> 0:10:34.600
<v Speaker 5>We think everything's on sale in Japan. As you say,

0:10:34.679 --> 0:10:37.520
<v Speaker 5>as you're closing it on one sixty, you know, we've

0:10:37.559 --> 0:10:39.280
<v Speaker 5>got a little ways to go. We've got a month

0:10:39.360 --> 0:10:42.320
<v Speaker 5>to wait and see what the BOJ does in January.

0:10:42.360 --> 0:10:45.320
<v Speaker 5>But the impact of a FED rate cut in the

0:10:45.360 --> 0:10:48.440
<v Speaker 5>Bank of Japan holding SETI is clear. Get impact on

0:10:48.600 --> 0:10:52.360
<v Speaker 5>FX is There's just no way you can deny it,

0:10:52.760 --> 0:10:56.200
<v Speaker 5>so everything's on sale. Will rates normalize? Are we going

0:10:56.240 --> 0:10:58.840
<v Speaker 5>into the Are we finally going into the sort of

0:10:58.840 --> 0:11:02.440
<v Speaker 5>post two thousand and eight financial crisis mode of central

0:11:02.480 --> 0:11:06.320
<v Speaker 5>banks all working in unison and having similar policies. I

0:11:06.320 --> 0:11:11.960
<v Speaker 5>think absolutely we've reached a point where regionalization and specific

0:11:12.000 --> 0:11:15.360
<v Speaker 5>countries are going to be responding according to their specific needs.

0:11:15.400 --> 0:11:18.760
<v Speaker 5>There is not a global approach. There's not a G

0:11:18.880 --> 0:11:23.120
<v Speaker 5>seven approach to interest rates. Central banks are not capable

0:11:23.320 --> 0:11:27.560
<v Speaker 5>given the current global environment, frankly, of working together the

0:11:27.600 --> 0:11:32.080
<v Speaker 5>way they did for much of the last fifteen, ten

0:11:32.160 --> 0:11:32.960
<v Speaker 5>twelve years.

0:11:33.520 --> 0:11:37.720
<v Speaker 4>What's the approach of the boj It's been sounding davish

0:11:37.800 --> 0:11:40.600
<v Speaker 4>and just wondering if it could be under a lot

0:11:40.640 --> 0:11:43.880
<v Speaker 4>of pressure to make that move given where the yen

0:11:44.040 --> 0:11:44.520
<v Speaker 4>is headed.

0:11:45.840 --> 0:11:48.600
<v Speaker 5>Absolutely there's pressure to make a move, There's no doubt

0:11:48.640 --> 0:11:51.120
<v Speaker 5>about that. I think the biggest if you were to

0:11:51.160 --> 0:11:56.079
<v Speaker 5>prioritize the pressures, though, is to understand what is the

0:11:56.120 --> 0:11:59.080
<v Speaker 5>Federal reserve US Federal reserve policy going to be. The

0:11:59.360 --> 0:12:03.880
<v Speaker 5>sort of hawkish tone of that recent cut of twenty

0:12:03.960 --> 0:12:07.360
<v Speaker 5>five business points, I think many many folks in the

0:12:07.360 --> 0:12:10.240
<v Speaker 5>market who've been in the space for a few decades,

0:12:10.280 --> 0:12:12.960
<v Speaker 5>are really wondering when we're going to have serious dialogue

0:12:12.960 --> 0:12:15.840
<v Speaker 5>about rates going back up again in the United States.

0:12:15.840 --> 0:12:19.679
<v Speaker 5>I know we're expecting two more cuts, but it's hard

0:12:19.760 --> 0:12:23.320
<v Speaker 5>not to view current US policies and what we expect

0:12:23.360 --> 0:12:26.120
<v Speaker 5>over the next one to two three years to not

0:12:26.280 --> 0:12:31.000
<v Speaker 5>be inflationary. So there's a, if you will, a looming

0:12:31.920 --> 0:12:38.520
<v Speaker 5>challenge of Jerome Powell versus the incoming administration, and it's

0:12:38.720 --> 0:12:40.640
<v Speaker 5>hard not to see rates going back up in the

0:12:40.720 --> 0:12:43.880
<v Speaker 5>United States at some point, and maybe sooner rather than later.

0:12:44.480 --> 0:12:46.600
<v Speaker 4>So having said that, Adam, what do you see the

0:12:46.640 --> 0:12:50.320
<v Speaker 4>BOJ doing? How soon do you see that hike coming?

0:12:51.000 --> 0:12:52.559
<v Speaker 4>And what does it mean for the end?

0:12:52.960 --> 0:12:56.480
<v Speaker 5>So we think that there will be a January a

0:12:56.559 --> 0:12:58.760
<v Speaker 5>move in January. I think that rate will go up

0:12:58.760 --> 0:13:02.560
<v Speaker 5>in the in Japan, and I think the BOJ again,

0:13:02.920 --> 0:13:05.960
<v Speaker 5>the Japanese interest in the Japanese economy versus US interest

0:13:06.000 --> 0:13:09.040
<v Speaker 5>in US economy, and the political convergence, if you will,

0:13:09.040 --> 0:13:12.600
<v Speaker 5>that created a global zero interest rate environment. It's gone.

0:13:13.640 --> 0:13:17.439
<v Speaker 5>There has been significant inflation in Japan, some bit good inflation,

0:13:17.559 --> 0:13:20.240
<v Speaker 5>some ait bad inflation. The good inflation is wage inflation.

0:13:20.720 --> 0:13:25.920
<v Speaker 5>We have seen significant rise in wages, which makes the

0:13:25.960 --> 0:13:30.200
<v Speaker 5>BOJ very happy. Some of the external factors over energy

0:13:30.240 --> 0:13:32.920
<v Speaker 5>prices and other things that the bad inflation, if you will,

0:13:33.240 --> 0:13:37.600
<v Speaker 5>is also clearly still present. The consumer driven recovery driven

0:13:37.640 --> 0:13:43.160
<v Speaker 5>by wage increases has not played out fully. We think

0:13:43.200 --> 0:13:45.400
<v Speaker 5>there is more of that to come, and we think

0:13:45.440 --> 0:13:48.520
<v Speaker 5>that Japan will certainly raise rates once and then they'll

0:13:48.559 --> 0:13:52.559
<v Speaker 5>sort of wait and see. The incoming Trump administration will

0:13:53.080 --> 0:13:57.640
<v Speaker 5>take office in January twentieth, the power will change, and

0:13:57.679 --> 0:14:01.040
<v Speaker 5>then we'll start to see what policies really get enacted

0:14:01.080 --> 0:14:04.600
<v Speaker 5>at the US at the national level, We'll see what

0:14:04.720 --> 0:14:08.319
<v Speaker 5>happens in Congress. It's very murky right now. There have

0:14:08.360 --> 0:14:12.000
<v Speaker 5>been a number of appointees that would seem very sort

0:14:12.000 --> 0:14:14.920
<v Speaker 5>of if you're middle of the road and traditionalists in

0:14:14.960 --> 0:14:17.560
<v Speaker 5>their approach to certain things, and there are a number

0:14:17.600 --> 0:14:20.880
<v Speaker 5>of appointees from the Trump administration that might seem to

0:14:20.920 --> 0:14:24.640
<v Speaker 5>be a bit more radical and implementing change. It's a

0:14:24.640 --> 0:14:26.400
<v Speaker 5>little bit hard to tell who's going to win out

0:14:26.800 --> 0:14:31.880
<v Speaker 5>and specifically in this economic policy space where the US

0:14:31.920 --> 0:14:32.440
<v Speaker 5>will land.

0:14:33.120 --> 0:14:36.000
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, despite the markets and the uncertainty in the US,

0:14:36.040 --> 0:14:40.040
<v Speaker 4>I mean, US exceptionalism has continued and people say it

0:14:40.040 --> 0:14:42.960
<v Speaker 4>will continue to persist back in the year ahead in

0:14:42.960 --> 0:14:46.160
<v Speaker 4>twenty twenty five. Given that scenario, AD I mean, I'm

0:14:46.240 --> 0:14:51.440
<v Speaker 4>wondering if how you're assessing the foreign interest in the

0:14:51.520 --> 0:14:56.160
<v Speaker 4>Japanese market in comparison, I mean, if US exceptionalism were

0:14:56.160 --> 0:14:58.800
<v Speaker 4>to continue, I mean, how much interest is there in

0:14:58.920 --> 0:15:00.760
<v Speaker 4>Japan the US side there.

0:15:01.320 --> 0:15:03.600
<v Speaker 5>I said, there's a significant amount of optimism in the

0:15:03.640 --> 0:15:08.120
<v Speaker 5>economic and business space with the incoming administration. But I'd

0:15:08.120 --> 0:15:10.560
<v Speaker 5>also say, as an investor, you look at markets, you

0:15:11.320 --> 0:15:13.520
<v Speaker 5>look at the run up, the significant run up in

0:15:13.880 --> 0:15:16.760
<v Speaker 5>US prices and the leadership, if you will, of the

0:15:17.360 --> 0:15:22.120
<v Speaker 5>Magnificent seven. Japan remains significantly undervalued and on sale the

0:15:22.200 --> 0:15:25.240
<v Speaker 5>United States. It's hard to imagine the next couple of

0:15:25.360 --> 0:15:30.600
<v Speaker 5>years performance mimicking mirroring the last couple of years of performance,

0:15:31.080 --> 0:15:33.680
<v Speaker 5>and the chickens will come home to roost on inflation

0:15:34.400 --> 0:15:36.800
<v Speaker 5>in the United States, and the chickens will come home

0:15:36.840 --> 0:15:39.600
<v Speaker 5>to roost on a what might turn out to be

0:15:39.640 --> 0:15:44.880
<v Speaker 5>a very challenging Congress with regards to well as we

0:15:45.000 --> 0:15:48.720
<v Speaker 5>just recently saw frankly in the what's the debt ceiling

0:15:48.800 --> 0:15:51.280
<v Speaker 5>going to be? What sort of legislation is going to

0:15:51.280 --> 0:15:55.200
<v Speaker 5>get pass the Continuing Resolution to fund the US government.

0:15:55.840 --> 0:15:58.040
<v Speaker 5>It seems there's going to be a significant amount of

0:15:58.080 --> 0:16:01.600
<v Speaker 5>controversy there. So final policy will look like in the

0:16:01.680 --> 0:16:04.480
<v Speaker 5>United States is still very much up in the air

0:16:05.240 --> 0:16:09.040
<v Speaker 5>in our opinion, So until there is clarity on that

0:16:09.280 --> 0:16:12.960
<v Speaker 5>it actually becomes, it would be very unusual for the

0:16:13.120 --> 0:16:17.680
<v Speaker 5>Japanese to make precipitous moves at the boj and responding

0:16:17.720 --> 0:16:19.960
<v Speaker 5>to a policy that they don't even know exactly what

0:16:20.000 --> 0:16:22.720
<v Speaker 5>the policies will look like. You know. A good example

0:16:22.720 --> 0:16:25.680
<v Speaker 5>would be tariffs, you know, and how will tariffs be applied?

0:16:25.920 --> 0:16:28.880
<v Speaker 5>Will will China and Japan be all in the same bucket,

0:16:29.080 --> 0:16:32.440
<v Speaker 5>or will there be some preferential treatment for some allies

0:16:32.840 --> 0:16:35.040
<v Speaker 5>used to be tariffs? This is this is all very

0:16:35.120 --> 0:16:36.040
<v Speaker 5>unclear right now.

0:16:36.400 --> 0:16:39.600
<v Speaker 4>If Japan is under owned, what your investors been looking at?

0:16:39.920 --> 0:16:42.440
<v Speaker 4>What must you own in Japan in twenty twenty five.

0:16:42.640 --> 0:16:46.360
<v Speaker 5>So I think there's some areas that are clear and obvious.

0:16:47.200 --> 0:16:48.960
<v Speaker 5>You know, what's important to the Japanese. What is the

0:16:49.040 --> 0:16:53.000
<v Speaker 5>Japanese government going to support. There's a huge moment of

0:16:53.040 --> 0:16:55.400
<v Speaker 5>opportunity right now in Japan, and I think many many

0:16:55.480 --> 0:16:58.400
<v Speaker 5>people at the Japanese government level and many people at

0:16:58.400 --> 0:17:03.160
<v Speaker 5>the Japanese business level see a potential pivot. We've already

0:17:03.640 --> 0:17:06.720
<v Speaker 5>for the first time in over almost twenty years. Twenty

0:17:06.840 --> 0:17:11.040
<v Speaker 5>years ago, China became Japan's largest trading partner in the world,

0:17:12.160 --> 0:17:16.200
<v Speaker 5>replacing the United States as Japan's largest trading partner. Given

0:17:16.240 --> 0:17:19.600
<v Speaker 5>the geopolitical realities of the day, we think that we

0:17:19.680 --> 0:17:21.560
<v Speaker 5>have now reached the pivot point where we're going to

0:17:21.560 --> 0:17:23.560
<v Speaker 5>go back to seeing the United States as the largest

0:17:23.840 --> 0:17:27.440
<v Speaker 5>trading partner for Japan, and that has some enormous implications.

0:17:27.720 --> 0:17:30.960
<v Speaker 5>How did the United States economies, not just the economies,

0:17:31.000 --> 0:17:36.440
<v Speaker 5>but the political economy work together. What are the very targeted,

0:17:36.520 --> 0:17:39.480
<v Speaker 5>specific goals of the Japanese government in the science and

0:17:39.520 --> 0:17:42.560
<v Speaker 5>technology space in many of the areas where they want

0:17:42.600 --> 0:17:46.680
<v Speaker 5>to exploit certain research and development advantages, in certain areas

0:17:46.720 --> 0:17:50.360
<v Speaker 5>where they've maintained, if you will, significant R and D

0:17:51.080 --> 0:17:56.000
<v Speaker 5>technological innovation leadership, other areas where they've fallen behind semiconductors

0:17:56.040 --> 0:17:59.479
<v Speaker 5>is an obvious example, and then other areas where we

0:17:59.520 --> 0:18:03.320
<v Speaker 5>see explosion of interests, such as in the venture capital,

0:18:03.880 --> 0:18:08.600
<v Speaker 5>early stage risk taking investment space. We think the Japanese

0:18:08.640 --> 0:18:13.320
<v Speaker 5>government is very, very focused and committed to improving the

0:18:13.440 --> 0:18:18.199
<v Speaker 5>overall ecosystem and environment for in making risky investment. So

0:18:18.280 --> 0:18:20.960
<v Speaker 5>in our world, what do we think about venture capital,

0:18:21.119 --> 0:18:25.280
<v Speaker 5>hedge funds, private equity, everything called alternatives. We think is

0:18:25.320 --> 0:18:29.639
<v Speaker 5>going to be dramatically different the opportunity set in Japan

0:18:30.040 --> 0:18:32.159
<v Speaker 5>over the next five to ten years. We also think

0:18:32.240 --> 0:18:35.600
<v Speaker 5>in certain sectors it's clear and obvious where there's Japanese

0:18:35.600 --> 0:18:40.480
<v Speaker 5>government interests, all these interests are converging and creating opportunity

0:18:40.520 --> 0:18:41.280
<v Speaker 5>for investors.

0:18:41.840 --> 0:18:45.359
<v Speaker 1>That was Ed Rogers, the CEO and CIO of Rogers

0:18:45.440 --> 0:18:50.280
<v Speaker 1>Investment Advisors, in conversation with Bloomberg's Hustlinda Ahman, And as

0:18:50.320 --> 0:18:53.040
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty four comes to a close, we want to

0:18:53.040 --> 0:18:56.159
<v Speaker 1>thank you for listening to the Daybreak Asia podcast. It

0:18:56.240 --> 0:18:59.360
<v Speaker 1>certainly was a year chocked full of consequential stories right

0:18:59.359 --> 0:19:03.280
<v Speaker 1>across the region, and we hope you found our storytelling

0:19:03.320 --> 0:19:07.479
<v Speaker 1>and conversations interesting, perhaps even useful. From all of us

0:19:07.480 --> 0:19:11.160
<v Speaker 1>here at Bloomberg Radio and especially the Daybreak Asia podcast team,

0:19:11.560 --> 0:19:14.639
<v Speaker 1>we wish you a happy, healthy, and prosperous twenty twenty

0:19:14.680 --> 0:19:14.920
<v Speaker 1>five