WEBVTT - Surveillance: Economic Data Is Decelerating, Golub Says

0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:13.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keene

0:00:13.480 --> 0:00:17.560
<v Speaker 1>Jai Ley. We bring you insight from the best in economics, finance, investment,

0:00:18.000 --> 0:00:23.520
<v Speaker 1>and international relations. Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

0:00:23.600 --> 0:00:33.320
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg dot Com, and of course on the Bloomberg And

0:00:33.440 --> 0:00:35.360
<v Speaker 1>let's talk about that ugly tait a raut Europe just

0:00:35.360 --> 0:00:38.840
<v Speaker 1>to begin with it. I think that really brings potentially

0:00:38.840 --> 0:00:43.120
<v Speaker 1>brings forward an ECP decision from September to tomorrow. John,

0:00:43.240 --> 0:00:45.760
<v Speaker 1>you're the first person to say that. I totally agree.

0:00:45.840 --> 0:00:49.400
<v Speaker 1>Let's bring in Michael mcaplin Bag International Economics and Policy correspondent.

0:00:49.400 --> 0:00:52.040
<v Speaker 1>Your thoughts, Mike, Well, let maybe the second person to

0:00:52.080 --> 0:00:54.400
<v Speaker 1>say that it could easily bring forward the decision. The

0:00:54.400 --> 0:00:56.920
<v Speaker 1>problem that they have is what are they going to do,

0:00:56.960 --> 0:00:58.600
<v Speaker 1>which tool are they going to use, and how are

0:00:58.600 --> 0:01:00.600
<v Speaker 1>they going to set that up? Presuma believe they've been

0:01:00.600 --> 0:01:02.640
<v Speaker 1>working in that for some time. But the hope was

0:01:02.760 --> 0:01:05.240
<v Speaker 1>that Jogging could float some ideas and see how they

0:01:05.280 --> 0:01:08.360
<v Speaker 1>would play and see what kind of impact that might

0:01:08.440 --> 0:01:10.480
<v Speaker 1>have in the markets, and they would have to forego

0:01:10.640 --> 0:01:14.240
<v Speaker 1>that sort of preliminary testing period if they go ahead

0:01:14.240 --> 0:01:17.000
<v Speaker 1>and move it, But you're right, the numbers so bad.

0:01:17.080 --> 0:01:21.560
<v Speaker 1>German manufacturing the flash p m I forty three, and

0:01:21.600 --> 0:01:26.640
<v Speaker 1>that signals significant contraction in manufacturing. That is definitely going

0:01:26.680 --> 0:01:29.360
<v Speaker 1>to be a drag on growth there, Mike. The parallel

0:01:29.360 --> 0:01:32.039
<v Speaker 1>of the analog to the United States is a linkage

0:01:32.040 --> 0:01:36.600
<v Speaker 1>of the service sector economy to what's clearly a manufacturing recession.

0:01:37.040 --> 0:01:39.800
<v Speaker 1>Is there service sector economy the same as our service

0:01:39.800 --> 0:01:43.880
<v Speaker 1>sector economy. Well, they're manufacturing is a much bigger component

0:01:43.920 --> 0:01:45.840
<v Speaker 1>of the German economy. But yes, they have a large

0:01:45.840 --> 0:01:50.320
<v Speaker 1>services uh component to their economy and the services sector

0:01:50.440 --> 0:01:53.200
<v Speaker 1>is hanging in there. Um. Their p m I for

0:01:53.280 --> 0:01:56.760
<v Speaker 1>services fifty four, that's a trivial change from what it

0:01:56.840 --> 0:01:59.920
<v Speaker 1>was a month ago. Uh, it's not services, it's manufacturing.

0:02:00.040 --> 0:02:01.640
<v Speaker 1>A lot of that has to do with trade. Germany

0:02:01.680 --> 0:02:04.120
<v Speaker 1>is one of the biggest trading nations in the world,

0:02:04.280 --> 0:02:09.600
<v Speaker 1>and with China shut down and the US engaged in

0:02:09.639 --> 0:02:12.040
<v Speaker 1>the trade war with them, You've got a lot of

0:02:12.040 --> 0:02:15.799
<v Speaker 1>other nations that are engaged in many trade skirmishes. It's

0:02:15.840 --> 0:02:19.440
<v Speaker 1>tough for Germany. Those trade talks can't begin fast enough

0:02:19.639 --> 0:02:22.080
<v Speaker 1>for the likes of Germany in Europe, the United States

0:02:22.080 --> 0:02:26.959
<v Speaker 1>and officials heading over to Beijing. I believe ka which

0:02:26.960 --> 0:02:30.440
<v Speaker 1>is significant in and of itself. The Chinese are basically

0:02:30.440 --> 0:02:34.000
<v Speaker 1>saying trade is trade. Let's keep it out of politics

0:02:34.040 --> 0:02:37.040
<v Speaker 1>for now, because the politics between the US and I'm

0:02:37.080 --> 0:02:39.400
<v Speaker 1>sure Bob will know more about those. Politics between the

0:02:39.480 --> 0:02:41.960
<v Speaker 1>U S and China not very good right now. But

0:02:42.400 --> 0:02:44.880
<v Speaker 1>if they can focus on the trade numbers and the

0:02:44.919 --> 0:02:47.480
<v Speaker 1>trade negotiations and try to work on that, it does

0:02:47.520 --> 0:02:50.960
<v Speaker 1>signal there may be farther away from getting somewhere, but

0:02:51.280 --> 0:02:53.680
<v Speaker 1>at least they're starting. Let's bring in Bob Homa, shall

0:02:53.760 --> 0:02:56.079
<v Speaker 1>we kissing your associates? Vice Chair, Bob, you know a

0:02:56.120 --> 0:02:58.840
<v Speaker 1>little something about Germany. I'd love your thoughts on it.

0:02:59.280 --> 0:03:01.520
<v Speaker 1>We're now looking at the water levels in the river Rhine,

0:03:01.560 --> 0:03:04.640
<v Speaker 1>which which to anyone outside of Europe sounds absolutely ridiculous,

0:03:04.639 --> 0:03:07.360
<v Speaker 1>but the weather is being so dry, so hot over

0:03:07.360 --> 0:03:10.239
<v Speaker 1>in Europe that it's actually becoming an economic issue. Bob,

0:03:10.440 --> 0:03:12.519
<v Speaker 1>your knowledge on the country, your knowledge on that area,

0:03:12.800 --> 0:03:15.679
<v Speaker 1>just walkestry has significant. That is well, it is a significant.

0:03:15.760 --> 0:03:18.720
<v Speaker 1>I live for summer in bun which was then the

0:03:18.760 --> 0:03:22.840
<v Speaker 1>capital of what was then West Germany, and the Rhine

0:03:23.080 --> 0:03:27.840
<v Speaker 1>is really the major artery for a lot of trade

0:03:27.919 --> 0:03:31.880
<v Speaker 1>that goes from the western part of Germany through to

0:03:32.160 --> 0:03:35.440
<v Speaker 1>Rotterdam and other ports and then to other parts of

0:03:35.440 --> 0:03:38.120
<v Speaker 1>the world. So the Rhine is very important, and the

0:03:38.240 --> 0:03:40.840
<v Speaker 1>trade link with China that Mike talked about a moment

0:03:40.880 --> 0:03:44.600
<v Speaker 1>ago is also critically important. We talked in this country

0:03:44.640 --> 0:03:49.960
<v Speaker 1>blithely about decoupling and delinking with China. China is an

0:03:50.000 --> 0:03:55.280
<v Speaker 1>integral part of the manufacturing network in Europe and in

0:03:55.320 --> 0:03:58.480
<v Speaker 1>the United States as well. And a weaker China, which

0:03:58.480 --> 0:04:04.080
<v Speaker 1>we've seen their growths diminishing rather substantially, not disastrously, but

0:04:04.200 --> 0:04:07.520
<v Speaker 1>certainly lower than it was, and that affects their demand

0:04:07.640 --> 0:04:11.000
<v Speaker 1>for manufactured goods from Europe and from the United States

0:04:11.000 --> 0:04:15.480
<v Speaker 1>as well. So some normalization of economic relations and alleviation

0:04:15.520 --> 0:04:19.000
<v Speaker 1>of the threat of higher tariffs, and perhaps even reducing

0:04:19.000 --> 0:04:22.400
<v Speaker 1>the tariffs um and improving the investment environment in China

0:04:22.440 --> 0:04:24.680
<v Speaker 1>would be very helpful to the Europeans. It would take time,

0:04:24.680 --> 0:04:27.520
<v Speaker 1>but it would have an impact on the market. The

0:04:27.600 --> 0:04:30.800
<v Speaker 1>limited time that we have with you today, ambassadors extraordinary.

0:04:30.920 --> 0:04:34.760
<v Speaker 1>I I am really taken them back by the diversity

0:04:34.839 --> 0:04:39.279
<v Speaker 1>of the proposed cabinet or speculated cabinet of Prime Minister Johnson.

0:04:39.800 --> 0:04:43.000
<v Speaker 1>It truly to me seems to be a generational shift

0:04:43.480 --> 0:04:48.920
<v Speaker 1>in the United Kingdom. Yes, well, he's got an interesting agenda.

0:04:49.000 --> 0:04:51.560
<v Speaker 1>One is he is and if you look at the

0:04:51.600 --> 0:04:54.440
<v Speaker 1>Tory Party there it is a much more diverse party

0:04:54.440 --> 0:04:56.320
<v Speaker 1>than it was ten years ago. When he wants to

0:04:56.320 --> 0:04:59.240
<v Speaker 1>be able to pick people who represent various elements of

0:04:59.279 --> 0:05:03.240
<v Speaker 1>the Tory Party. But basically on one issue he's going

0:05:03.279 --> 0:05:07.599
<v Speaker 1>to get a lot of levers, people who want a

0:05:08.160 --> 0:05:12.440
<v Speaker 1>bregsit and so he's going to be diversified ethnically and culturally.

0:05:12.600 --> 0:05:14.919
<v Speaker 1>But on the question of Brexit, he's gonna want to

0:05:14.920 --> 0:05:20.440
<v Speaker 1>have relatively hard line. But John it's extraordinary. An Indian

0:05:20.480 --> 0:05:24.599
<v Speaker 1>family that went to Uganda thrown out of anyonever it was.

0:05:25.240 --> 0:05:29.600
<v Speaker 1>We've got a Pakistani possibly appointed times actually just for

0:05:29.680 --> 0:05:32.120
<v Speaker 1>pulling the headline, crossing the bloom bag that Sage Javid

0:05:32.680 --> 0:05:37.719
<v Speaker 1>may be the chancellors. To many people, that's story news.

0:05:37.760 --> 0:05:44.839
<v Speaker 1>But for Americans, the diversity proposed is unprecedented. There's no equivalent. Actually,

0:05:45.000 --> 0:05:46.720
<v Speaker 1>the Conservative Party has done a really good job of

0:05:46.760 --> 0:05:49.520
<v Speaker 1>bringing minority figures into the full front of the party

0:05:49.720 --> 0:05:51.839
<v Speaker 1>and we could well see that in the Boris Johnson

0:05:51.880 --> 0:05:56.240
<v Speaker 1>cabinet quite a big way. Yeah, and it's healthy for

0:05:56.240 --> 0:05:58.080
<v Speaker 1>for Britain and I think it's healthy for Britain in

0:05:58.120 --> 0:06:00.920
<v Speaker 1>the world because it enables them to have these links

0:06:00.920 --> 0:06:04.440
<v Speaker 1>with other countries. How does Boris Johnson attend to the

0:06:04.480 --> 0:06:06.920
<v Speaker 1>President of the United States. We've heard in the last

0:06:06.960 --> 0:06:11.320
<v Speaker 1>hours they may visit three times to September. Well. I

0:06:11.320 --> 0:06:14.160
<v Speaker 1>think Boris Johnson wants to a demonstrate with people that

0:06:14.200 --> 0:06:16.880
<v Speaker 1>he can work with the United States. Be He's gonna

0:06:16.920 --> 0:06:21.960
<v Speaker 1>want to develop some closer economic ties with the EU,

0:06:22.080 --> 0:06:24.040
<v Speaker 1>even if there is a heart break that he wants

0:06:24.040 --> 0:06:26.719
<v Speaker 1>to sure that there's some kind of trade deal. But

0:06:27.240 --> 0:06:30.159
<v Speaker 1>if he cannot get that, then he's going to have

0:06:30.240 --> 0:06:32.440
<v Speaker 1>to have some deal with the United States on trade.

0:06:32.440 --> 0:06:36.800
<v Speaker 1>They're gonna need them. He sold his candidacy in part

0:06:36.839 --> 0:06:39.400
<v Speaker 1>on the idea that we can leave the European Union

0:06:39.400 --> 0:06:42.240
<v Speaker 1>with no real ill effects because will immediately be able

0:06:42.279 --> 0:06:44.200
<v Speaker 1>to put together a trade deal with the United States.

0:06:44.520 --> 0:06:47.479
<v Speaker 1>They haven't been legally allowed to negotiate because they're still

0:06:47.520 --> 0:06:49.560
<v Speaker 1>part of the EU, but they've still been talking on

0:06:49.600 --> 0:06:52.479
<v Speaker 1>the sidelines for quite some time. It's still it's still

0:06:52.520 --> 0:06:56.039
<v Speaker 1>true that Europe's biggest trading partners. So finding some deal

0:06:56.120 --> 0:06:58.400
<v Speaker 1>or trade with Europe's important. But if he can work

0:06:58.440 --> 0:07:01.720
<v Speaker 1>with the United States, it's anthan's his leverage with the Europeans,

0:07:01.920 --> 0:07:03.920
<v Speaker 1>and if he can't get a deal, he's gonna want

0:07:03.960 --> 0:07:06.160
<v Speaker 1>a good deal with The question is will the United States,

0:07:06.440 --> 0:07:09.600
<v Speaker 1>in the way it negotiates, give him a really good deal,

0:07:09.960 --> 0:07:11.480
<v Speaker 1>and that's going to be a challenge. We're going to

0:07:11.560 --> 0:07:15.920
<v Speaker 1>continue five hour discussion with Robert Harman's today. We'll try

0:07:15.960 --> 0:07:28.560
<v Speaker 1>to get to death as well Alicia Levine with this

0:07:28.640 --> 0:07:30.200
<v Speaker 1>bn y mel and Alicia, I want to go right

0:07:30.240 --> 0:07:33.440
<v Speaker 1>to the terminal rate. Everything squeezing down. John mentioning of

0:07:33.560 --> 0:07:36.520
<v Speaker 1>negative negative rates in Europe as well. You're supposed to

0:07:36.560 --> 0:07:39.920
<v Speaker 1>flip the reciprocal and get a higher pe. What's the

0:07:40.000 --> 0:07:44.080
<v Speaker 1>new twelve multiple? I mean value stocks were very twelve.

0:07:44.880 --> 0:07:48.240
<v Speaker 1>Is it fifteen or is it eighteen? So I'm not

0:07:48.240 --> 0:07:49.880
<v Speaker 1>going to put a number on it, but it's come on,

0:07:50.120 --> 0:07:52.119
<v Speaker 1>come on, you look for a bank put a number

0:07:52.160 --> 0:07:56.119
<v Speaker 1>on it, not the sales side. Um, you know, look

0:07:56.160 --> 0:07:58.680
<v Speaker 1>it's higher. It's clearly higher. When your rates are lower,

0:07:58.960 --> 0:08:02.000
<v Speaker 1>you discount rate as ower, your multiple as higher, and

0:08:02.160 --> 0:08:04.240
<v Speaker 1>markets go up. And we see that not just in

0:08:04.280 --> 0:08:07.360
<v Speaker 1>the US but also globally, which is why markets don't

0:08:07.440 --> 0:08:11.920
<v Speaker 1>feel frothy. They feel more or less fairly valued, but

0:08:12.040 --> 0:08:17.040
<v Speaker 1>not frothing four L four, not level five, Level four.

0:08:17.800 --> 0:08:20.240
<v Speaker 1>I was listening to Andrew Sheets of Morgan Stanley quite

0:08:20.280 --> 0:08:22.880
<v Speaker 1>recently and he makes a really interesting point. They make

0:08:22.920 --> 0:08:25.200
<v Speaker 1>it very simple over at Morgan Stanley. We're going to

0:08:25.200 --> 0:08:27.360
<v Speaker 1>get easing. That is the consensus view in the market

0:08:27.440 --> 0:08:30.520
<v Speaker 1>right now. What is the accompanying data. Does it continue

0:08:30.560 --> 0:08:33.360
<v Speaker 1>to weaken, does it stabilize, or does it accelerate? And

0:08:33.360 --> 0:08:35.360
<v Speaker 1>that's the real judgment call here as to what is

0:08:35.360 --> 0:08:37.800
<v Speaker 1>about to happen with risk assets and right now the

0:08:37.840 --> 0:08:39.640
<v Speaker 1>Andrew Sheets take on this, and at least sure I'd

0:08:39.640 --> 0:08:41.600
<v Speaker 1>love your insight on it as well. Is that if

0:08:41.640 --> 0:08:45.560
<v Speaker 1>this market was bettering beyond just easing and to something

0:08:45.720 --> 0:08:51.040
<v Speaker 1>like sustainable economic growth, why inflation expectations higher? Why commodities

0:08:51.120 --> 0:08:54.200
<v Speaker 1>rallying across the whole complex? And why aren't long end

0:08:54.240 --> 0:08:56.719
<v Speaker 1>rates pushing higher as well? Why aren't we factoring then

0:08:56.840 --> 0:09:00.000
<v Speaker 1>those things? If we believe these central banks can end

0:09:00.040 --> 0:09:03.559
<v Speaker 1>genia about a growth picture, Well, it's a great question,

0:09:03.679 --> 0:09:06.360
<v Speaker 1>and we've had this discussion now for several weeks, which

0:09:06.440 --> 0:09:11.080
<v Speaker 1>is what actually is the transition mechanism between lower rates

0:09:11.320 --> 0:09:13.840
<v Speaker 1>and economic growth. And if you look at Germany and

0:09:13.880 --> 0:09:16.240
<v Speaker 1>you look at Europe and the e c B, it's

0:09:16.280 --> 0:09:19.840
<v Speaker 1>that's the perfect example of the muddy nature of it

0:09:19.920 --> 0:09:22.120
<v Speaker 1>and how it's not actually direct transmission, because if you

0:09:22.120 --> 0:09:23.400
<v Speaker 1>look at the p m I is coming out of

0:09:23.440 --> 0:09:27.840
<v Speaker 1>Germany today, it's very clear that negative rates actually have

0:09:28.000 --> 0:09:31.840
<v Speaker 1>not helped the economy or manufacturing, or investment or anything

0:09:31.840 --> 0:09:34.080
<v Speaker 1>of the sort. So we come back to America and

0:09:34.120 --> 0:09:36.760
<v Speaker 1>ask the question, what can the central bank here do

0:09:36.960 --> 0:09:39.840
<v Speaker 1>by easing. Clearly it's going to be in the interest

0:09:39.920 --> 0:09:43.440
<v Speaker 1>rate sectors, interest rates sensitive sectors of the economy, housing

0:09:43.960 --> 0:09:46.199
<v Speaker 1>and autos. Autos have their own issue because there's a

0:09:46.200 --> 0:09:48.800
<v Speaker 1>structural change going on in auto ownership. We can see

0:09:48.800 --> 0:09:51.720
<v Speaker 1>that in right sharing, but we should see it there first.

0:09:52.120 --> 0:09:54.959
<v Speaker 1>The other issue is on the on the yield question.

0:09:55.120 --> 0:09:59.840
<v Speaker 1>If we think growth is stabilizing and turning, you can

0:10:00.040 --> 0:10:05.120
<v Speaker 1>not escape the global negative yield here in the US,

0:10:05.360 --> 0:10:08.320
<v Speaker 1>and you have thirteen trillion dollars of negative yielding debt

0:10:08.600 --> 0:10:10.520
<v Speaker 1>and that's going to come into America and you can't

0:10:10.559 --> 0:10:13.120
<v Speaker 1>you can't engineer your way out of it. It's capital flows.

0:10:13.200 --> 0:10:16.400
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk about earnings quickly as well. Caterpillar delivering results.

0:10:16.440 --> 0:10:18.599
<v Speaker 1>I believe in about eight minutes time looking at the

0:10:18.600 --> 0:10:20.720
<v Speaker 1>semi Semmy's have had a massive run over the last

0:10:20.720 --> 0:10:23.480
<v Speaker 1>couple of days. Taiwan Semmy I believe last week came

0:10:23.480 --> 0:10:25.839
<v Speaker 1>out with some pretty decent numbers relative to an ugly

0:10:26.160 --> 0:10:29.839
<v Speaker 1>expectation looking forward. I believe Texas Instruments did the same

0:10:29.840 --> 0:10:32.000
<v Speaker 1>thing after the close yesterday. You'll take on that area

0:10:32.040 --> 0:10:34.600
<v Speaker 1>of the market right now. I think it's interesting what

0:10:34.600 --> 0:10:36.960
<v Speaker 1>what the semis are telling you is that cyclicals are

0:10:37.000 --> 0:10:39.800
<v Speaker 1>the play here and the u S data is interesting

0:10:39.800 --> 0:10:42.480
<v Speaker 1>because the u S data in June clearly was better

0:10:42.880 --> 0:10:45.160
<v Speaker 1>than than April or May. So you have a turn

0:10:45.200 --> 0:10:47.280
<v Speaker 1>here in the US. The semis are saying that you

0:10:47.320 --> 0:10:50.280
<v Speaker 1>play the cyclicals because they're the forward looking that they're

0:10:50.320 --> 0:10:53.400
<v Speaker 1>the forward looking sector. This is really the interesting thing here.

0:10:53.440 --> 0:10:56.600
<v Speaker 1>While everybody is so worried about growth falling apart, corporates

0:10:56.600 --> 0:10:59.840
<v Speaker 1>are coming in pretty decent. Are you happy advising clients

0:10:59.840 --> 0:11:01.800
<v Speaker 1>for not to add a little bit more sticklaricality to

0:11:01.840 --> 0:11:04.839
<v Speaker 1>that portfolios? Given the economic data we're seeing a swell.

0:11:05.240 --> 0:11:07.959
<v Speaker 1>I am actually, and I am because you don't. You

0:11:08.000 --> 0:11:10.400
<v Speaker 1>don't fight central banks. So you have the FED, you've

0:11:10.440 --> 0:11:12.600
<v Speaker 1>got the e c B, you've got other central banks

0:11:12.640 --> 0:11:15.640
<v Speaker 1>already easing as of last week, so you have to

0:11:15.679 --> 0:11:19.080
<v Speaker 1>play into that. Your multiple is higher. You support corporates.

0:11:19.200 --> 0:11:21.280
<v Speaker 1>You can't go bankrupt in Europe. How are you gonna

0:11:21.320 --> 0:11:24.120
<v Speaker 1>go bankrupt? The ECB is buying every bond out there.

0:11:24.720 --> 0:11:28.000
<v Speaker 1>We're too short. We've got to come back Alicia for

0:11:28.040 --> 0:11:42.400
<v Speaker 1>another visit here soon out there and darkening the door

0:11:42.480 --> 0:11:45.280
<v Speaker 1>right now. Timthey O'Brien spiriting with David Shipley all that

0:11:45.440 --> 0:11:48.760
<v Speaker 1>his Bloomberg opinion. Many of you have seen him waxing

0:11:48.800 --> 0:11:52.560
<v Speaker 1>philosophical in Washington, and this morning we begin by speaking

0:11:52.559 --> 0:11:57.080
<v Speaker 1>to Mr O'Brien about these Mueller hearings. The photo this

0:11:57.120 --> 0:12:00.920
<v Speaker 1>week out on Twitter of a lieutenant in vian and

0:12:00.960 --> 0:12:03.120
<v Speaker 1>there was another photo the President doing whatever he was

0:12:03.120 --> 0:12:06.080
<v Speaker 1>doing at the time. Do we really know who Robert

0:12:06.160 --> 0:12:08.800
<v Speaker 1>Mueller is? I mean, do we have a clue who's

0:12:08.840 --> 0:12:12.839
<v Speaker 1>actually gonna be the focus of attention in Washington this morning? Yeah? Yeah,

0:12:12.920 --> 0:12:15.720
<v Speaker 1>Robert Mueller is a by the books prosecutor. He's he

0:12:15.840 --> 0:12:19.640
<v Speaker 1>follows the rules. Uh, you know, he's a long standing

0:12:20.280 --> 0:12:25.240
<v Speaker 1>classic Republican conservative. Um, he's well, why can't this president

0:12:25.280 --> 0:12:28.600
<v Speaker 1>get along with him? Well, because it's not about politics.

0:12:28.679 --> 0:12:31.120
<v Speaker 1>You know. Trump doesn't like the fact that Mueller's steward

0:12:31.000 --> 0:12:35.760
<v Speaker 1>an investigation that potentially could have gone into into an

0:12:35.760 --> 0:12:39.120
<v Speaker 1>exploration of Trump's finances, but certainly looked obviously at what

0:12:39.120 --> 0:12:43.520
<v Speaker 1>happened in the twenty sixteen campaign and Trump's UM teen's

0:12:43.559 --> 0:12:46.200
<v Speaker 1>interactions with Russians. He didn't like any of that because

0:12:46.240 --> 0:12:48.439
<v Speaker 1>it was an existential threat. So Tim, we have two

0:12:48.480 --> 0:12:51.120
<v Speaker 1>herrings today. One starts rather readly for Washington. The House

0:12:51.200 --> 0:12:54.800
<v Speaker 1>Judiciary Committee hearring beginning hasn't been up to so early

0:12:54.880 --> 0:12:58.160
<v Speaker 1>in three months. Tim's in New York here at Blomberg.

0:12:58.200 --> 0:13:00.199
<v Speaker 1>Tim is still getting up early. Don't worry about you know,

0:13:00.320 --> 0:13:01.880
<v Speaker 1>I'm not going to pay attention to Tom. Can you

0:13:01.880 --> 0:13:06.640
<v Speaker 1>ask me a question, please, let's talk about it. What

0:13:06.640 --> 0:13:09.080
<v Speaker 1>are you expecting? What are you expecting from this? Because

0:13:09.080 --> 0:13:11.080
<v Speaker 1>so many of our listeners it just thinking about this.

0:13:11.120 --> 0:13:14.840
<v Speaker 1>So I've got hours of testimony. Perhaps do I tune in? Well,

0:13:14.880 --> 0:13:17.880
<v Speaker 1>here's the thing. The MULA report is an extraordinary document.

0:13:17.920 --> 0:13:20.720
<v Speaker 1>Its fourty eight pages long, and it is one of

0:13:20.720 --> 0:13:24.680
<v Speaker 1>the most incriminating documents ever put together about a sitting president.

0:13:24.880 --> 0:13:27.520
<v Speaker 1>Here's the other reality. Most of the country and most

0:13:27.520 --> 0:13:30.480
<v Speaker 1>politicians have not read it. So one of the things

0:13:30.559 --> 0:13:33.520
<v Speaker 1>that's important about today is its political theater. This is

0:13:33.559 --> 0:13:36.880
<v Speaker 1>the power of TV and radio to broadcast something that

0:13:36.880 --> 0:13:40.400
<v Speaker 1>people aren't reading on with the idea that they might

0:13:40.440 --> 0:13:43.800
<v Speaker 1>engage with it. So to the extent that this brings

0:13:43.920 --> 0:13:47.360
<v Speaker 1>the Mala Report into people's living rooms, it's important and

0:13:47.360 --> 0:13:49.800
<v Speaker 1>we've seen that before over the last year. We saw

0:13:49.840 --> 0:13:53.000
<v Speaker 1>it with Kavanaugh's confirmation earrings for the Supreme Court. We

0:13:53.000 --> 0:13:56.760
<v Speaker 1>saw with Michael Koh's hearings UM people really engaged with those.

0:13:56.840 --> 0:13:59.240
<v Speaker 1>Having said that, I do feel like a little bit

0:13:59.240 --> 0:14:00.960
<v Speaker 1>of light has run out of the lamp. I think

0:14:01.240 --> 0:14:03.800
<v Speaker 1>people have had are sort of in a PTSD state

0:14:03.920 --> 0:14:07.680
<v Speaker 1>with Trump, and I don't know how much more generally

0:14:07.720 --> 0:14:09.319
<v Speaker 1>people want to absorb. So I think this will be

0:14:09.320 --> 0:14:11.160
<v Speaker 1>a litmus test of that today. But let's explore that

0:14:11.160 --> 0:14:13.000
<v Speaker 1>a little bit further. The idea that this is about

0:14:13.120 --> 0:14:15.920
<v Speaker 1>almost defining the perceptions or shaping the perceptions of the

0:14:15.960 --> 0:14:20.000
<v Speaker 1>Muller Report. You've written this morning the role that Attorney

0:14:20.040 --> 0:14:22.880
<v Speaker 1>General William Barr has had. You've written about that this morning,

0:14:22.880 --> 0:14:25.640
<v Speaker 1>that he's almost defined. He shaped the perception, perhaps more

0:14:25.720 --> 0:14:28.160
<v Speaker 1>so than the individual that wrote it. Just walks us

0:14:28.160 --> 0:14:30.400
<v Speaker 1>through the important self. That's him. Yeah, you know, this

0:14:30.440 --> 0:14:33.240
<v Speaker 1>isn't Bill Barr's first rodeo. He was. He was an

0:14:33.240 --> 0:14:36.640
<v Speaker 1>attorney general for George H. W. Bush in the early

0:14:37.000 --> 0:14:41.040
<v Speaker 1>nineties when the Orian contrainvestigation was underway, and he was

0:14:41.160 --> 0:14:45.040
<v Speaker 1>very shrewd about how we protected the president during that investigation.

0:14:45.120 --> 0:14:46.960
<v Speaker 1>So he had been there before, and I think he

0:14:47.000 --> 0:14:48.920
<v Speaker 1>came into this with a playbook, and I think his

0:14:49.000 --> 0:14:52.440
<v Speaker 1>playbook was he was going to define what the report

0:14:52.600 --> 0:14:55.840
<v Speaker 1>was about before Bob Muller or anyone else did, including

0:14:55.880 --> 0:14:59.920
<v Speaker 1>the Democrats. And what Bill Barr said was, um, there's

0:15:00.040 --> 0:15:04.920
<v Speaker 1>no collusion, there's no criminal conspiracy. The president wasn't fully exonerated,

0:15:05.120 --> 0:15:07.800
<v Speaker 1>and Bob Mueller made no ruling on obstruction of justice,

0:15:07.960 --> 0:15:11.640
<v Speaker 1>so I will he didn't obstruct. And that basically became,

0:15:12.120 --> 0:15:14.560
<v Speaker 1>you've gotten a clean bill of health, Mr President, even

0:15:14.560 --> 0:15:17.080
<v Speaker 1>though that's not what the report says. And moll and

0:15:17.400 --> 0:15:20.280
<v Speaker 1>Bar really stayed by that. You know, when the report

0:15:20.320 --> 0:15:23.360
<v Speaker 1>was finally released in full. He had a press conference

0:15:23.360 --> 0:15:25.040
<v Speaker 1>to day came out and he said a lot of

0:15:25.080 --> 0:15:28.440
<v Speaker 1>misleading things about what was in the report. So you know,

0:15:28.520 --> 0:15:31.640
<v Speaker 1>bar has been an ally of the president and has

0:15:31.640 --> 0:15:34.560
<v Speaker 1>really running interference for hmat. Is Mr Mueller a private

0:15:34.680 --> 0:15:39.280
<v Speaker 1>citizen today? Is he uh employee of the government? Is

0:15:39.320 --> 0:15:43.040
<v Speaker 1>he a legacy to the Department of Justices or code?

0:15:43.040 --> 0:15:46.360
<v Speaker 1>Did he has to? I think he had a personal code.

0:15:46.400 --> 0:15:48.680
<v Speaker 1>There is not an institutional coach. It's not a d

0:15:49.000 --> 0:15:52.920
<v Speaker 1>J code er fl he he resigned in May. They

0:15:52.920 --> 0:15:55.680
<v Speaker 1>shut his office down, I believe in late May, so

0:15:55.720 --> 0:15:58.880
<v Speaker 1>he's no longer implied by the employed by the Justice Department.

0:15:59.360 --> 0:16:02.920
<v Speaker 1>Um this letter he sought this week from Justice Department

0:16:02.920 --> 0:16:07.120
<v Speaker 1>offering guidance about what he could say. My colleague No Feldman,

0:16:07.160 --> 0:16:09.920
<v Speaker 1>who knows about all things legal, said that it's not

0:16:10.000 --> 0:16:13.280
<v Speaker 1>a legally binding letter. I think Mueller asked for it

0:16:13.600 --> 0:16:17.040
<v Speaker 1>because it's yet another indication that Mueller really wants he

0:16:17.080 --> 0:16:19.040
<v Speaker 1>does not want to testify in public about what he

0:16:19.080 --> 0:16:22.720
<v Speaker 1>regards as a private investigation. What are these shining lights

0:16:22.720 --> 0:16:26.440
<v Speaker 1>of our American politics gonna do? When he says it's

0:16:26.440 --> 0:16:28.560
<v Speaker 1>not gonna be the drama? I plead the Fifth Amendment.

0:16:28.560 --> 0:16:31.680
<v Speaker 1>But he's gonna say, I don't want to answer that, correct.

0:16:31.680 --> 0:16:33.480
<v Speaker 1>So I think what they're gonna have to probably do

0:16:33.600 --> 0:16:37.480
<v Speaker 1>is ask him to read passages from the report. And

0:16:37.520 --> 0:16:40.640
<v Speaker 1>there's some really extraordinary passages in there where Trump is asking,

0:16:40.680 --> 0:16:42.680
<v Speaker 1>is they're going to force Mr Mueller to do that.

0:16:43.080 --> 0:16:46.280
<v Speaker 1>He's a citizen, he's appearing before the Congress. He should

0:16:46.360 --> 0:16:48.320
<v Speaker 1>do what they asked him to do, include read from

0:16:48.320 --> 0:16:50.520
<v Speaker 1>the document. And now beyond that, of course, this is

0:16:50.560 --> 0:16:53.440
<v Speaker 1>going to dominate the headlines in Washington, d C. Something

0:16:53.440 --> 0:16:55.720
<v Speaker 1>that's attracted a little attention from our listeners here at

0:16:55.760 --> 0:16:57.720
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Tim is what is happening with the d l

0:16:57.800 --> 0:17:01.320
<v Speaker 1>J and big tech. Some people are struggling to get

0:17:01.320 --> 0:17:03.400
<v Speaker 1>their head around the idea that the United States is

0:17:03.440 --> 0:17:06.080
<v Speaker 1>involved in a trite dispute with the Chinese and also

0:17:06.160 --> 0:17:08.440
<v Speaker 1>simultaneously going off to some of the big tech firms

0:17:08.480 --> 0:17:12.680
<v Speaker 1>here in the United States. Two things for us, well,

0:17:12.840 --> 0:17:15.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, as a you know, as as business journalists,

0:17:15.280 --> 0:17:19.520
<v Speaker 1>I find the schizophrenia in the Trump administration curious and

0:17:19.560 --> 0:17:22.479
<v Speaker 1>it and it often feels to me like where they

0:17:22.480 --> 0:17:25.480
<v Speaker 1>are on policy is a little bit shoot from the hip.

0:17:25.720 --> 0:17:28.800
<v Speaker 1>And you don't know who where the inputs are coming from.

0:17:28.840 --> 0:17:31.880
<v Speaker 1>You know, as you just said, he came into office

0:17:31.920 --> 0:17:34.280
<v Speaker 1>as a champion of business. He had a you know,

0:17:34.280 --> 0:17:37.440
<v Speaker 1>a tech council meet at Trump Tower with the head

0:17:37.480 --> 0:17:40.919
<v Speaker 1>of the Fangs and other and other another leading CEOs.

0:17:41.440 --> 0:17:44.439
<v Speaker 1>Now he's authorized it would appear in anti trust investigation.

0:17:44.720 --> 0:17:48.560
<v Speaker 1>You are considered Timothy O'Brien the expert on the president's

0:17:48.600 --> 0:17:52.320
<v Speaker 1>previous finances. I believe in the last twenty four hours

0:17:52.920 --> 0:17:55.840
<v Speaker 1>he's saying I want my state tax returns to be

0:17:55.960 --> 0:17:59.840
<v Speaker 1>private in New York is reasserting that he doesn't want

0:17:59.840 --> 0:18:02.560
<v Speaker 1>his state tax returns, not only saying that he's suing

0:18:02.600 --> 0:18:06.000
<v Speaker 1>as a private citizen to prevent that as the same

0:18:06.000 --> 0:18:07.800
<v Speaker 1>as the federal return they're not. They don't have the

0:18:07.800 --> 0:18:10.000
<v Speaker 1>same depth as the as the federal returns, but they

0:18:10.040 --> 0:18:13.600
<v Speaker 1>have a lot of the same information directionally. Obviously, I

0:18:13.640 --> 0:18:15.080
<v Speaker 1>think what people want to see is what kind of

0:18:15.119 --> 0:18:18.840
<v Speaker 1>income he has from abroad and in any possible malfeasance

0:18:18.880 --> 0:18:22.280
<v Speaker 1>that might be inside the documents to be Governor Cuomo

0:18:22.840 --> 0:18:27.359
<v Speaker 1>past legislation to allow this. The President is saying, no,

0:18:27.600 --> 0:18:30.760
<v Speaker 1>is a citizen. We're not going to do this, what

0:18:30.840 --> 0:18:33.560
<v Speaker 1>would you suggest will be the outcome? I don't think

0:18:33.600 --> 0:18:35.280
<v Speaker 1>the courts are going to be on the President's side

0:18:35.280 --> 0:18:39.520
<v Speaker 1>and this. You know, they've made a similar, you know,

0:18:39.800 --> 0:18:42.840
<v Speaker 1>slate of arguments about access to his financial records and

0:18:42.880 --> 0:18:46.399
<v Speaker 1>other records. And his argument has been these are political

0:18:46.440 --> 0:18:49.719
<v Speaker 1>efforts and therefore they should be knocked down. And the

0:18:49.760 --> 0:18:54.240
<v Speaker 1>Congress has said, we're exercising oversight per the Constitution. The

0:18:54.280 --> 0:18:57.320
<v Speaker 1>courts have tended to decide with Congress on that. What

0:18:57.440 --> 0:18:59.240
<v Speaker 1>will you look for the rest of the summer from

0:18:59.240 --> 0:19:02.280
<v Speaker 1>the president we've and talking you're about has been almost

0:19:02.280 --> 0:19:05.480
<v Speaker 1>two administrations. In the first term, there's been such turnover

0:19:05.560 --> 0:19:08.720
<v Speaker 1>and all, what's sort of your crystal ball into the

0:19:08.760 --> 0:19:11.879
<v Speaker 1>cooling months of September and October. Um, well, he doesn't

0:19:11.880 --> 0:19:15.240
<v Speaker 1>have cooling months, so we meet with Prime Minister Johnson.

0:19:15.280 --> 0:19:17.000
<v Speaker 1>I mean you know that. Yeah, I think and I

0:19:17.040 --> 0:19:20.160
<v Speaker 1>think that I think that, you know, Iran, and and

0:19:20.160 --> 0:19:22.320
<v Speaker 1>and North Korea have to remain sort of front and

0:19:22.320 --> 0:19:27.200
<v Speaker 1>center in people's minds. Uh, the southern border remains unresolved.

0:19:27.200 --> 0:19:30.000
<v Speaker 1>What's gonna happen with immigration policy there? And then I

0:19:30.000 --> 0:19:34.640
<v Speaker 1>think obviously he's positioning and um, you know there's gonna

0:19:34.640 --> 0:19:36.480
<v Speaker 1>be some key issues that the Republicans have to pull

0:19:36.560 --> 0:19:39.720
<v Speaker 1>together on to have an agenda behind and beyond just

0:19:40.320 --> 0:19:42.120
<v Speaker 1>Trump the showman. And I think they've got to figure

0:19:42.119 --> 0:19:45.159
<v Speaker 1>out where they are on healthcare, where they are in immigration,

0:19:45.800 --> 0:19:48.560
<v Speaker 1>and and and make sure that the fruits of their

0:19:49.080 --> 0:19:51.240
<v Speaker 1>tax cut are apparent to their support. We're gonna stay

0:19:51.240 --> 0:19:53.880
<v Speaker 1>and listen to the testimony live here in Bloomberg Radio.

0:19:53.920 --> 0:19:56.000
<v Speaker 1>I want to watch you translated for me. Tom. I

0:19:56.560 --> 0:19:59.400
<v Speaker 1>would that that we supported if you read the document.

0:19:59.440 --> 0:20:00.880
<v Speaker 1>Full of school, I was sure, I have not read.

0:20:00.960 --> 0:20:03.000
<v Speaker 1>I have not read the document, So you guys should

0:20:03.000 --> 0:20:05.200
<v Speaker 1>not host a show about an event if you haven't

0:20:05.200 --> 0:20:07.760
<v Speaker 1>read the document. Really, I don't think the members, honestly,

0:20:07.840 --> 0:20:10.240
<v Speaker 1>I don't think every day there was all these this

0:20:10.359 --> 0:20:12.840
<v Speaker 1>jockeying in Washington about who would get to ask questions,

0:20:12.840 --> 0:20:16.119
<v Speaker 1>and they were postponing the hearings, and my feeling was

0:20:16.200 --> 0:20:18.439
<v Speaker 1>only let the people ask questions who've actually read the

0:20:18.480 --> 0:20:21.840
<v Speaker 1>moment when I agree with that that, right, it's it's interesting.

0:20:22.359 --> 0:20:24.680
<v Speaker 1>Jim O'Brien, thank you so much, of course, with Blueberg

0:20:24.760 --> 0:20:27.159
<v Speaker 1>opinion and driving so much to the smart that the

0:20:27.280 --> 0:20:40.000
<v Speaker 1>every day right now on the equity markets, John, why

0:20:40.040 --> 0:20:43.679
<v Speaker 1>don't you bring him? Mr Golub who has been persistently

0:20:44.160 --> 0:20:47.240
<v Speaker 1>in the markets through gloom, thick and thin, joined just

0:20:47.320 --> 0:20:49.840
<v Speaker 1>from Credit Swacee, the chief US equity strategist. It's been

0:20:49.840 --> 0:20:51.720
<v Speaker 1>a while, John, it's quite a catch. Elby. Let's talk

0:20:51.760 --> 0:20:54.760
<v Speaker 1>about earning season so far. What are you looking at?

0:20:54.800 --> 0:20:58.160
<v Speaker 1>What's your school can't John, it's you know, it's it's

0:20:58.280 --> 0:21:01.119
<v Speaker 1>pretty good. If you look at the the level of

0:21:01.320 --> 0:21:04.919
<v Speaker 1>earnings surprises, you have something like three cores of the

0:21:04.960 --> 0:21:08.040
<v Speaker 1>company's beating expectations, and the beats are coming in more

0:21:08.080 --> 0:21:11.600
<v Speaker 1>than six percent, which is really strong. The level of

0:21:11.640 --> 0:21:15.760
<v Speaker 1>the earnings growth is quite weak. We'll probably by the

0:21:15.760 --> 0:21:19.600
<v Speaker 1>time this is over only have about two EPs growth

0:21:19.640 --> 0:21:21.680
<v Speaker 1>and when you take out the buybacks, that's pretty close

0:21:21.720 --> 0:21:25.160
<v Speaker 1>to zero. But but compared to expectations, things are coming

0:21:25.160 --> 0:21:27.560
<v Speaker 1>in pretty well. What's the guidance like at the moment

0:21:27.640 --> 0:21:31.920
<v Speaker 1>for the rest of this year going? UM? I think

0:21:31.960 --> 0:21:34.520
<v Speaker 1>the guidance is finding what we knew we were going

0:21:34.560 --> 0:21:40.400
<v Speaker 1>to get was um, you know, comments about about trade

0:21:40.480 --> 0:21:43.960
<v Speaker 1>and potential headwinds, and so I'm not sure we're seeing

0:21:44.000 --> 0:21:50.040
<v Speaker 1>anything that's um that's out of the ordinary. But you know, Prepsy,

0:21:50.240 --> 0:21:54.720
<v Speaker 1>the more important issue here is that the media company,

0:21:54.760 --> 0:21:58.679
<v Speaker 1>the typical average company and portfolio is doing much better

0:21:58.800 --> 0:22:02.399
<v Speaker 1>than the weighted number when people quote the SMP. And

0:22:02.440 --> 0:22:06.080
<v Speaker 1>the reason for that is simply that mega cap tech

0:22:06.200 --> 0:22:08.959
<v Speaker 1>is having a harder time with respect to growth and

0:22:09.000 --> 0:22:12.800
<v Speaker 1>that's bringing down the averages even though typical portfolio managers

0:22:12.800 --> 0:22:14.920
<v Speaker 1>doing a little better. Okay, investing one oh one, your

0:22:14.920 --> 0:22:19.320
<v Speaker 1>most sophisticated hedge fund client or somebody in wealth management

0:22:19.359 --> 0:22:22.600
<v Speaker 1>at credit Suites. I just did a laddered return year

0:22:22.640 --> 0:22:25.160
<v Speaker 1>to date, six months to day, three months to date,

0:22:25.440 --> 0:22:27.800
<v Speaker 1>one month to date, and the answer is it's all

0:22:27.840 --> 0:22:32.000
<v Speaker 1>double digit, pretty nice returns. Everything said and done. Do

0:22:32.119 --> 0:22:35.080
<v Speaker 1>I get out of the market and enjoy what I've

0:22:35.080 --> 0:22:37.919
<v Speaker 1>done the first six months or do you stay in

0:22:37.960 --> 0:22:41.359
<v Speaker 1>the market even if you get an incremental single digit

0:22:41.400 --> 0:22:43.840
<v Speaker 1>return to the end of the year. Alright, So, Tom,

0:22:43.880 --> 0:22:46.600
<v Speaker 1>I'm I'm gonna disappoint you a little bit because I've

0:22:46.600 --> 0:22:50.000
<v Speaker 1>been super bullish for the last six years, and I'd say,

0:22:50.080 --> 0:22:53.000
<v Speaker 1>is it's not that embarished, But I'm more cautious. If

0:22:53.040 --> 0:22:57.600
<v Speaker 1>you look since the September high, so roughly about ten months,

0:22:58.080 --> 0:23:01.520
<v Speaker 1>the SMP is up only two. The reason that the

0:23:01.560 --> 0:23:05.359
<v Speaker 1>market looks so great since let's say late December or

0:23:05.440 --> 0:23:08.240
<v Speaker 1>year to date of the last six weeks was because

0:23:08.359 --> 0:23:10.840
<v Speaker 1>we had such a lousy fourth quarter and we've gotten

0:23:10.840 --> 0:23:14.560
<v Speaker 1>it back. So stock multiples are fine at seventeen, which

0:23:14.720 --> 0:23:18.920
<v Speaker 1>but that's roughly where they were, um, you know, ten

0:23:18.960 --> 0:23:22.520
<v Speaker 1>months ago. So the market doesn't look particularly expensive, even

0:23:22.520 --> 0:23:25.960
<v Speaker 1>though it's run up recently. The earnings outlook for for

0:23:26.080 --> 0:23:29.399
<v Speaker 1>next year you're probably gonna get something like a load

0:23:29.440 --> 0:23:34.200
<v Speaker 1>of mid single digits, which is not brilliant, but is fine. Um.

0:23:34.440 --> 0:23:36.879
<v Speaker 1>The thing which we really need to see to propel

0:23:36.960 --> 0:23:40.440
<v Speaker 1>the markets further is exactly what Jonathan was talking about

0:23:40.440 --> 0:23:43.959
<v Speaker 1>a moment ago. You don't want to be um putting

0:23:44.000 --> 0:23:46.720
<v Speaker 1>yourself out there with respect to equities when the economic

0:23:46.840 --> 0:23:50.760
<v Speaker 1>data is decelerating. We need that to turn around. Um.

0:23:50.800 --> 0:23:53.800
<v Speaker 1>The other thing is if anyone believes that that falling

0:23:53.800 --> 0:23:56.639
<v Speaker 1>interest rates are good for stocks, that is not going

0:23:56.680 --> 0:23:58.240
<v Speaker 1>to be the case between now and the end of

0:23:58.240 --> 0:24:00.480
<v Speaker 1>the year. That last line, that is not just a

0:24:00.560 --> 0:24:03.119
<v Speaker 1>throwaway statement from the team, a credit slace. I know

0:24:03.200 --> 0:24:04.959
<v Speaker 1>you've done a lot of work on it, so explore

0:24:05.000 --> 0:24:06.560
<v Speaker 1>it a little bit. Further, for us, there is this

0:24:06.680 --> 0:24:09.400
<v Speaker 1>just sort of generous general surface level belief that level

0:24:09.480 --> 0:24:12.159
<v Speaker 1>rates great for stocks. What do you know, what do

0:24:12.240 --> 0:24:16.000
<v Speaker 1>you see in the data? Well, I mean, so there's

0:24:16.000 --> 0:24:18.800
<v Speaker 1>a couple of things we we we've mechanically, we've gone

0:24:18.800 --> 0:24:21.640
<v Speaker 1>through and said what happens to stocks when on days

0:24:21.680 --> 0:24:24.280
<v Speaker 1>where interest rates fall and days where interest rates rise,

0:24:24.720 --> 0:24:26.920
<v Speaker 1>and when days were interest rates rise, what you have

0:24:27.080 --> 0:24:30.199
<v Speaker 1>is better news. And those are the days where the

0:24:30.200 --> 0:24:33.360
<v Speaker 1>stock market makes virtually all of their games. This has

0:24:33.400 --> 0:24:37.680
<v Speaker 1>been the case for virtually the entire recovery cycle. It's

0:24:37.680 --> 0:24:42.280
<v Speaker 1>a very consistent way to to invest. So that's really

0:24:42.320 --> 0:24:45.119
<v Speaker 1>the simple bottom one. So for people, the reason that

0:24:45.240 --> 0:24:47.680
<v Speaker 1>the market wants to fed or was expecting to fit

0:24:47.800 --> 0:24:50.359
<v Speaker 1>to cut is because the short end of the curve

0:24:50.520 --> 0:24:53.399
<v Speaker 1>is is inverted. Basically, you can get a higher interest

0:24:53.520 --> 0:24:56.760
<v Speaker 1>rate on one month bonds than you can on a

0:24:56.800 --> 0:25:00.359
<v Speaker 1>two year bond. But in general speaking, if we have

0:25:00.520 --> 0:25:02.399
<v Speaker 1>lower interest rates at the end of the year, we

0:25:02.440 --> 0:25:07.560
<v Speaker 1>will have lower stock prices. John the value in American banking,

0:25:07.600 --> 0:25:09.639
<v Speaker 1>you're with a Swiss bank, so it's a little easier

0:25:09.680 --> 0:25:12.720
<v Speaker 1>for you to talk about this than others representing too

0:25:12.720 --> 0:25:15.880
<v Speaker 1>big to fail banks. How a bunch of a steel

0:25:16.440 --> 0:25:19.320
<v Speaker 1>is that cash flow of too big to fail American

0:25:19.359 --> 0:25:23.520
<v Speaker 1>banking right now? It's it's amazing Tom that right now,

0:25:23.560 --> 0:25:26.200
<v Speaker 1>if you if you look at the return of capital,

0:25:26.280 --> 0:25:30.240
<v Speaker 1>dividends and five backs together, the US banks are yielding

0:25:30.400 --> 0:25:34.120
<v Speaker 1>ten percent, thank you. And this is an environment where

0:25:34.160 --> 0:25:38.520
<v Speaker 1>you can get barely over two percent on a government bond.

0:25:39.080 --> 0:25:41.680
<v Speaker 1>And not only that, but the banks are much much

0:25:41.760 --> 0:25:45.600
<v Speaker 1>less risky today than they've been because the government has

0:25:45.640 --> 0:25:50.080
<v Speaker 1>forced them to take less risk. So um, I'm shocked

0:25:50.080 --> 0:25:53.520
<v Speaker 1>that investors aren't more enthusiastic about that. What's so important here,

0:25:53.600 --> 0:25:56.879
<v Speaker 1>John is Yesterday Gabriela Santos of JP Morgan was saying

0:25:56.920 --> 0:26:00.480
<v Speaker 1>blended SPX is a two percent share buy back, and

0:26:00.600 --> 0:26:03.760
<v Speaker 1>Mr Galub just said the banking too big defail banking

0:26:03.800 --> 0:26:07.000
<v Speaker 1>sector is a five factor of that. Well, they've been

0:26:07.040 --> 0:26:09.440
<v Speaker 1>juicing aps with the buy backs. We saw that with

0:26:09.480 --> 0:26:11.399
<v Speaker 1>the results just the other week. John, talk to me

0:26:11.440 --> 0:26:14.400
<v Speaker 1>about the financials at the moment and the level rate story,

0:26:14.960 --> 0:26:17.560
<v Speaker 1>the FED on the brink of an easing cycle. I

0:26:17.560 --> 0:26:19.760
<v Speaker 1>don't know how deep it goes. It could be one cut,

0:26:19.840 --> 0:26:22.800
<v Speaker 1>two cuts, three cuts, four That kind of environment what

0:26:22.800 --> 0:26:25.200
<v Speaker 1>does it mean for US financials now, considering the shift

0:26:25.240 --> 0:26:28.920
<v Speaker 1>they've made to their business models in the last decade. Well,

0:26:29.119 --> 0:26:31.280
<v Speaker 1>and it's it's a it's a great point. First of all,

0:26:31.320 --> 0:26:34.159
<v Speaker 1>and this is a big difference between US banks and

0:26:34.240 --> 0:26:37.600
<v Speaker 1>non US banks is the US banks make more of

0:26:37.640 --> 0:26:42.439
<v Speaker 1>their money from fees, which means that they hold up

0:26:42.520 --> 0:26:46.440
<v Speaker 1>much better even in environments for that where interest rates

0:26:46.440 --> 0:26:50.000
<v Speaker 1>aren't kind of working in their favor. Um. But what

0:26:50.400 --> 0:26:52.960
<v Speaker 1>right now, if you can get a higher interest rate

0:26:53.640 --> 0:26:55.960
<v Speaker 1>on a one month CD, then you can get on

0:26:56.000 --> 0:26:59.800
<v Speaker 1>a to year government bond. It's very hard for banks

0:26:59.840 --> 0:27:03.119
<v Speaker 1>to make money when they're borrowing costs which which our

0:27:03.160 --> 0:27:06.359
<v Speaker 1>deposits is higher than what they're gonna lend out um

0:27:06.480 --> 0:27:09.640
<v Speaker 1>for two or three years. So if the FED can

0:27:10.000 --> 0:27:12.280
<v Speaker 1>brings down the short end of the of the curve,

0:27:12.880 --> 0:27:16.760
<v Speaker 1>a short end of short term introduce, then then bank

0:27:16.800 --> 0:27:19.840
<v Speaker 1>profitability should do well. So what the what the banking

0:27:19.880 --> 0:27:23.159
<v Speaker 1>sector wants is a steepio curve where the tenure bond

0:27:23.240 --> 0:27:26.720
<v Speaker 1>is above the two year yield. And that's what the

0:27:26.760 --> 0:27:30.280
<v Speaker 1>markets expecting. The reason the market's expecting four moves is

0:27:30.320 --> 0:27:32.639
<v Speaker 1>because they do not believe the FED will let the

0:27:32.640 --> 0:27:35.320
<v Speaker 1>curve stay inverted at the short end. Is there right now?

0:27:35.400 --> 0:27:37.800
<v Speaker 1>Two oh five and the tenure one eight one on

0:27:37.880 --> 0:27:46.119
<v Speaker 1>the two year Jonathan Gollop credits. Thanks for listening to

0:27:46.200 --> 0:27:50.720
<v Speaker 1>the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on

0:27:50.760 --> 0:27:56.600
<v Speaker 1>Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm

0:27:56.640 --> 0:27:59.960
<v Speaker 1>on Twitter at Tom Keane before the podcast. You can

0:28:00.040 --> 0:28:03.200
<v Speaker 1>always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio.