Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keene, along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Ferrell and Lisa Brownwitz Jay Leye. We bring
Speaker 1: you insight from the best and economics, finance, investment, and
Speaker 1: international relations. Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcast, Suncloud, Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot com, and of course on the Bloomberg terminal. We
Speaker 1: are both familiar with the heritage, we are both unfamiliar
Speaker 1: with the products. David Bailin joining US now City Global Wealth,
Speaker 1: Chief Investment Officer and Global head of Investments. David, let's
Speaker 1: just talk about I think the key discussion right now
Speaker 1: the best way, the cleanest way to get exposure, durable
Speaker 1: exposure to a better American economy. Well, you know, first
Speaker 1: of all, I want to be terms repairman. But other
Speaker 1: than that, I want to think this is a pretty
Speaker 1: extraordinary time. And you've actually hit upon a couple of
Speaker 1: those themes. Number one is incredible revenue growth for checking
Speaker 1: allergy companies and the benefit of course, you know, to
Speaker 1: their stocks, but that's what's benefiting the economies. Incredible efficiency
Speaker 1: and incredible flexibility of you know of companies, global companies
Speaker 1: and US companies. Number two is and you use the
Speaker 1: great example of you know of Stanley works, the the
Speaker 1: the idea of of what growth is to come when
Speaker 1: we talk about it economy growing six to eight percent
Speaker 1: after a pandemic. There are two aspects to it. One
Speaker 1: is the actually ability to spend, right, and that ability
Speaker 1: to spend is due to household savings. And that ability
Speaker 1: to spend is actually due to the fact that people
Speaker 1: have not had the opportunity to leave their home to
Speaker 1: do things, to begin doing work for themselves, right. And
Speaker 1: what we're seeing is a pent up demand from the
Speaker 1: consumer as well as right, an enormous amount of stimulus,
Speaker 1: and as well as the fact that people are going
Speaker 1: to begin to act as they did, you know, a
Speaker 1: year and a half ago. All of that is happening
Speaker 1: at the same time. You've asked another question I think
Speaker 1: in your programs you know yesterday, which is what's sustainable
Speaker 1: and that will be very interesting. Lisa talked about this
Speaker 1: in the in the intro just now, which is, you know,
Speaker 1: some companies are gonna be able to keep this boost
Speaker 1: of revenue a company like UPS reporting extraordinary UHR shipments
Speaker 1: and things like that. The to the extent that people
Speaker 1: continue to work from home, that will continue to take place.
Speaker 1: And so this change of behavior that's definitely going to
Speaker 1: be underway for the next couple of years that have
Speaker 1: challenged that's gonna be a big deal. The more people
Speaker 1: are adapting to work in the future based upon what
Speaker 1: they learned in the pandemic, the more we have this
Speaker 1: sustainable revenue growth that you're seeing now, David, the big
Speaker 1: fear out there. I want you to address this. And
Speaker 1: we see this a along the way for different reasons.
Speaker 1: But now front centers, margin compression o MG units price
Speaker 1: revenue down we go and on the income statement, we're
Speaker 1: gonna see some forms of margin compression. I don't see it. Well,
Speaker 1: I do see it, and I think you're gonna see
Speaker 1: it on a temporary basis, as certain things are are
Speaker 1: really in short supply, you know, when the economy reopened.
Speaker 1: The other thing is we're going to have all of
Speaker 1: the inputs except for or except for labor. All of
Speaker 1: the inputs are going to go up a great yield
Speaker 1: in terms of their costs, right, all of the commodities,
Speaker 1: the cost of actually shipping goods and services. The fact
Speaker 1: that there is going to be you know, a way
Speaker 1: I put it sixteen months of inventory needs to be
Speaker 1: produced in twelve months to not only satisfy current demand,
Speaker 1: but to refill the supply pipeline. All of that's going
Speaker 1: to take place now, and that will cause some delays,
Speaker 1: and it also will cause prices to go up. I
Speaker 1: also believe you, however, that this will be passed through
Speaker 1: to the consumer because the leaders are going to compression. Now.
Speaker 1: That brings up the idea of inflation. People talk about it,
Speaker 1: and there will be I think temporary inflation for the
Speaker 1: course of the next twelve to eighteen months. We want
Speaker 1: our clients to own tips right now. And the only
Speaker 1: thing we really love in the fixed income market other
Speaker 1: than high yield our tips because they actually will capture
Speaker 1: this type of consumer inflation. But it will be forever.
Speaker 1: It'll just be for this particular boost of time well.
Speaker 1: And the temporary inflation boost hinges in the idea that
Speaker 1: we're not going to get a material shift in the economy.
Speaker 1: And here you had Google yesterday announcing a fifty dollar
Speaker 1: fifty billion dollars share buy back. Is that good or
Speaker 1: bad for you as investor? After all of these investors
Speaker 1: that they wanted to see investment in the infrastructure of
Speaker 1: companies the investment in actual productivity going forward. Share buybacks
Speaker 1: doesn't get that done. Well, they really don't have much
Speaker 1: of a choice when you're just handed, you know, literally
Speaker 1: boatloads of cash because of the fact that your investment
Speaker 1: is in human capital. If you think about it, that is,
Speaker 1: you know, they have excess cash. They're doing buy backs.
Speaker 1: Who else does it benefit? Well, it benefits all of
Speaker 1: their employees as well. They simply don't have the internal
Speaker 1: research and development costs that are required necessary to sustain
Speaker 1: the growth that they have. It's not going to be
Speaker 1: building new manufacturing plants. It's gonna be hiring new human capital.
Speaker 1: And they will do that, and that's why they're going
Speaker 1: to benefit both their shareholders and their employees by doing so.
Speaker 1: David always gonna catch these quite a catch up on
Speaker 1: this market. So, David By in the City Global webt
Speaker 1: c IO, global head of Investments, we begin with Torsten
Speaker 1: Slack with Apollo Global Management and their chief of animus
Speaker 1: towards then when you see this data in the historic
Speaker 1: moment of trade, are you elevating your g d P
Speaker 1: estimates and lengthening the boom economy? Well, it is certainly
Speaker 1: very revealing for how strong the economy is when imports
Speaker 1: go up so much. It is certainly, as Lisa was saying,
Speaker 1: a very strong sign that the stimulus checks have been
Speaker 1: buying a lot of consumer goods that's been showing up
Speaker 1: in trade. We also have generally speaking that the economy
Speaker 1: is getting a lot of tail wind from excess savings
Speaker 1: at the corporate sector, ex savings to the household sector.
Speaker 1: And on top of that the reopening of course just
Speaker 1: continuous and now with the discussions now just just today
Speaker 1: of the mass mandates changing. So this economy is is
Speaker 1: doing very well. And the numbers this morning on the
Speaker 1: trade bat and just confirms that this is your picture
Speaker 1: of the ball underwater that's coming up is certainly a
Speaker 1: good analogy. We aren't seeing an economy that's coming back
Speaker 1: very strongly. Let's talk about inflation, price pressure. As you
Speaker 1: pointed out, Sosten, this isn't just base effects. It's too
Speaker 1: easy to sit here. It's almost lazy just to say
Speaker 1: it's the base effects. We all know the base effects.
Speaker 1: It's more than that, isn't it. It is? And I
Speaker 1: think this is a very very important discussion for today.
Speaker 1: As Mike was all Mike McKee just was mentioning for
Speaker 1: the press conference and the FIT, I mean, the FAT
Speaker 1: will continue to tell the dobish story about the unemployer
Speaker 1: rate is still six percent. This is just base effects.
Speaker 1: There is nothing really to worry about here in the
Speaker 1: near term. We're still waiting for the economy to come
Speaker 1: back to full capacity or the unemployer rate to come
Speaker 1: back to a lower level, which could be around three
Speaker 1: and a half percent, which we were pre pandemic. But
Speaker 1: as you're saying, John, if you look at the data
Speaker 1: for a number of different indicators, not only UH invasion
Speaker 1: expectations going up for the household sector, you're also seeing
Speaker 1: that it's getting very difficult to find workers. Some companies
Speaker 1: are out paying workers just to show up on an interview.
Speaker 1: You're also seeing in a number of different indicators when
Speaker 1: it comes to the i M the regional FITS surveys
Speaker 1: from the Richmond FED, from the Denver I'm sorry they
Speaker 1: tellas FIT, and then the area in particular, but also
Speaker 1: the Kansas City FIT. They have shown significant pressure in
Speaker 1: particularly the manufacturing sector, and all this is pointing to
Speaker 1: higher input costs and as you just poke about copper prices,
Speaker 1: that makes it more expensive to produce, and the big
Speaker 1: question is what happens if input costs go up. The
Speaker 1: two things can happen. Either margins can get squeezed or
Speaker 1: selling prices meaning inflation can go up. And we are
Speaker 1: seeing more signs of this not just being base effects.
Speaker 1: There is very strong demanding the economy pushing prices higher.
Speaker 1: So how much you around look different to the federals
Speaker 1: serves right now, Tusten. So I think that in the
Speaker 1: near term, and if I type e CFC, go on
Speaker 1: my Bloomberg screen and I do the quarterly profile of
Speaker 1: how does the consensus expect copy CEO over the next
Speaker 1: level quarters, it is quite impressive that the expectation is
Speaker 1: inflation will go up in the next quarter or two
Speaker 1: and then it will come down and be exactly two
Speaker 1: going into the end of this year and into the
Speaker 1: next GM. I think the risks are beginning to rise
Speaker 1: that Larry Summers is right, Oh it's only blank. Shah
Speaker 1: has been saying this is not just overheating. There's a
Speaker 1: risk this is like starting a fire. So there is
Speaker 1: a chance that inflation could be overshooting two percent. And
Speaker 1: if it might continue to say well that's okay, we
Speaker 1: have flexible average inflations are getting we are allowing inflation
Speaker 1: to overshoot. But the big, big question is if long
Speaker 1: breaks also joy going to take a relatively relaxed approach
Speaker 1: to inflation overshooting two percent. So I would say John,
Speaker 1: to your question that the key issue here really is
Speaker 1: that inflation does begin to overshoot two percent for an
Speaker 1: extended period. One does need to look very carefully and
Speaker 1: how long raids. A long race just say okay, that's
Speaker 1: all right, we accept that, or a long race begin
Speaker 1: to say, well, wait a minute. If I'm a bond
Speaker 1: investor and I see higher inflation, that it wrote my
Speaker 1: returns and therefore I need to be compensated for that risk.
Speaker 1: What does an inflation fire look like? Not just burning hot,
Speaker 1: but a fire. I mean, are we heading back to
Speaker 1: nineteen seventies? When we say that, people scream, no way,
Speaker 1: We're no way heading back to that. But purse out
Speaker 1: the new inflation fire. Yeah, that's a very important questions.
Speaker 1: I would say, the new inflation fire, it's very similar
Speaker 1: to what we had in the late sixties, where inflation
Speaker 1: gradually went up and it stayed at a relatively elevated level.
Speaker 1: In this world we live in, today. The levels of inflation,
Speaker 1: of course are different readsiveto we had in the late
Speaker 1: sixties from sixty five to nine seventy, But in my book,
Speaker 1: that would be inflation at all above two and a
Speaker 1: half on core pc, which as you know, is the
Speaker 1: first preferred measure of inflation. If we get to those levels,
Speaker 1: and in particularly we get there just for several months,
Speaker 1: then I do think that bond investors will really start
Speaker 1: to become worried. That's not my baseline scenario. I still
Speaker 1: think that inflation is under control, but we do have
Speaker 1: a few months here where we could risk some turbulence
Speaker 1: in credit, in equities, in risky assets because of this
Speaker 1: issue that rates risks and inflation risks are more elevated.
Speaker 1: And the final point of this is, I have a
Speaker 1: look at your Blueberg screen on rates. Vall implied vault
Speaker 1: in rates is very very elevated. So the moving decks,
Speaker 1: for example, is very elevated. Ready to say BIGGS, which
Speaker 1: has just come down. So what is the shock that
Speaker 1: people are so worried about in rates markets that people
Speaker 1: in equity markets don't seem to care too much about
Speaker 1: saying things with creditble it's also very low, so there
Speaker 1: is a disconnect between polativity implied BA in braids market
Speaker 1: is very high rereative to how do imply ball actually
Speaker 1: is in almost all risky assets. I think that's telling
Speaker 1: us something about how investors are thinking about the inflation
Speaker 1: risks for the next several months. It Tolsten really really
Speaker 1: ready smart Toustin's look that Apollo Global Management chief economist
Speaker 1: right now in Washington, Isaac Boltanski with us with a
Speaker 1: compass point, with a very sharp note, and he really
Speaker 1: I love the phrase, Isaac, from rhetoric to reality, the
Speaker 1: idea that we're loaded with rhetoric tonight. When does the
Speaker 1: reality click in eleven PM tonight or do we have
Speaker 1: to wait eleven weeks? I would argue it's already starting
Speaker 1: to click in at least that's my takeaway from from
Speaker 1: investor calls. You know what we're gonna get tonight, Tom
Speaker 1: is an incredibly ambitious and expansive proposal that would you know,
Speaker 1: intended to remake our economy in a way that we
Speaker 1: haven't seen since since a Great Society and their lb J.
Speaker 1: The reality is it's not going to happen. And one
Speaker 1: of my favorite lines and the one that I think
Speaker 1: we should keep in mind as we listen to the
Speaker 1: president's speak is the President proposes, the Congress disposes, and
Speaker 1: really the question for investors remains what will Congress agree to?
Speaker 1: And the subtext there is what will the centrist Democrats
Speaker 1: in the Senate allow? Okay, but I want to go
Speaker 1: out to your climb of Ohio Wesleyan University. I mean,
Speaker 1: they've got to sell this thing out where maybe the
Speaker 1: election is actually pretty close as well. How do the
Speaker 1: moderate Democrats were around the acreage of Ohio Wesleyan adapt
Speaker 1: to their president and to their liberal wing. I think
Speaker 1: that the main point there is that, and this is
Speaker 1: I think an important timing point to highlight is that
Speaker 1: Infrastructure Week is going to last another five months or
Speaker 1: so tom It's going to be iterative, it's going to
Speaker 1: be time consuming, it will include myriad bruising fights over
Speaker 1: really detailed and nuanced see issues from like tid exchanges
Speaker 1: all the way to that basis. It's going to take
Speaker 1: another I think five months, most likely until September or
Speaker 1: October to get something done. But my view is that
Speaker 1: there is a window of both political and legislative opportunity
Speaker 1: that Democrats will seize on and that we will get something.
Speaker 1: We're not going to get what the President calls for tonight,
Speaker 1: but we will get something of significant. Isaac, giving your
Speaker 1: experience in Washington, d C. What is likely between the
Speaker 1: two point three trillion dollar infrastructure spending the one point
Speaker 1: a trillion doll our American Families plan, what's realistic? Look,
Speaker 1: I think that right now we should focus on physical infrastructure.
Speaker 1: I think that that clearly has a considerable amount of
Speaker 1: support on Capitol Hill. Uh. I think there's actually bipartisan
Speaker 1: negotiation now, even though I wouldn't bet on that, I
Speaker 1: still think that we have to go through reconcstiliation. So
Speaker 1: I think we should focus on physical infrastructure, and then
Speaker 1: on the tax side. Here's my framework. Any thing that's
Speaker 1: seen is narrowing the gap between wealth and work has
Speaker 1: a highlihood of being included in the final package because
Speaker 1: it dove tails with the Democratic economic fairness agenda. So
Speaker 1: here I'm talking about the higher tax bracket. I'm talking
Speaker 1: about the increase in capital gains. I'm talking about the
Speaker 1: end of stepped up basis. Well, let's put some numbers
Speaker 1: on that, equalizing the treatment of earnings and capital gains.
Speaker 1: The band is quite wide the spread is quite wide
Speaker 1: right now, Isaac, how narrow do you expect the spreads together?
Speaker 1: What kind of numbers are you thinking about? Yeah, Look,
Speaker 1: I think that anything that we here tonight should always
Speaker 1: be viewed as a negotiating um marker, not a red line,
Speaker 1: and I think the White House has been clear about that.
Speaker 1: So we will not see a capital gains rate of
Speaker 1: of for I think that ultimately that will be negotiated
Speaker 1: down um to something closer to range. I think there
Speaker 1: are a number of reasons for that. We have the
Speaker 1: same interest democrats, but also I think there's an awareness
Speaker 1: that we want to incentivize long term investment. Furthermore, there's
Speaker 1: an equilibrium where if you raise it too high, no
Speaker 1: one wants to sell, and so I really think it's
Speaker 1: fair to assume percent on that end again for the
Speaker 1: highest earner. Well, let me just add an additional question
Speaker 1: and then, Isaac, because what they're trying to achieve is
Speaker 1: to close that carried interest loophole as well. And from
Speaker 1: what I can tell, and you tell me if your
Speaker 1: interpretation is different, that they're trying to do that by
Speaker 1: equalizing the treatment of capital gangt in wages and the
Speaker 1: end outcome would be closing that loophole. Now, if they
Speaker 1: can't equalize that, can they just close the loophole by
Speaker 1: doing something else? And do you think they should do that? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think you have a nail on the head and
Speaker 1: it's highlighted in the fact sheet here. Their focus is
Speaker 1: really on capital income broadly, and so capital gains and
Speaker 1: dividends by the way, we're included. And if we just
Speaker 1: talked about increasing that threshold and ending stepped up basis,
Speaker 1: he really handled the carried interest issue in its own
Speaker 1: right now. I'm telling you I don't think that they
Speaker 1: all the way to treating his ordinary income. So there
Speaker 1: will be a focus on a more narrow fix to
Speaker 1: carry interests as well. I think this time Democrats are
Speaker 1: finally prepared to close that, especially with the overarching changes
Speaker 1: to the rate for capital gains. And again I can't
Speaker 1: underscore how important it is the end of stepped up basis.
Speaker 1: Isaac got to catch up. Go ahead from you. I
Speaker 1: was about Tansky taking the realist approach to the situation
Speaker 1: down in Washington, d C. Will Power joins now from
Speaker 1: Beard really been looking forward to this. With this outperform
Speaker 1: on Apple, Will I want to note the privatization of Apple.
Speaker 1: Since two thousand and twelve, they've eliminated a very large
Speaker 1: percentage of their shares are down to seventeen jillion right now.
Speaker 1: Share buybacks are part of the fabric there. Do you
Speaker 1: just assume that continues in this boom economy. It's Tom's
Speaker 1: great to be here, thanks again for having me. I
Speaker 1: think the answer to the sort of answer is yes.
Speaker 1: I think it has become a key piece of the
Speaker 1: fabric of the company, and the reality is become a
Speaker 1: good way to try to help reward shareholders with the
Speaker 1: prodigious cash really that they continued to produce. And this
Speaker 1: is a company that we forecast produced free cash flow
Speaker 1: approaching eighty billion dollars, and despite spending a lot on
Speaker 1: R and D and other growth initiatives, they continue to
Speaker 1: produce excess cash. And I think, as you know, they've
Speaker 1: had a policy to try to turn that net cash
Speaker 1: position to neutral or effectively zero, and that suggests we're
Speaker 1: going to continue to see aggressive buybacks. They've approached called,
Speaker 1: you know, thirty billion dollars a quarter. We expect that
Speaker 1: to continue going forward. Are they going to announce a
Speaker 1: dividend increase today? I've seen that out in the zeitgeist.
Speaker 1: And if they do that, do they reaffirm their position
Speaker 1: by making it a near double digit dividend increase. That's
Speaker 1: a good question. It's not gonna surprise me if we
Speaker 1: see it did a dividend increase, whether it's double digit
Speaker 1: or not, I don't know what my suspicion is. We'll see,
Speaker 1: uh an additional kind of double data, if you will,
Speaker 1: on commitment both buy back and dividend increase, and I
Speaker 1: think it's likely we'll get that as part of their owning.
Speaker 1: Theres no official announcement of respect. Well, what did you
Speaker 1: make of the announcement yesterday or earlier this week from
Speaker 1: Apple that they were going to invest four hundred thirty
Speaker 1: billion dollars. I can't even say it's that much in
Speaker 1: US infrastructure. Well, look, it's a commitment to the United
Speaker 1: States and investment generally, right, because certainly making investments outside
Speaker 1: of the United you know States as well. I'm sure
Speaker 1: there's a political angle to that as well. I think
Speaker 1: they like to emphasize the fact that they are a
Speaker 1: significant taxpayer already give it all the tacks that they're
Speaker 1: taking on the regulatory front. But I think it also
Speaker 1: just speaks to the compidence they have in the business
Speaker 1: going forward, right, and investments they want to make to
Speaker 1: ensure they have the production capabilities, the skill sets UH
Speaker 1: in R and D investment they need to continue to
Speaker 1: remain in a leadership position. Well, and Tom accused me
Speaker 1: perhaps of being a little bit cynical yesterday because my
Speaker 1: immediate reaction was, this is entirely a PR move ahead
Speaker 1: of different antitrust regulations potentially coming down the pike, as
Speaker 1: well as higher taxes. And yet how much does this
Speaker 1: sort of underscore the supply chain pressures that we expect
Speaker 1: to hear about in today's earnings release. Well, I think
Speaker 1: that's certainly an element of the two Right, and Apple's
Speaker 1: a company that's been a master of supply chain over
Speaker 1: the years and has continued to look for ways to
Speaker 1: diversify of supply chain. And I think you're right. I
Speaker 1: think there is an element of PR. We've we've seen
Speaker 1: similar announcements to the batter three hundred fifty billion dollars
Speaker 1: and the like over the past, you know, couple of
Speaker 1: years respective commitment. So I think it continues down that
Speaker 1: path you know they've been on in terms of laying
Speaker 1: out a longer term vision. And again I think also
Speaker 1: as I said, you know, I think speaks to the
Speaker 1: competence of the business and the opportunity opportunities they still
Speaker 1: see ahead. Real part of the last him around the
Speaker 1: Joy was it rebuild in Asia, not just China and
Speaker 1: Asia in general. Do you look for a further recovery
Speaker 1: of their Asian growth? Well, I think they've continued to
Speaker 1: see success across the globe. I mean, I when you
Speaker 1: look at the uh, you know, the terrible situation in
Speaker 1: India and Brazil and some of these other geographies, and
Speaker 1: you know, it's unclear to what degree they get impacted
Speaker 1: short term, um, you know from COVID, So that's still
Speaker 1: a wild card geography, uh, you know, by geography, but
Speaker 1: it is best we can tell demand remains robust across
Speaker 1: product lines and across geographies. You know, we're get expecting
Speaker 1: twenty percent plus growth across you know, really all the
Speaker 1: product lines move into this quarter, and I think solid
Speaker 1: growth across pos as well. I gotta make some news
Speaker 1: here will power your targets to one fifty five. But
Speaker 1: what's your some of the parts valuation when you break
Speaker 1: this down and your value services and all the rest
Speaker 1: of it and all the products and that what's your
Speaker 1: some of the parts statistic? Yeah, well top a good question.
Speaker 1: You know. Look, I mean I think one of the
Speaker 1: things to call out here is if you look at
Speaker 1: wearables and services on a combined basis, that's almost a
Speaker 1: hundred billion dollar business. How much is that share wearables
Speaker 1: and in the stuff Lisa Bce, how much does that
Speaker 1: for share? Yeah, well, I'd have to go back and
Speaker 1: do that math and come back to come on, you know,
Speaker 1: on a first air basis, but I can tell you
Speaker 1: a revenue basis, it's almost a third of the business
Speaker 1: and on a combined basis doing no right and that's
Speaker 1: what's helping ding ship. Yeah, talk like an economist. We're
Speaker 1: not going to get a straight answer out of wheel
Speaker 1: power to them. All I could say is that my
Speaker 1: tech cash is probably less robust than vet bills. There
Speaker 1: is a question, if you want to talk like an economist, Well,
Speaker 1: when you zoom out, a lot of people say, especially
Speaker 1: with tech stock valuations, they've gotten somewhat divorced from fundamentals. Yes,
Speaker 1: fundamentals look amazing, and yet the valuation is hinged very
Speaker 1: much on yields remaining This low on inflation remaining low.
Speaker 1: What's your view on that. How vulnerable are apples shares
Speaker 1: to the idea of yields moving materially higher. I think
Speaker 1: less vulnerable than some of my hyper growth names, so
Speaker 1: you know, as an example, I cover many of the
Speaker 1: high growth software SASS names and names like Zoo, Ring, Central, Trulia, right,
Speaker 1: which were all rocket ships last year, but they've been
Speaker 1: under more to rest due to rising interest rate, and
Speaker 1: so I can't be I think it's a much bigger
Speaker 1: focus there than it is on some of the big
Speaker 1: tech names. And the tax rate will be something to watch.
Speaker 1: Something with Apple and some of other big tech names
Speaker 1: against the kind of speaks of the fact that they
Speaker 1: pay us afficant uh you know percentage of profits uh,
Speaker 1: you know out in taxes. So it's certainly starting to
Speaker 1: keep an eye and as a pertaining to the broader
Speaker 1: market in the text space, I think, you know, a
Speaker 1: bigger impact on the true high high growth names Apples
Speaker 1: growing at a much faster page right now. Um, I
Speaker 1: think buying large and seeing still as a as a
Speaker 1: double digit law term or at this point, well, when
Speaker 1: you talk about taxes, what would have a bigger impact
Speaker 1: in your view, a higher overall tax rate or closing
Speaker 1: some of the loopholes that big tech companies have enjoyed
Speaker 1: to evade or to get away from some of the
Speaker 1: high taxation rates. Yeah, that's a good question, and I'm
Speaker 1: not sure I have the perfect answer to that. I
Speaker 1: think it's probably you know, the higher tax rate um overall.
Speaker 1: And again think is Apple points out, you know they
Speaker 1: believe to the highest proble taxpayer in America, you know
Speaker 1: already right, So it just at some level they're not
Speaker 1: using perhaps every single loophole that perhaps, uh, you know
Speaker 1: they could, but but you know they all companies are
Speaker 1: always gonna look to try to maximize right there, the profits. Well,
Speaker 1: Mrs Keene emails in and she wants to know it
Speaker 1: hit her like you when you go to these roads
Speaker 1: shows and you do all your Apple chit chit chat
Speaker 1: and all that. Do you get like the Airmas Thermas
Speaker 1: watch swag? Do you get like the watch bands? Some
Speaker 1: mermaz at four hundred eighty nine dollars for the watch band.
Speaker 1: I know, I'm like everybody else, I'm still paying for it.
Speaker 1: If you want to talk to you know, Tim Cook
Speaker 1: about that for me, you know that'd be great. I'd
Speaker 1: love to build to test out some of those products.
Speaker 1: We'll do that. When we talked, yeah, I mean I
Speaker 1: mean if I'm sorry, Lisa, that just says I mean dollars.
Speaker 1: Lisa is a watch band, That says Lisa bramowoods, Oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know me. It's basically how much is that air
Speaker 1: tag again? John? You said it was something like four
Speaker 1: hundred dollars. Happened to this conversation this morning run will
Speaker 1: Power best Sadia Research analyst. Thank you said. This is
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Thanks for listening. Join us live
Speaker 1: weekdays from seven to ten am Eastern on Bloomberg Radio
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg Television each day from six to nine
Speaker 1: am for insight from the best in economics, finance, investment,
Speaker 1: and international relations. And subscribe to the Surveillance podcast on
Speaker 1: Apple podcast, SoundCloud, Bloomberg dot com, and of course, on
Speaker 1: the terminal. I'm Tom Keene, and this is Bloomberg