Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Markets Podcast. I'm Paul Sweeney, along
Speaker 1: with my co host of Bonnie Quinn. Every business day
Speaker 1: we bring you interviews from CEOs, market pros, and Bloomberg experts,
Speaker 1: along with essential market moving news. Kind the Bloomberg Markets
Speaker 1: Podcast on Apple podcast or wherever you listen to podcasts,
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com. So it's been an interesting morning.
Speaker 1: We've been talking a lot about various deals out there,
Speaker 1: from the Verizon deal to the TikTok deal slash arrangement.
Speaker 1: For somebody who you know can tell us a lot
Speaker 1: more about it. Now, let's go to Los Angewitz, London,
Speaker 1: Howard You, who is lego Professor of Management and Innovation
Speaker 1: at I m d Business School. So the story is
Speaker 1: that Oracle edged out Microsoft in negotiating for the US
Speaker 1: operations of China owned TikTok, which is the subsidiary of
Speaker 1: by Dance. But Professor You explain to us exactly what
Speaker 1: kind of a quote unquote deal this is. Well, it
Speaker 1: remained slightly unclear how that technical partnership is gonna be
Speaker 1: with Urticle and TikTok. What has been clear right now
Speaker 1: is Microsoft historically or over the past few days, we're
Speaker 1: thinking about acquiring tech talk and make it safe for
Speaker 1: US user, and possibly they need to open the algal
Speaker 1: or the software code and make it much more transparent
Speaker 1: going forward. And in the end it's bike Dance. The
Speaker 1: owner of TikTok said no to Microsoft, and in a
Speaker 1: way that the technical partnership is probably keeping whatever algal
Speaker 1: behind will stay intact and trying to appease to government
Speaker 1: at the same time. So, professor, what was the political
Speaker 1: overhang of this deal or the political influence of this
Speaker 1: deal from your perspective, I mean, this is a big
Speaker 1: major development in the sense that for the first time
Speaker 1: government are really adding on acting on an ad hot basis.
Speaker 1: So starting from the Trum administration, all of these executive orders,
Speaker 1: there is no industry saltation, there is no independent inquiry
Speaker 1: per se. And then after all the Chinese government at
Speaker 1: the same time we're basically saying, you know, by Dance,
Speaker 1: you cannot export any software code in the name of
Speaker 1: you know, national security. On the ramification is the following
Speaker 1: that business is find it really really difficult going forward
Speaker 1: to plan ahead, whether it's long term R and D
Speaker 1: or product sales and marketing. Given all of these becomes
Speaker 1: much more of an ad hot basis in your estimation,
Speaker 1: is Oracle the right kind of company to be doing this?
Speaker 1: I mean in the ideal world. This is kind of
Speaker 1: strange because if you think about Oracle is historically it
Speaker 1: is really a B two B company. They sells database services.
Speaker 1: It doesn't really have a large B to C market
Speaker 1: as a result, to know how that they have would
Speaker 1: be arguably much less than Microsoft, where is running xboxes
Speaker 1: or this game, And of course the B two C
Speaker 1: market is huge and sort of the technical ability around
Speaker 1: AI is also amazing too. However, if you're thinking about
Speaker 1: tech talk, probably one of the biggest worry is once
Speaker 1: they've gone through the deal potentially go through, would they
Speaker 1: completely lose their independence. From that angle than Oracle potentially
Speaker 1: becomes much more attractive. That's smaller than know How around
Speaker 1: B two SEA market is much less, and quite frankly,
Speaker 1: they are not very strong in building our goal. So
Speaker 1: from that angle, it's not too surprising that techtok would
Speaker 1: actually prefer a weaker partner in this case Oracle. So
Speaker 1: do you think this deal this arrangement? I guess it's
Speaker 1: probably the better way to term it. Do you think
Speaker 1: this will actually work, Will it go through and we'll
Speaker 1: actually do what it's supposed to do? You think, I
Speaker 1: mean over the long run, um is probably simply a
Speaker 1: cosmetic touch. Um. I mean both administration where it's Beijing
Speaker 1: and and and the US government is most worry oh,
Speaker 1: using this as a excuse of threatening national security. So
Speaker 1: what the business executive right now is trying to come
Speaker 1: up with a mixed shift solution to a piece on
Speaker 1: both sides. But I think going forward, what really have
Speaker 1: highlight is organization can no longer pick side despite the
Speaker 1: tou politics between China and US. If you're any multinational
Speaker 1: particular here in Europe, when I'm talking to executives, they
Speaker 1: really cannot afford to pick side and ignore one market
Speaker 1: versus the other. Um. So that would cause tremendous termoil
Speaker 1: in the business community as all eyes are watching how
Speaker 1: TikTok is trying to find for itself. Yeah, it's really interesting.
Speaker 1: Can you put a value on the USA sets of TikTok, professor? Right?
Speaker 1: I mean right now they're talking about fifty billion dollar right.
Speaker 1: It really comes down to depending on how the US
Speaker 1: acquirer can really leverage both of the user base on
Speaker 1: what is remaining as you can back engineers and our goal.
Speaker 1: So you know, at first I thought Walmart and Microsoft
Speaker 1: bid is interesting because it potentially TikTok can be a
Speaker 1: very interesting e commerce platform to rejuvenate Walmart e commerce.
Speaker 1: So that's a direct symergy that you could put the
Speaker 1: tag price on and fifty billion dollars kind of okay.
Speaker 1: Now for you know Oracle, then I'm not too certain
Speaker 1: what kind of price they would eventually agree a point
Speaker 1: because again without the software algorithm being sold potentially, and
Speaker 1: if Oracles simply a technical partner for distribution itself, then
Speaker 1: the payback becomes much less tenuous in a way. But
Speaker 1: maybe they are motivated by other factors as well. Maybe
Speaker 1: they want to tell a new story to Wall Street,
Speaker 1: or who knows, maybe there's political motivation in stepping in
Speaker 1: and making sure that it goes through UM. But from
Speaker 1: a commercial aspect, fifty billion dollar without some directs in
Speaker 1: g on e commerce for instance, will sound a little crazy.
Speaker 1: So Professor, just thirty seconds left, get your thoughts on
Speaker 1: what some people are talking about is a technology cold
Speaker 1: war between China and I mean, the Internet is totally
Speaker 1: fractured these days. I think what business executive around the
Speaker 1: world we have to understand right now, we're stepping into
Speaker 1: a bipolar world. Right. You have the U S system,
Speaker 1: the China system, the European zone as well, and in
Speaker 1: terms of GDP size, all three are important, and yet
Speaker 1: they conform very different norm very different regulation. So the
Speaker 1: idea you can be one product and spread around the
Speaker 1: world and conquer the world is totally over going forward.
Speaker 1: Decentralization's priority. Conforming to local regulation is second, and the
Speaker 1: third is the customer insight would be very different as
Speaker 1: the Internet world continued to fracture. So I think this
Speaker 1: is one of the key dynamics that executive must prepared
Speaker 1: themselves going forward. How are you? Thank you so much
Speaker 1: for joining us. How would you as the LEGO Professor
Speaker 1: of Management and Innovation I am the business school based
Speaker 1: in Switzerland. And Vonnie, it just seems that there is
Speaker 1: a growing kind of cold war when it comes to
Speaker 1: technology out there. Well, I imagine it's the type of
Speaker 1: thing that we'll see the they'll drawn back upon within
Speaker 1: the next few months. I mean, we already know the
Speaker 1: Steve Milution is going to come to some kind of
Speaker 1: a decision this week on this particular affair of the
Speaker 1: Oragle TikTok affair. And you know, we just don't know
Speaker 1: enough details yet. Yeah, exactly right. Not sure the structure here.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Markets with Paul Sweeney and Bonny Quinn
Speaker 1: on Bloomberg Radio. Merger Monday is back. And it's not
Speaker 1: just TikTok. We also have another big tech deal chip
Speaker 1: giant in video forty billion dollar deal for SoftBank's ARM unit.
Speaker 1: That's a UK based business. Let's get some color on
Speaker 1: that huge deal. We can do that with On and
Speaker 1: Triny Vaston, senior semiconductor and hardware analysts for Bloomberg Intelligence,
Speaker 1: so on, And first of all, give us to your
Speaker 1: foot view of this deal for video. Yeah, hey, Paul,
Speaker 1: good morning money. This is a fantastic deal for video. Right,
Speaker 1: So you're expanding your ecosystem from being a graphics provider
Speaker 1: for um PC, video gamers and m AI engines if
Speaker 1: you made for the data center, and you're expanding it
Speaker 1: to an ecosystem that powers all of um the world's smartphones,
Speaker 1: all of the world's tablets, all of the world's network devices.
Speaker 1: So dramatic expansion of the ecosystem. Um difference between in
Speaker 1: video and ARM is that in video predominantly monetizes directly
Speaker 1: through chips it makes UM, and AR monetizes predominantly through
Speaker 1: intellectual basic building blocks that it makes UM, which are
Speaker 1: used by multiple chip makers, some of whom are in
Speaker 1: video competitors, and and so it creates a little bit
Speaker 1: of a sticky wicket from a regulatory perspective. But financially
Speaker 1: it's great for in video and greatful ARM as well
Speaker 1: because they get a R and D boost UM as
Speaker 1: a result of the deal. What does it mean for
Speaker 1: soft Bank? Was this telegraphed in anyway? Yeah? For soft Bank,
Speaker 1: I would imagine that this raises cash, although the cash
Speaker 1: component of it is much smaller than we had initially
Speaker 1: estimated UM. So it helps them sort of going private
Speaker 1: ambitions are amplified a little bit UM when the deal closes.
Speaker 1: They'll get more in video stock, they'll get more cash,
Speaker 1: they can buy back more of their own stock, etcetera.
Speaker 1: And it further is their ambitions. They've held in video
Speaker 1: stock before, so it's not like the Vidio asset is
Speaker 1: an unknown quantity for softmak alright on it. So your
Speaker 1: technical analysis of the regulatory is a sticky wicked. I
Speaker 1: bet if I spoke to January, who does it for
Speaker 1: a living antitrust animals for Bloomberg Intelligence, would she tell
Speaker 1: me they have a very steep antitrust curve to climb. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean you can see that by the fact that
Speaker 1: you need regulatory clearance US, UK, Europe and China, and
Speaker 1: even without the um so the US China friction that
Speaker 1: is currently ongoing, this would dramatically expand the market. You
Speaker 1: have a sort of a neutral player being acquired by
Speaker 1: a customer slash competitor. How will they keep the entity separate?
Speaker 1: Um They would obviously have to promise their process in
Speaker 1: writing that in video will not interfere with ARMS licensing model.
Speaker 1: But the fact that ARMS intellectual property will be first
Speaker 1: known to Invidio, the roadmaps will be first um uh,
Speaker 1: Invidia will have first access to it. That sort of
Speaker 1: creates an advantage for Nvidia that potentially none of its
Speaker 1: others peers, customers, competitors, etcetera. Have. So Jen is probably
Speaker 1: going to tell you the same thing that it is
Speaker 1: a sticky wicket. Yeah, I mean, ARMS customers are Apple
Speaker 1: and Intel. You know, they're the hugest customers in the world.
Speaker 1: ARM will become a US firm if this all goes through,
Speaker 1: how would that impact our relationship with China, given the
Speaker 1: China still controls ARMED China. Yeah, so that's a very
Speaker 1: good question, Monnie. And it was asked on the on
Speaker 1: the recent merger call that Nvidia and ARM had. The
Speaker 1: claim is that the intellectual property origination is still based
Speaker 1: out of Cambridge and are in Video intends to keep
Speaker 1: that asset as is and the intellectual property tomasow as is.
Speaker 1: So technically it's even though ARM becomes owned by an
Speaker 1: American company, the intellectual property origination is out of the UK.
Speaker 1: So technically, according to them anyway, it doesn't come under
Speaker 1: the purvey of the regulators in a more stringent manner.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's going to be a hard, um hard
Speaker 1: piece of thing to convince the US regulators that some
Speaker 1: how they should not be involved in in that piece
Speaker 1: of the pipe because in Video is now the owner
Speaker 1: of that asset. So I think that adds to the
Speaker 1: complexity of this. And then we haven't talked about it,
Speaker 1: but China um Is has used M and a um
Speaker 1: sort of extended out the M and a um um
Speaker 1: a deal regulation for for extend periods of time they
Speaker 1: scuttle the Quacom n XP deal, if you remember, so
Speaker 1: they could use this as a as an example showcase
Speaker 1: to show, Okay, this is how you mess with me,
Speaker 1: this is how I repay you. UM. So that could
Speaker 1: be one part of it. The second part of it
Speaker 1: is also a lot of arms They could squeeze out
Speaker 1: arm licensing deals UM in the in China as a
Speaker 1: result of this, make sure that they have access to
Speaker 1: ARM I P because they're trying to build up their
Speaker 1: semiconductor industry. So a lot of complexity is involved. I think, UM,
Speaker 1: the eighteen months is definitely needed, UM and the regulatory
Speaker 1: part is definitely the stickiest wicket here on a Triny Boston,
Speaker 1: thank you so much. We appreciate that. A big, big
Speaker 1: deal in the space here. The question is when we
Speaker 1: see some more deals of ANNIE. But very interesting on
Speaker 1: a Triny Boston, senior tech analysts for Bloomberg Intelligence giving
Speaker 1: us the breakdown on this NVIDEO deal for armed forty
Speaker 1: billion dollars short of face some repertory uh roadblocks I
Speaker 1: think on many countries ANNIE, that's for sure. But I'll
Speaker 1: tell you something. Investors are obviously very hopeful about this
Speaker 1: because in Video's talk is of seven percent, which is
Speaker 1: quite the move upwards, and it's holding onto those gains
Speaker 1: where we saw Oracle, for example, earlier on make huge
Speaker 1: gains and not hold onto them. Meantime, Jeffries has boosted
Speaker 1: the price targets to six d and eighty dollars from
Speaker 1: five hundred and seventy. And don't forget, we're at five
Speaker 1: twenty now, so that's a full one sixty dollars higher
Speaker 1: than we are now for Nvideo. Based on this extraordinary
Speaker 1: deal flow coming out of the market today, well as
Speaker 1: we saw the number of deals announced today this morning
Speaker 1: over the weekend. Technology remains at the forefront of investors
Speaker 1: perspective that includes such new and exploding technologies as blockchain.
Speaker 1: Get more color on that. We are welcome. We welcome
Speaker 1: Doug Barthwick, chief marketing officer and head of business development
Speaker 1: for a company I n X based in New York City. Doug,
Speaker 1: thanks so much for joining us here. Let's start off
Speaker 1: with just you telling us, give us a good sense
Speaker 1: of what I n X is, what you guys are doing. Sure, so,
Speaker 1: I n X is a company that we set up
Speaker 1: a couple of years ago and it's got two different areas.
Speaker 1: One is for a platform for the trading of cryptocurrency
Speaker 1: and the other one is a platform for the trading
Speaker 1: of security tokens. Now you may not be familiar with
Speaker 1: security tokens, but if you think about something like Nike
Speaker 1: stock trading twenty four hours a day in a digital environment,
Speaker 1: that's what a security token is. And it's our belief
Speaker 1: that in the near future all equities will end up
Speaker 1: going on the blockchain and going digital because of the efficiency.
Speaker 1: So you can find with that. And so we created
Speaker 1: an exchange for trading of digital securities and at the
Speaker 1: same time created a digital security that for the first
Speaker 1: time as an F one registered with the SEC And
Speaker 1: I encourage your listeners to go look at it because
Speaker 1: I'm going to talk about some things and that F
Speaker 1: one is the first one that's ever been done. It's
Speaker 1: on the blockchain. But also this is the first I
Speaker 1: p O and the U S history that accepts at
Speaker 1: the I p O Bitcoin, Ether and U s dc
Speaker 1: or or are stable coins, so first time you can
Speaker 1: accept cryptocurrencies, and the I p O is currently ongoing.
Speaker 1: So Doug explained to us how this is different from competition.
Speaker 1: I believe the wink of as Twins did something like
Speaker 1: this before. Am I right? I could be wrong? Well,
Speaker 1: you are correct, and the wink of as Twins have
Speaker 1: one exchange and Gemini. I think that's the one you're discussing,
Speaker 1: and certainly you know you can trade current cryptocurrencies on that,
Speaker 1: but in terms of security tokens, that's not something that
Speaker 1: they offer right now. And security tokens come under a
Speaker 1: very different regulator than does let's say, cryptocurrency cryptocurrencies come
Speaker 1: under States MT licenses or money transmitter licenses, whereas security
Speaker 1: tokens come under the SEC. And so you know, it's
Speaker 1: a very big step for essentially it's not debt, it's
Speaker 1: not equity, it's a security token or a digital assets
Speaker 1: and that's what we've one come up with, and then
Speaker 1: two we're creating the exchange to trade it. So do
Speaker 1: you have exchanges up and running now trading securities or
Speaker 1: trading assets right now? We do not know. And so this,
Speaker 1: this this raise that we're doing right now is to
Speaker 1: get them on board in terms of getting to market.
Speaker 1: Now we've built them, they're ready to go, but we
Speaker 1: need to raise capital in order to go out and
Speaker 1: get some of the licenses that we're looking for. So
Speaker 1: today we could trade with the US, but we're not
Speaker 1: turning it on yet until we've finished with the I
Speaker 1: p O. Dog. Who are the typical investors in an
Speaker 1: IPO like this, Well, the typical investors are are twofold one.
Speaker 1: You've got the folks that are already understand the crypto environment.
Speaker 1: So that's you know, the folks that are holding bitcoin
Speaker 1: theoryum that that go on and on about it, and
Speaker 1: that's probably about point two percent of the population. Now
Speaker 1: they see what we do as being putting handcuffs on
Speaker 1: securities because our security for the first time has k
Speaker 1: y C and a m L built into it do
Speaker 1: what's called a smart contract. That means you can't tell
Speaker 1: take an I n X token and sell it to
Speaker 1: someone else unless they've already gone through KYC. So this
Speaker 1: is like, you know, a huge, big change now for
Speaker 1: securities markets. So that's of the population they're very interested
Speaker 1: in because this is a giant leap forward for securities markets.
Speaker 1: Not only you know, can you do an I P O,
Speaker 1: but you can also do it you can accept different
Speaker 1: crypts of currencies, but you can also do it whereby
Speaker 1: you could list in many many countries at once with
Speaker 1: the security token just through a couple of lines of code,
Speaker 1: as opposed to tens of millions of dollars of legal fees.
Speaker 1: And so you know, we're really making a big change.
Speaker 1: But also think about this. You know Nike trading twenty
Speaker 1: four hours a day, that would be fantastic. And millennials today,
Speaker 1: of their top five holdings, one of them is g
Speaker 1: BTC or Gray Scale Bitcoin Trust and that means that
Speaker 1: you know that the millennial generation has a great interest
Speaker 1: in digital and yet they don't understand why their dads
Speaker 1: or their moms look at news at four o'clock on
Speaker 1: a Friday, a bad news on an equity and they say,
Speaker 1: don't worry, we'll get out of it at nine thirty
Speaker 1: in the morning on the Monday. That just doesn't make
Speaker 1: any sense to them. And this is the Amazon generation
Speaker 1: that wants to be able to do things right now,
Speaker 1: and so we've created a product for folks to trade
Speaker 1: equities immediately, twenty four hours a day. What's the regulatory framework?
Speaker 1: What's the SEC saying? For example, Well, the SEC is
Speaker 1: who have we've been talking to for two and a
Speaker 1: half years. We've spent over nine hundred and fifty days
Speaker 1: creating the F one that can be found on the
Speaker 1: Edgar database, and then then then there it's shows transparency
Speaker 1: into a field that traditionally no one's ever had transparency.
Speaker 1: I think when you think about crypto and you think
Speaker 1: about exchanges, you know they're all privately owned, most of
Speaker 1: them are held off shore. There certainly isn't transparency. What
Speaker 1: we're trying to do is raise money through a community
Speaker 1: and build a community. When someone comes in and buys
Speaker 1: the token, we see that as being a potential user
Speaker 1: of our platform as well. So I mean I think
Speaker 1: that's a good run up. Yeah, it's so interesting. I mean,
Speaker 1: if you know nothing about the blockchain and you know
Speaker 1: nothing about cryptocurrencies, would you still advise somebody like that
Speaker 1: to put, you know, give this a go. Well, I
Speaker 1: wouldn't advise anyone to give it a go. I think
Speaker 1: that they should look at the F one that the
Speaker 1: ad your database. But if you do believe that everything,
Speaker 1: whether it's equities, whether it's fixed income, whether it's commodities,
Speaker 1: are going to move onto the blockchain, and we already
Speaker 1: know that China's and talks to do that with their
Speaker 1: currency that europs and talks to do that that the
Speaker 1: US is discussing a digital dollar. So if currencies are
Speaker 1: going to move on the blockchain, and given that regulators
Speaker 1: of love K y C and they like to know
Speaker 1: who owns what where, and they like to be able
Speaker 1: to make sure that bad actors don't own things, then
Speaker 1: I think you can be pretty sure that equities are
Speaker 1: going to move onto the blockchain as well. And we're
Speaker 1: the first. Well dog, thank you for coming on and
Speaker 1: giving us the the explanation about all of this, and
Speaker 1: I do hope you come back and explain to us
Speaker 1: more what's going on as we progress. It seems like
Speaker 1: the blockchain and come to currencies have been around a while,
Speaker 1: but I'm certainly no more educated than I was before.
Speaker 1: I have to re educate myself every couple of years
Speaker 1: on all of this because the change is so fast
Speaker 1: and it does seem to be a bit of a
Speaker 1: land crab as well. So really interesting to follow Dug
Speaker 1: Boarth with because chief marketing officer and head of business
Speaker 1: development at i n X well a good start to
Speaker 1: the week from the equity market's perspective, lead in large
Speaker 1: part by sixty nine billion dollars worth of M and
Speaker 1: A announced bringing Merger Monday back to the markets, back
Speaker 1: to the four to get a sense of kind of
Speaker 1: how we think about all this M and A in
Speaker 1: the context of where we are with the markets. We
Speaker 1: welcome Peter Kenny, father of Kenny's Commentary and Strategic Board Solutions. Uh, Peter,
Speaker 1: thanks so much for joining us here. Well, Merger Monday
Speaker 1: is back with a vengeance that pushes the pandemic at
Speaker 1: least a little bit off the front page, at least
Speaker 1: for a moment here. What do you make of this
Speaker 1: spade of deals that we're seeing today? What does it
Speaker 1: mean for the market from your perspective? Well, thanks for
Speaker 1: having me um. First of all, the timing couldn't be
Speaker 1: better because if you look at the Nastack, SMP and
Speaker 1: the Dow all closed last week at or close to
Speaker 1: their fifty day moving averages, which which means basically there
Speaker 1: was effectively a retest of that low that was established
Speaker 1: on Monday of last week. So this is really really
Speaker 1: up Tuesday of West week. This is really welcome news.
Speaker 1: It's great. I love the fact that it's big names
Speaker 1: like Oracles, saft Bank, the vaccine stories and really really important,
Speaker 1: and that's lifting the market. It really is coming at
Speaker 1: a great time because in the note that I wrote
Speaker 1: and put out the street this morning, um my concern
Speaker 1: was that with all the indexities industries really resting on
Speaker 1: a fifty day and without any news out there that
Speaker 1: I could you know, shake a stick at, it seems
Speaker 1: to me or it seemed to me as though there
Speaker 1: was going to be continued weakness and potentially a drop
Speaker 1: all of the fifty day for all three Well, does
Speaker 1: the Oracle news signals that the China standoff might get
Speaker 1: sort of eased if you like, because it's it's a
Speaker 1: major deal. This was one of the ways that the
Speaker 1: Trump administration was going after China in a very practical manner. Yes, absolutely, Bonny,
Speaker 1: this was actually a very significant deal on several fronts.
Speaker 1: First of all, you know, of course, there's a political
Speaker 1: basis for a lot of what's going on here, and
Speaker 1: there's a nationalist security concern. But this is a way
Speaker 1: out that I don't think anybody was really looking at,
Speaker 1: and frankly, I don't think anybody was really talking about Oracle,
Speaker 1: So um, it is a way forward that saves space
Speaker 1: and allows for a constructive exit from where we currently stand,
Speaker 1: which was very, very I think it was tense. Frankly,
Speaker 1: it was tense, so Peter. Typically, when a CEO and
Speaker 1: a board decided to go forth with a large acquisition,
Speaker 1: it signals their confidence in not only their business model
Speaker 1: and the acquired business model, but also the economy, geopolitics,
Speaker 1: all those things are confident to put that kind of
Speaker 1: capital to work. I'm not sure I see that confidence
Speaker 1: out there is I look at some of the economic
Speaker 1: indicators and the still uncertain nature of the path of
Speaker 1: this pandemic. Oh I, I could not agree with you
Speaker 1: more wholeheartedly, Paul. I mean, well, you have an awful
Speaker 1: lot on our plate here. This was a one off,
Speaker 1: this deal with Oracle and TikTok, this is a one off.
Speaker 1: This is not speaking to a broader picture other than
Speaker 1: what Vonnie really intimated. That is that this is a
Speaker 1: graceful exit out of something that could have been a
Speaker 1: significantly larger conflict. So the deal is important and it's welcome,
Speaker 1: but it's a one off. The broader landscape in terms
Speaker 1: of trade, global growth, domestic our, domestic economy, there's an
Speaker 1: awful lot on the table that is that's going to
Speaker 1: be an act as a headwind from here on to
Speaker 1: the end of the year, and of course throwing presidential politics,
Speaker 1: I mean, the biggest variable of all time. Right, what
Speaker 1: are you telling your clients about the election, Peter um,
Speaker 1: head your bets, Um, just manage risk. Polls are very
Speaker 1: very close. Um. I think that it's regardless of who
Speaker 1: is elected, the aftermaths of the election is going to
Speaker 1: test the nerves of the average American because I think
Speaker 1: it's going to be an awfully um difficult um social
Speaker 1: economic scene on the streets. I mean, if if what
Speaker 1: we've been living through over the last month as any indication,
Speaker 1: I'm afraid it's not going to get a whole lot
Speaker 1: better even with the resolution of the presidential elections. How
Speaker 1: would you suggest hedging that kind of uncertainty, which is
Speaker 1: we haven't really seen that much in our past history.
Speaker 1: So if you're in high growth names, if you're in
Speaker 1: names that have really driven this rally and your today
Speaker 1: performance by the NANATAK which is far outstripped the SMP
Speaker 1: and the Dad Johns industrial level act on those names
Speaker 1: looking to be in names that have not really provided
Speaker 1: much of the growth story impetus, but have provided consistent dividends. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, batting down the hatches, reduce your risk exposure.
Speaker 1: There's nothing wrong with metals, there's nothing wrong with alternatives,
Speaker 1: but keep your eye on those aspects of your portfolio
Speaker 1: that tend to drift drift in parabolic waves. Um. They're
Speaker 1: great for traders, but they're not great for the everyday
Speaker 1: investor on nine Street. So just batting down the hatches. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's amazing, you know, batten down the hatches. And at
Speaker 1: the same time, there's not much you can do, you know,
Speaker 1: hedge wise, right, Peter, I mean that's right, it's all.
Speaker 1: It's all in equities right now. You the whole story
Speaker 1: right now for investors exequities. If you look at bonds,
Speaker 1: there's no yield. If you look at the global macro story,
Speaker 1: there's very little. I mean you're getting negative yields and
Speaker 1: much of Europe. Um, there's really no place to go.
Speaker 1: Any argument for just holding onto some cash, Peter, holding
Speaker 1: on the cash, hold on their precious metals. Have a
Speaker 1: defensive posture and your portfolio, look for dividends, and just
Speaker 1: make sure that the exposures that you do have going
Speaker 1: into the president this whole election is covered either through
Speaker 1: options or by just simply reducing your exposure. Yeah, Peter,
Speaker 1: thank you. Always eliminating to speak with you. Peter Kenny
Speaker 1: is founder of Strategic Board Solutions and of course also
Speaker 1: brings out some excellent commentary daily and weekly on the
Speaker 1: Wall Street Beat if you like. And he's been a
Speaker 1: member of the New York Stock has changed for the
Speaker 1: last twenty years and lots more than that. So, Paul,
Speaker 1: if we weren't expecting to come into a tape that
Speaker 1: was nicely in the green, but here we have at
Speaker 1: the Sea up one and three wards of percent, the
Speaker 1: Nastack up two point three percent this Monday morning. Thanks
Speaker 1: for listening to the Boomberg Markets podcast. You can subscribe
Speaker 1: and listen to interviews at Apple Podcasts or or whatever
Speaker 1: a podcast platform you prefer. I'm Bonnie Quinn. I'm on
Speaker 1: Twitter at Bonnie Quinn, and I'm Paul Sweeney. I'm on
Speaker 1: Twitter at pt Sweeney. Before the podcast, you can always
Speaker 1: catch us worldwide at Bloomberg Radio.