WEBVTT - Daybreak Weekend: Davos Preview, Oil Volatility, Mester Speaks, Iowa Caucuses

0:00:02.000 --> 0:00:04.600
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Daybreak Weekend, our global look at the

0:00:04.640 --> 0:00:07.280
<v Speaker 1>top stories in the coming week from our Daybreak anchors

0:00:07.320 --> 0:00:09.600
<v Speaker 1>all around the world. Straight ahead on the program. But

0:00:09.720 --> 0:00:13.240
<v Speaker 1>holidays are over, so how did the nation's retailers fare.

0:00:13.400 --> 0:00:14.960
<v Speaker 1>I'm Tom Busby in New York.

0:00:15.040 --> 0:00:17.320
<v Speaker 2>I'm Stephen Caron and London, who are asking if peliscal

0:00:17.400 --> 0:00:20.439
<v Speaker 2>and business leaders can rebuild trust at this year's Wild

0:00:20.440 --> 0:00:22.040
<v Speaker 2>Economic Forum in Davos.

0:00:22.239 --> 0:00:26.080
<v Speaker 3>I'm Brian Curtis in Hong Kong. With Taiwan election results looming,

0:00:26.239 --> 0:00:29.360
<v Speaker 3>we look at Taiwan Semiconductor at delegate time in the

0:00:29.440 --> 0:00:30.160
<v Speaker 3>chip industry.

0:00:30.240 --> 0:00:33.000
<v Speaker 4>I'm Kavid Lyons in Washington, where we're looking ahead to

0:00:33.080 --> 0:00:34.320
<v Speaker 4>the Iowa Caucasus.

0:00:37.159 --> 0:00:41.239
<v Speaker 5>That's all straight ahead on Bloomberg Daybreak Weekend. The business

0:00:41.280 --> 0:00:45.240
<v Speaker 5>news you need to wrap up your week, Available on Apple, Spotify,

0:00:45.400 --> 0:00:48.720
<v Speaker 5>the Bloomberg Business Appen everywhere you get your podcasts.

0:00:53.159 --> 0:00:55.440
<v Speaker 1>Good day to you. I'm Tom Busby. We begin today's

0:00:55.480 --> 0:00:57.320
<v Speaker 1>program with a look at the strength of the US

0:00:57.360 --> 0:01:01.160
<v Speaker 1>consumer through the lens of the holidays and fourth quarter

0:01:01.200 --> 0:01:04.240
<v Speaker 1>retail sales, and we take a peek at the year ahead.

0:01:04.720 --> 0:01:07.760
<v Speaker 1>We're joined today by Poonham Goyle, Senior retail analysts for

0:01:07.880 --> 0:01:12.440
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Intelligence and Molly Smith, Bloomberg News Economy editor. Thank

0:01:12.480 --> 0:01:15.479
<v Speaker 1>you both for being here. Poonam. It's still a little early,

0:01:16.040 --> 0:01:19.200
<v Speaker 1>but what we've heard so far about retail sales and

0:01:19.560 --> 0:01:23.280
<v Speaker 1>December's numbers. We know the National Retail Federation says sales

0:01:23.319 --> 0:01:25.800
<v Speaker 1>last month up three percent five percent for all of

0:01:25.880 --> 0:01:30.040
<v Speaker 1>last year. Master cards spending pulse an increase of three

0:01:30.080 --> 0:01:33.600
<v Speaker 1>point one not spectacular, but would you say pretty solid?

0:01:33.720 --> 0:01:35.840
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, I'd say, you know, the holiday season ring in

0:01:35.920 --> 0:01:39.040
<v Speaker 6>pretty solid results. In fact, a number that you didn't

0:01:39.080 --> 0:01:41.720
<v Speaker 6>cite was the Adobe number where they came out with

0:01:41.800 --> 0:01:45.200
<v Speaker 6>also a slight increase, which suggests that online sales also

0:01:45.280 --> 0:01:48.760
<v Speaker 6>did well. So we think holiday overall did do well

0:01:49.000 --> 0:01:51.320
<v Speaker 6>and a large part of that was the strength that

0:01:51.360 --> 0:01:54.680
<v Speaker 6>we saw in November versus December. So it was a

0:01:54.680 --> 0:01:58.000
<v Speaker 6>great start to holiday, It ended okay and led the

0:01:58.040 --> 0:02:00.680
<v Speaker 6>season to be higher than what most expected.

0:02:00.960 --> 0:02:02.920
<v Speaker 1>And Molly, I'm going to ask you about what that

0:02:03.080 --> 0:02:07.520
<v Speaker 1>means for the consumer. We have a very strong labor market, right,

0:02:07.720 --> 0:02:10.799
<v Speaker 1>unemployment holding steady just three point seven percent last month.

0:02:10.840 --> 0:02:13.280
<v Speaker 1>What appears to be a soft landing. What does it

0:02:13.320 --> 0:02:13.640
<v Speaker 1>look like?

0:02:13.840 --> 0:02:17.799
<v Speaker 7>I think it's it's maybe a little bit more complicated

0:02:17.919 --> 0:02:21.600
<v Speaker 7>than that that the jobs report on the surface that

0:02:21.680 --> 0:02:24.440
<v Speaker 7>we got for the month of December, well, it's great

0:02:24.440 --> 0:02:26.760
<v Speaker 7>from the headline number in terms of the payrolls, the

0:02:26.840 --> 0:02:29.560
<v Speaker 7>unemployment figure that you cited, wage growth, but there are

0:02:29.600 --> 0:02:32.040
<v Speaker 7>a few other things under the surface, like duration of

0:02:32.080 --> 0:02:35.200
<v Speaker 7>unemployment growing longer, and a few other caveats that made

0:02:35.200 --> 0:02:38.000
<v Speaker 7>this maybe just not as strong as you might expect.

0:02:38.160 --> 0:02:41.040
<v Speaker 7>And it's kind of contributing then to what we're expecting

0:02:41.080 --> 0:02:44.120
<v Speaker 7>to be a slowdown in consumer spending this year. I

0:02:44.160 --> 0:02:45.840
<v Speaker 7>know we've been calling for that for a while. There

0:02:45.840 --> 0:02:47.920
<v Speaker 7>have been people who would have expected us to have

0:02:47.960 --> 0:02:50.480
<v Speaker 7>a recession already, Like you said, look like that's probably

0:02:50.520 --> 0:02:53.520
<v Speaker 7>not going to happen, But there has just been this

0:02:53.639 --> 0:02:57.440
<v Speaker 7>really outsize strength and consumer spending. Given all of these

0:02:58.040 --> 0:03:01.680
<v Speaker 7>this other macro backdrop, that you would expected consumer spending

0:03:01.960 --> 0:03:04.600
<v Speaker 7>to taper off by now. And I think the cumulative

0:03:04.600 --> 0:03:08.000
<v Speaker 7>effect of the inflation that we've had for the last

0:03:08.120 --> 0:03:11.240
<v Speaker 7>year and a half plus now, higher borrowing costs and

0:03:11.280 --> 0:03:14.040
<v Speaker 7>how much longer they're going to stay this elevated level,

0:03:14.320 --> 0:03:17.480
<v Speaker 7>is probably going to lead to consumer spend tapering off

0:03:17.720 --> 0:03:19.200
<v Speaker 7>in this year, and you talked.

0:03:18.960 --> 0:03:22.480
<v Speaker 1>About the higher borrowing costs. We're consumer spending. We're still spending,

0:03:22.639 --> 0:03:25.639
<v Speaker 1>but it looks like we're charging more more than ever before.

0:03:26.040 --> 0:03:28.959
<v Speaker 7>There is Yeah, definitely has been a pickup in credit

0:03:29.000 --> 0:03:31.280
<v Speaker 7>card balances. I think important though to keep that in

0:03:31.320 --> 0:03:35.360
<v Speaker 7>the context of deposits, and those are still pretty high,

0:03:35.400 --> 0:03:38.920
<v Speaker 7>so when you look at card balances to deposits, it's

0:03:39.000 --> 0:03:41.720
<v Speaker 7>not as startling of a rise as if you were

0:03:41.720 --> 0:03:45.000
<v Speaker 7>to just look at card balances in an absolute dollar amount.

0:03:45.080 --> 0:03:48.160
<v Speaker 7>So I think that's important to remember. And when we

0:03:48.200 --> 0:03:52.000
<v Speaker 7>talk about the consumer, obviously like that's you know, millions

0:03:52.000 --> 0:03:54.440
<v Speaker 7>and millions of people, there's obviously a lot of different

0:03:54.480 --> 0:03:58.400
<v Speaker 7>income brackets within that, a lot of different spending propensities.

0:03:58.440 --> 0:04:01.120
<v Speaker 7>So important to keep in mind that this isn't really

0:04:01.160 --> 0:04:05.400
<v Speaker 7>a broad, you know, decline in spending power. It's really

0:04:05.400 --> 0:04:08.560
<v Speaker 7>more affecting consumers at the lower end the most as

0:04:08.600 --> 0:04:12.240
<v Speaker 7>you would expect, and higher end, you know, higher income

0:04:12.280 --> 0:04:14.400
<v Speaker 7>earners are still really propping up a lot of the

0:04:14.440 --> 0:04:15.280
<v Speaker 7>aggregate numbers.

0:04:15.400 --> 0:04:16.280
<v Speaker 8>Poon let's starn to you.

0:04:16.400 --> 0:04:19.080
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk about some of the retailers that really did

0:04:19.120 --> 0:04:21.800
<v Speaker 1>benefit no matter who the shoppers are, high end low end.

0:04:22.080 --> 0:04:25.360
<v Speaker 1>We heard from Abercrombie and Fitch, Lulu, Lemon, American Eagle,

0:04:25.839 --> 0:04:29.640
<v Speaker 1>all reporting strong sales and strong outlooks. Who else have

0:04:29.720 --> 0:04:30.360
<v Speaker 1>you heard from?

0:04:30.440 --> 0:04:32.359
<v Speaker 6>Well, those are the few that we've heard from, and

0:04:32.440 --> 0:04:34.960
<v Speaker 6>we'll hear from more as a report earning, but we

0:04:35.000 --> 0:04:38.480
<v Speaker 6>did see strength and the Amazon numbers based on our

0:04:38.520 --> 0:04:40.840
<v Speaker 6>own channel checks and what we're hearing, so we do

0:04:40.960 --> 0:04:44.600
<v Speaker 6>think that's another retailer or web giant that will continue

0:04:44.640 --> 0:04:47.159
<v Speaker 6>to take share, not just for the holiday but even

0:04:47.200 --> 0:04:49.880
<v Speaker 6>as we move into twenty twenty four, as spending just

0:04:49.920 --> 0:04:53.640
<v Speaker 6>shifts more online. Broadly speaking, the one interesting thing that

0:04:53.680 --> 0:04:56.360
<v Speaker 6>I will call out, and just to piggyback on Molly's

0:04:56.400 --> 0:04:58.720
<v Speaker 6>comments on the credit card, you know, part of the

0:04:58.760 --> 0:05:01.279
<v Speaker 6>reason that we saw such strength in twenty twenty four

0:05:01.680 --> 0:05:04.280
<v Speaker 6>was the rise of BNPL, which is buy now, pay later,

0:05:04.760 --> 0:05:07.720
<v Speaker 6>and in fact, from data that we're seeing in four

0:05:07.800 --> 0:05:12.480
<v Speaker 6>q BNPL spending online was up fourteen percent year every year,

0:05:12.960 --> 0:05:17.520
<v Speaker 6>and that's based on Adobe's estimate. So as consumers leverage

0:05:17.600 --> 0:05:20.000
<v Speaker 6>this new payment option and really use that to stretch

0:05:20.040 --> 0:05:22.880
<v Speaker 6>their wallets, we'll probably continue to see more of that

0:05:23.080 --> 0:05:24.719
<v Speaker 6>heading into twenty twenty four too.

0:05:25.040 --> 0:05:28.560
<v Speaker 1>And you talked about more use by the lower end consumer.

0:05:28.640 --> 0:05:32.200
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk about the lower and consumer and where we

0:05:32.279 --> 0:05:36.920
<v Speaker 1>see some of the big giants like Walmart, Target, Coals

0:05:37.000 --> 0:05:40.760
<v Speaker 1>another big discounter. What did you see this past season

0:05:40.880 --> 0:05:44.440
<v Speaker 1>and what do you see ahead Poonam for those big retailers.

0:05:44.640 --> 0:05:46.720
<v Speaker 6>Yes, I think the big retailers, you know, it's a

0:05:46.760 --> 0:05:50.960
<v Speaker 6>double edged sword for them because they are getting spend

0:05:51.000 --> 0:05:53.760
<v Speaker 6>from people that are trading down or people that want

0:05:53.800 --> 0:05:57.720
<v Speaker 6>to stretch their dollars further. They're seeing that spend come through,

0:05:57.960 --> 0:06:00.560
<v Speaker 6>but then at the same time they're also ground with

0:06:01.360 --> 0:06:05.280
<v Speaker 6>just consumers that don't have enough to spend and also deflation. Right,

0:06:05.320 --> 0:06:07.760
<v Speaker 6>we saw deflation kick in at least in a lot

0:06:07.800 --> 0:06:10.800
<v Speaker 6>of the consumables later in the year. So because of that,

0:06:10.960 --> 0:06:13.760
<v Speaker 6>you're seeing some pressure on their top line, which we

0:06:13.800 --> 0:06:17.160
<v Speaker 6>think could continue into twenty twenty four, especially early twenty

0:06:17.200 --> 0:06:17.720
<v Speaker 6>twenty four.

0:06:18.640 --> 0:06:20.760
<v Speaker 1>Now, you wrote a piece, I think it came out

0:06:20.800 --> 0:06:25.159
<v Speaker 1>just last week about the challenges in retail specific to

0:06:25.200 --> 0:06:28.080
<v Speaker 1>the retail calendar. What did you tell us about that?

0:06:29.080 --> 0:06:31.719
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, so it's interesting, you know, regardless of where consumer

0:06:31.800 --> 0:06:34.560
<v Speaker 6>spending shapes out to be this year, we're entering the

0:06:34.640 --> 0:06:38.560
<v Speaker 6>year with fewer shopping days between Thanksgiving and Christmas, and

0:06:38.600 --> 0:06:42.039
<v Speaker 6>that's five fewer shopping days. So that means that consumers

0:06:42.080 --> 0:06:45.440
<v Speaker 6>are going to have to consolidate their purchases in a

0:06:45.480 --> 0:06:48.599
<v Speaker 6>shorter window, and there's fewer days for retailers to try

0:06:48.640 --> 0:06:52.080
<v Speaker 6>to sell them more. That's a negative. The other negative

0:06:52.320 --> 0:06:55.320
<v Speaker 6>is coming up shortly, which is Easter. Easter this year

0:06:55.400 --> 0:06:58.680
<v Speaker 6>falls on March thirty first, versus later in April in

0:06:58.800 --> 0:07:02.800
<v Speaker 6>years past, so that means temperatures will be cooler. It

0:07:02.880 --> 0:07:07.000
<v Speaker 6>means that consumers maybe spending a little less. Historically, when

0:07:07.040 --> 0:07:11.119
<v Speaker 6>Easter has come earlier, it has impacted sales of food

0:07:11.640 --> 0:07:14.360
<v Speaker 6>and clothing, and that could occur again this year.

0:07:15.680 --> 0:07:18.320
<v Speaker 1>Molly, where do you see the calendar falling in for

0:07:18.400 --> 0:07:19.240
<v Speaker 1>consumer spending?

0:07:19.560 --> 0:07:21.640
<v Speaker 7>I just always have to like smile a little because,

0:07:21.640 --> 0:07:23.360
<v Speaker 7>you know, we always say, like the weather one way

0:07:23.480 --> 0:07:26.080
<v Speaker 7>or the other seems to play a role in this.

0:07:26.200 --> 0:07:28.160
<v Speaker 7>You know, it was like two cold people didn't shop,

0:07:28.200 --> 0:07:30.680
<v Speaker 7>it was two warm people wanted to play outside and

0:07:30.680 --> 0:07:33.960
<v Speaker 7>didn't shop. So there's always some kind of factor and

0:07:34.000 --> 0:07:36.920
<v Speaker 7>you know, who the heck knows, so it'll it'll play

0:07:36.960 --> 0:07:40.640
<v Speaker 7>out into time. That's certainly more Punam's specialty than mine

0:07:40.640 --> 0:07:43.880
<v Speaker 7>to forecast how the weather will factor into spending patterns.

0:07:43.920 --> 0:07:46.679
<v Speaker 7>But you know, she raised an interesting point though about

0:07:46.880 --> 0:07:51.160
<v Speaker 7>how retailers have been seeing deflation for a few months,

0:07:51.240 --> 0:07:53.320
<v Speaker 7>and that was something that when we just got the

0:07:53.360 --> 0:07:56.200
<v Speaker 7>Consumer Price Index report last week that was for the

0:07:56.200 --> 0:08:00.720
<v Speaker 7>month of December, really important moment here where the good sector,

0:08:01.040 --> 0:08:03.360
<v Speaker 7>you know, this is where all of like the purchases

0:08:03.400 --> 0:08:07.560
<v Speaker 7>of stuff like cars, furniture, clothing, things of that nature,

0:08:07.920 --> 0:08:12.240
<v Speaker 7>that sector has been showing price declines, had been showing

0:08:12.240 --> 0:08:16.120
<v Speaker 7>price declined, sorry, for six months, and that unexpectedly stopped

0:08:16.400 --> 0:08:19.160
<v Speaker 7>in December. That was a that's a really key potential

0:08:19.200 --> 0:08:22.200
<v Speaker 7>turning point because this has been in the broader context

0:08:22.240 --> 0:08:25.040
<v Speaker 7>of where is inflation going? The good sector has been

0:08:25.120 --> 0:08:28.240
<v Speaker 7>driving so much of the disinflation that we've been seeing

0:08:28.280 --> 0:08:31.440
<v Speaker 7>in recent months, and now it's kind of raising some questions,

0:08:31.680 --> 0:08:33.679
<v Speaker 7>is that running out of steam? How much more can

0:08:33.720 --> 0:08:37.280
<v Speaker 7>the supply side continue to help? So that's going to

0:08:37.320 --> 0:08:39.719
<v Speaker 7>be a really key question going forward for retailers and

0:08:39.840 --> 0:08:40.600
<v Speaker 7>for the economy.

0:08:41.400 --> 0:08:43.400
<v Speaker 1>Unless you're selling houses, of course.

0:08:43.679 --> 0:08:46.760
<v Speaker 7>Yes still pretty far. Insurance yes still both of those

0:08:46.800 --> 0:08:51.200
<v Speaker 7>also still pretty expensive, so also have not really turned

0:08:51.200 --> 0:08:53.760
<v Speaker 7>out to be the bigger disinflation story that you would

0:08:53.760 --> 0:08:56.200
<v Speaker 7>have hoped to see in rents. So far those are

0:08:56.240 --> 0:08:57.640
<v Speaker 7>still pretty expensive.

0:08:58.240 --> 0:09:00.000
<v Speaker 1>Now, Molly, one more thing I want to ask you

0:09:00.040 --> 0:09:05.880
<v Speaker 1>and Poonum, it looks excuse me, it looks like we're

0:09:05.880 --> 0:09:08.360
<v Speaker 1>not going to see an interest rate cut anytime soon,

0:09:08.480 --> 0:09:11.120
<v Speaker 1>maybe maybe according to the FED, back half of the year,

0:09:11.559 --> 0:09:14.240
<v Speaker 1>and that will certainly impact borrowing costs. How do you

0:09:14.280 --> 0:09:16.599
<v Speaker 1>think that will help consumers?

0:09:16.960 --> 0:09:19.559
<v Speaker 7>Well, I think right now, you know, the bets are

0:09:19.600 --> 0:09:23.440
<v Speaker 7>still kind of coalescing around the earliest being for a

0:09:23.520 --> 0:09:27.200
<v Speaker 7>March reduction, which FED officials have pushed back on that

0:09:27.360 --> 0:09:31.480
<v Speaker 7>pretty strongly. But I mean, it's it's still really tough

0:09:31.520 --> 0:09:34.520
<v Speaker 7>to tell when that is going to come. I mean,

0:09:34.559 --> 0:09:37.079
<v Speaker 7>I don't think the you know, the reports that we

0:09:37.080 --> 0:09:39.520
<v Speaker 7>were just talking about, the CPI that we just got,

0:09:39.640 --> 0:09:42.680
<v Speaker 7>or retail sales coming up, those aren't going to really

0:09:43.000 --> 0:09:45.640
<v Speaker 7>you know, move the needle in terms of where that's

0:09:45.920 --> 0:09:49.199
<v Speaker 7>where when that cut's going to happen. But for I mean,

0:09:49.240 --> 0:09:52.520
<v Speaker 7>consumers can definitely count on borrowing costs coming down this year.

0:09:52.760 --> 0:09:55.600
<v Speaker 7>It's more a question just of when rather than if.

0:09:56.160 --> 0:09:57.600
<v Speaker 1>And Poonam final thoughts.

0:09:58.440 --> 0:10:00.800
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, And I'd say if both borrowing boss do come down,

0:10:00.840 --> 0:10:05.680
<v Speaker 6>which they are likely too. That is on the note like,

0:10:05.679 --> 0:10:08.520
<v Speaker 6>it would be positive for consumer spending. Right, Just the

0:10:08.640 --> 0:10:11.720
<v Speaker 6>idea of boring costs coming down and the rates coming

0:10:11.760 --> 0:10:14.720
<v Speaker 6>down would be positive to consumer spending this year.

0:10:15.440 --> 0:10:18.280
<v Speaker 1>Oh that's great. Well, our thanks to Punham Goyle, She's

0:10:18.320 --> 0:10:22.920
<v Speaker 1>senior retail analyst from Bloomberg Intelligence, and Molly Smith, Bloomberg

0:10:23.000 --> 0:10:26.480
<v Speaker 1>News Economy editor. Coming up on Bloomberg day Break Weekend,

0:10:26.640 --> 0:10:29.280
<v Speaker 1>It's that time of year for the World Economic Forum

0:10:29.360 --> 0:10:33.040
<v Speaker 1>in Davos, Switzerland. Who's going and what's on the agenda.

0:10:33.280 --> 0:10:46.960
<v Speaker 1>I'm Tom Busby and this is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg

0:10:47.000 --> 0:10:49.560
<v Speaker 1>Daybreak Weekend, our global look ahead at the top stories

0:10:49.559 --> 0:10:52.199
<v Speaker 1>for investors in the coming week. I'm Tom Busby in

0:10:52.280 --> 0:10:55.480
<v Speaker 1>New York. Up later in our program, the Iowa Coxes

0:10:55.520 --> 0:10:59.640
<v Speaker 1>begin jump starting the Republican presidential nominating race. But first,

0:11:00.120 --> 0:11:03.760
<v Speaker 1>the globe's political, corporate, and cultural elite gathering in a

0:11:03.880 --> 0:11:07.720
<v Speaker 1>tiny alpine village in Switzerland for the World Economic Forum.

0:11:08.040 --> 0:11:09.680
<v Speaker 1>For a look at what to expect, we turned to

0:11:09.679 --> 0:11:11.240
<v Speaker 1>Stephen Carroll in London.

0:11:11.520 --> 0:11:14.439
<v Speaker 2>Tom, It's the annual pilgrimage to Davos, for the event

0:11:14.480 --> 0:11:17.000
<v Speaker 2>that's over the year has been dubbed everything from globalist

0:11:17.120 --> 0:11:21.400
<v Speaker 2>Glastonbury to speed dating for CEOs. This year's World Economic

0:11:21.440 --> 0:11:24.199
<v Speaker 2>Forum will be attended by more than twenty seven hundred

0:11:24.200 --> 0:11:28.080
<v Speaker 2>political and business leaders, including the Chinese Premier League Chung Francis,

0:11:28.080 --> 0:11:31.040
<v Speaker 2>Emmanuel Macron, the EU Commission President our Slavanda Line, and

0:11:31.200 --> 0:11:34.680
<v Speaker 2>the Israeli President Isaac Hertzog. There's plenty to discuss on

0:11:34.720 --> 0:11:37.760
<v Speaker 2>the geopolitical front, but also the hundreds of CEOs attending

0:11:37.880 --> 0:11:40.280
<v Speaker 2>will be talking about economic issues as well as new

0:11:40.280 --> 0:11:43.840
<v Speaker 2>technologies and climate change. Will have full coverage across Bloomberg

0:11:43.960 --> 0:11:46.560
<v Speaker 2>Radio and television throughout the event. Our editor at large,

0:11:46.559 --> 0:11:48.400
<v Speaker 2>Francin and Lacort, will be there speaking to some of

0:11:48.400 --> 0:11:51.800
<v Speaker 2>the big names. And she's with me now, fran This is,

0:11:51.800 --> 0:11:54.319
<v Speaker 2>of course, in theory an economic event, but our economic

0:11:54.400 --> 0:11:57.800
<v Speaker 2>issues this year in Davos being overshadowed by things like

0:11:57.920 --> 0:11:59.920
<v Speaker 2>the wars in the Middle East and in Ukraine.

0:12:00.080 --> 0:12:02.160
<v Speaker 9>One hundred percent. I think there are mainly three themes,

0:12:02.160 --> 0:12:04.839
<v Speaker 9>and I know it's always mean. The themes that the

0:12:04.880 --> 0:12:08.520
<v Speaker 9>World Economic Form pick are always I guess the you know,

0:12:09.400 --> 0:12:13.480
<v Speaker 9>building too. We make jokes about it. Because some of

0:12:13.480 --> 0:12:16.760
<v Speaker 9>the predictions don't end up actually being the right ones.

0:12:16.800 --> 0:12:18.720
<v Speaker 9>But rebuilding trust. I think there are probably focused on

0:12:18.760 --> 0:12:21.760
<v Speaker 9>three things. It is monetary, so it's what's happening with

0:12:21.800 --> 0:12:24.080
<v Speaker 9>interest rates, Do we have a big pivot from central banks?

0:12:24.120 --> 0:12:27.160
<v Speaker 9>What does to inflation and therefore does that help and

0:12:27.200 --> 0:12:29.880
<v Speaker 9>support governments and companies. Remember twenty twenty three was meant

0:12:29.880 --> 0:12:31.959
<v Speaker 9>to be the wash out year. We started the year

0:12:32.000 --> 0:12:35.160
<v Speaker 9>by saying companies will go bus countries will get into

0:12:35.400 --> 0:12:38.680
<v Speaker 9>very very large debt situations, and it hasn't really played

0:12:38.679 --> 0:12:41.720
<v Speaker 9>out yet. The second thing, the World Economic Form participants.

0:12:41.760 --> 0:12:44.240
<v Speaker 9>I think we'll really focus on is AI and we're

0:12:44.240 --> 0:12:46.760
<v Speaker 9>expecting number of papers from the World Economic Forum to

0:12:46.760 --> 0:12:50.920
<v Speaker 9>trying to figure out exactly how you protect yourself for disinformation,

0:12:51.280 --> 0:12:54.360
<v Speaker 9>for fake news, especially in an election year. And now

0:12:54.360 --> 0:12:56.079
<v Speaker 9>I'm not only talking about the US. We have the

0:12:56.080 --> 0:12:59.320
<v Speaker 9>European Parliament. We have I think over fifty percent of

0:12:59.320 --> 0:13:01.079
<v Speaker 9>world GDP going to the poll, so a lot of

0:13:01.120 --> 0:13:03.160
<v Speaker 9>the folks will be on that. And then third one

0:13:03.200 --> 0:13:05.920
<v Speaker 9>one hundred percent will be geopolitics. So we have two

0:13:06.000 --> 0:13:10.440
<v Speaker 9>active wars Ukraine, the one between Israel and Hamas, and

0:13:10.520 --> 0:13:13.200
<v Speaker 9>there's you know, concerns that, of course, the Middle East

0:13:13.200 --> 0:13:16.960
<v Speaker 9>tensions spill over, so I think a lot of the

0:13:17.000 --> 0:13:19.440
<v Speaker 9>sessions and the conversations will be around that and what

0:13:19.480 --> 0:13:20.680
<v Speaker 9>it means for the world economy.

0:13:20.760 --> 0:13:23.439
<v Speaker 2>Now, every year of the World's Economic Forum publishers, it's Global

0:13:23.520 --> 0:13:26.559
<v Speaker 2>Risks reports. Top of the list you mentioned, they're misinformation

0:13:26.640 --> 0:13:29.240
<v Speaker 2>and disinformation. This year you've been speaking to the forums

0:13:29.240 --> 0:13:32.319
<v Speaker 2>Managing director Sadi is Ahiti about this. Let's take a listen.

0:13:32.760 --> 0:13:37.200
<v Speaker 10>In the two year timeframe, miss and disinformation number one risk.

0:13:37.400 --> 0:13:39.840
<v Speaker 10>So we put together the views of fifteen hundred experts

0:13:39.840 --> 0:13:43.079
<v Speaker 10>and that's what they're most worried about, very closely followed

0:13:43.080 --> 0:13:47.520
<v Speaker 10>by extreme weather, societal polarization, inflation. These are some of

0:13:47.520 --> 0:13:50.400
<v Speaker 10>the topics that are top of mind. But ten years out,

0:13:50.840 --> 0:13:54.120
<v Speaker 10>four top risks all about the environment, including for the

0:13:54.120 --> 0:13:58.880
<v Speaker 10>first time crossing tipping points for the Earth systems. That's

0:13:58.880 --> 0:14:01.000
<v Speaker 10>something that is top of mind, and I think the

0:14:01.000 --> 0:14:03.719
<v Speaker 10>predictions that that could happen in ten years and how

0:14:03.760 --> 0:14:05.040
<v Speaker 10>severe that could be.

0:14:05.120 --> 0:14:09.120
<v Speaker 9>Deeply concerning disinformation, fake news is extremely worrying. In an

0:14:09.120 --> 0:14:13.360
<v Speaker 9>election year, we have a large percentage of world GDP

0:14:13.559 --> 0:14:16.200
<v Speaker 9>actually going to the polls this year, how worried are

0:14:16.240 --> 0:14:17.200
<v Speaker 9>you about the US election?

0:14:17.960 --> 0:14:21.240
<v Speaker 10>I mean, depending on how you count it, major economies

0:14:21.280 --> 0:14:25.640
<v Speaker 10>with large populations, India, the US are going into these elections.

0:14:26.040 --> 0:14:29.280
<v Speaker 10>And what we found is that at each country level,

0:14:29.400 --> 0:14:32.280
<v Speaker 10>in addition to the global risk around miss and disinformation,

0:14:32.680 --> 0:14:36.000
<v Speaker 10>it's usually ranked very high among the top five risks

0:14:36.040 --> 0:14:39.400
<v Speaker 10>around the world, as is concerns about ourn economic downturn.

0:14:39.520 --> 0:14:42.680
<v Speaker 10>So what we're thinking is when these two things come together,

0:14:42.760 --> 0:14:45.800
<v Speaker 10>the economic hardship being faced by many people and the

0:14:45.920 --> 0:14:49.360
<v Speaker 10>rise of synthetic content, combined with going into an election

0:14:49.440 --> 0:14:51.800
<v Speaker 10>year where people get to make decisions about who's going

0:14:51.800 --> 0:14:54.400
<v Speaker 10>to be leading them, that together can be a very

0:14:54.440 --> 0:14:58.000
<v Speaker 10>potent mix. And in particular, if some of those views

0:14:58.040 --> 0:15:01.800
<v Speaker 10>start spilling over into very different perceptions of reality when

0:15:01.840 --> 0:15:05.280
<v Speaker 10>it comes to health, when it comes to what people

0:15:05.320 --> 0:15:08.280
<v Speaker 10>are thinking about education, what people think about specific people,

0:15:08.560 --> 0:15:10.560
<v Speaker 10>who then becomes the owner of the truth?

0:15:11.360 --> 0:15:13.520
<v Speaker 9>And again, do you have a breakdown of Actually this

0:15:13.600 --> 0:15:17.000
<v Speaker 9>misinformation is its state actors, and Russia has been involved

0:15:17.000 --> 0:15:18.840
<v Speaker 9>in the past in US elections.

0:15:18.640 --> 0:15:21.600
<v Speaker 10>So we're seeing a concern that this could be become

0:15:21.680 --> 0:15:25.240
<v Speaker 10>much more pervasive. To some extent, it's almost easier to

0:15:25.360 --> 0:15:28.960
<v Speaker 10>track some of that state sponsored disinformation and misinformation. But

0:15:29.160 --> 0:15:31.880
<v Speaker 10>now at some point that starts spilling over and it

0:15:31.920 --> 0:15:36.960
<v Speaker 10>becomes very difficult to track, especially without tracking systems, water

0:15:37.040 --> 0:15:41.080
<v Speaker 10>marking systems, and especially without the public being well educated

0:15:41.240 --> 0:15:44.640
<v Speaker 10>about the risks of synthetic content and especially when that

0:15:44.840 --> 0:15:45.840
<v Speaker 10>is fake news.

0:15:46.400 --> 0:15:49.520
<v Speaker 9>Does that have a clear impact on the economy, As

0:15:49.560 --> 0:15:52.160
<v Speaker 9>I guess, chief executives don't want to spend because they

0:15:52.160 --> 0:15:54.200
<v Speaker 9>don't know what pans out in the next twelve months.

0:15:54.640 --> 0:15:58.320
<v Speaker 10>So there's a lot of economic uncertainty. We're seeing a

0:15:58.440 --> 0:16:01.440
<v Speaker 10>risk of the lack of economic opportunity, we're seeing inflation

0:16:01.560 --> 0:16:03.680
<v Speaker 10>in the top ten or we're seeing a lot of

0:16:03.720 --> 0:16:06.560
<v Speaker 10>concerns around what exactly happens. And that's because of two

0:16:06.640 --> 0:16:11.040
<v Speaker 10>different situations. One is, of course, there continues to be

0:16:11.160 --> 0:16:14.960
<v Speaker 10>uncertainty as to what the policy outlook will be. Yes,

0:16:15.080 --> 0:16:18.720
<v Speaker 10>we are starting to tend towards a softer landing, but

0:16:18.840 --> 0:16:21.120
<v Speaker 10>at the same time, I think there are new pressures

0:16:21.120 --> 0:16:23.960
<v Speaker 10>coming in, supply side pressures that are coming in. There's

0:16:24.000 --> 0:16:27.880
<v Speaker 10>geopolitical risks out there and that may change what happens

0:16:27.880 --> 0:16:29.920
<v Speaker 10>over the course of the coming year. And then there's

0:16:29.960 --> 0:16:32.240
<v Speaker 10>a longer term economic risk and that has a lot

0:16:32.280 --> 0:16:36.040
<v Speaker 10>more to do with the divergence between developed and developing economies,

0:16:36.080 --> 0:16:37.440
<v Speaker 10>and that also has a lot to do with the

0:16:37.440 --> 0:16:41.560
<v Speaker 10>divergence between high income people and low income people across

0:16:41.600 --> 0:16:42.320
<v Speaker 10>all countries.

0:16:42.440 --> 0:16:45.640
<v Speaker 2>That is the World's Economic Forums. Sadiaz Ahdi, managing director there,

0:16:45.680 --> 0:16:48.560
<v Speaker 2>speaking to Francine Lack where Francine is still with us Fan.

0:16:48.600 --> 0:16:50.880
<v Speaker 2>You mentioned there the fact that it's a big election

0:16:51.000 --> 0:16:53.960
<v Speaker 2>year globally, with all those different elections happening. Does that

0:16:54.040 --> 0:16:57.440
<v Speaker 2>make the conversations in Davos different if some of those

0:16:57.480 --> 0:16:59.320
<v Speaker 2>world leaders who are going to be attending, we're also

0:16:59.360 --> 0:17:00.800
<v Speaker 2>going to be face the electors.

0:17:01.320 --> 0:17:03.040
<v Speaker 9>I think so. I think if you look at the

0:17:03.080 --> 0:17:06.120
<v Speaker 9>world economy and what we've been speaking with a number

0:17:06.200 --> 0:17:08.800
<v Speaker 9>of participants in the markets, is that actually an election year,

0:17:08.920 --> 0:17:12.120
<v Speaker 9>probably the incumbent will spend a lot more So if

0:17:12.119 --> 0:17:13.800
<v Speaker 9>you look at the economy, it's probably going to be

0:17:13.880 --> 0:17:16.639
<v Speaker 9>more resilient this year had we not had elections, because

0:17:16.680 --> 0:17:18.280
<v Speaker 9>no one wants to go into an election with a

0:17:18.320 --> 0:17:19.040
<v Speaker 9>week economy.

0:17:19.119 --> 0:17:19.199
<v Speaker 6>Now.

0:17:19.280 --> 0:17:21.479
<v Speaker 9>I know it's a very simplistic way of looking at it,

0:17:21.560 --> 0:17:25.040
<v Speaker 9>but it's probably something that gives us a little bit

0:17:25.080 --> 0:17:28.960
<v Speaker 9>of support for the outlook for a lot of these countries.

0:17:29.200 --> 0:17:33.280
<v Speaker 9>Longer term, it's a really question mark about what happens.

0:17:33.280 --> 0:17:34.919
<v Speaker 9>So some of the policies in place. It can be

0:17:34.920 --> 0:17:37.320
<v Speaker 9>here in the UK, it could of course be the

0:17:37.440 --> 0:17:41.439
<v Speaker 9>US which changes everything in our relationship with China, climate change,

0:17:41.560 --> 0:17:44.840
<v Speaker 9>some of the support that a potential for example, President

0:17:44.880 --> 0:17:48.120
<v Speaker 9>Trump would give to companies. But if you also listened

0:17:48.160 --> 0:17:50.600
<v Speaker 9>to what Zadia was saying about the top ten risks,

0:17:50.640 --> 0:17:53.000
<v Speaker 9>and I don't think we should underestimate this Stephen, is

0:17:53.040 --> 0:17:55.520
<v Speaker 9>that if you look at the two year horizon, so

0:17:55.840 --> 0:17:59.040
<v Speaker 9>people that they surveyed worry about misinformation, extreme weather events,

0:17:59.160 --> 0:18:04.520
<v Speaker 9>social paroles, cybersecurity. Ten years, it's critical changes to earth systems, bidiversity,

0:18:04.560 --> 0:18:06.960
<v Speaker 9>extreme weather. But if you worry about what's happening in

0:18:06.960 --> 0:18:09.120
<v Speaker 9>the next two years, and if you have bigger concerns

0:18:09.160 --> 0:18:11.800
<v Speaker 9>that are different ten years, then you don't address the

0:18:11.840 --> 0:18:14.879
<v Speaker 9>longer term concerns. So there's also a real worry of

0:18:14.960 --> 0:18:18.720
<v Speaker 9>everyone splitting and not really get anything done to managing

0:18:18.760 --> 0:18:19.680
<v Speaker 9>the longer term risks.

0:18:19.760 --> 0:18:21.840
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and it's part of the sort of dilemma that

0:18:21.880 --> 0:18:24.200
<v Speaker 2>faces Davos every year is that often there are big

0:18:24.240 --> 0:18:26.199
<v Speaker 2>long term issues that need to be talked about, but

0:18:26.240 --> 0:18:28.359
<v Speaker 2>everyone's much more focused on what's happening in the coming

0:18:28.400 --> 0:18:31.520
<v Speaker 2>months or the coming weeks as well. Much is made

0:18:31.600 --> 0:18:34.160
<v Speaker 2>every year of the politicians who do and don't go

0:18:34.200 --> 0:18:36.480
<v Speaker 2>to the World Economic Forum. Here in the UK, we

0:18:36.520 --> 0:18:39.240
<v Speaker 2>had the opposition labor leader Career Starmer being criticized for

0:18:39.320 --> 0:18:42.159
<v Speaker 2>attending last year. Is it a bad look any year?

0:18:42.240 --> 0:18:44.480
<v Speaker 2>What we're talking about rebuilding trust. If you go to

0:18:44.560 --> 0:18:46.360
<v Speaker 2>Davos or if you don't go, I.

0:18:46.280 --> 0:18:48.919
<v Speaker 9>Think it depends. I think it depends on cultural sensitivities

0:18:49.080 --> 0:18:51.639
<v Speaker 9>of the country. I think if you're an emerging economy,

0:18:52.480 --> 0:18:54.879
<v Speaker 9>showing up in Davos and getting deals done on trade

0:18:55.200 --> 0:18:57.720
<v Speaker 9>is a good thing. If you're Rishie Sunac and you're

0:18:57.760 --> 0:19:00.520
<v Speaker 9>married to a billionaire, it's probably not a good look,

0:19:00.560 --> 0:19:02.720
<v Speaker 9>which is why he stayed away last year. He's not

0:19:02.800 --> 0:19:05.600
<v Speaker 9>expected to show up this year as well. If you're

0:19:05.840 --> 0:19:09.040
<v Speaker 9>you know, mister Zelenski, President of Ukraine, then it probably

0:19:09.080 --> 0:19:11.720
<v Speaker 9>would be a good look, whether it's by video or

0:19:11.760 --> 0:19:13.720
<v Speaker 9>in person, to show up to make sure that people

0:19:13.760 --> 0:19:16.439
<v Speaker 9>don't forget Ukraine. So I think it's very personal and

0:19:16.480 --> 0:19:18.720
<v Speaker 9>whether you show up or not really gives you a

0:19:18.720 --> 0:19:21.000
<v Speaker 9>glimpse actually of what your country is facing or your

0:19:21.000 --> 0:19:21.720
<v Speaker 9>company is facing.

0:19:21.840 --> 0:19:23.640
<v Speaker 2>Okay, I'm looking forward to hearing the answers to those

0:19:23.720 --> 0:19:25.840
<v Speaker 2>questions as well. Our editor at large, Fancy and Laqua

0:19:26.000 --> 0:19:29.040
<v Speaker 2>full coverage from the World Economic Forum in Davos throughout

0:19:29.080 --> 0:19:32.000
<v Speaker 2>the week. Here a call across Bloomberg Radio, television, and

0:19:32.040 --> 0:19:34.600
<v Speaker 2>of course online on the terminal as well. I'm Stephen

0:19:34.600 --> 0:19:37.080
<v Speaker 2>Carolyn London. You can catch us every weekday morning here

0:19:37.080 --> 0:19:39.560
<v Speaker 2>for Bloomberg Daybreak here at beginning at six am in

0:19:39.600 --> 0:19:41.679
<v Speaker 2>London and one am on Wall Street.

0:19:41.920 --> 0:19:44.360
<v Speaker 1>Tom, thank you, Steven, and coming up here on Bloomberg

0:19:44.400 --> 0:19:46.800
<v Speaker 1>day Break weekend, we take a look at the geopolitical

0:19:46.840 --> 0:19:52.640
<v Speaker 1>machinations surrounding the business of computer chip manufacturing. I'm Tom Busby,

0:19:52.720 --> 0:20:05.959
<v Speaker 1>and this is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg day Break Weekend,

0:20:05.960 --> 0:20:08.280
<v Speaker 1>our global look ahead at the top stories for investors

0:20:08.280 --> 0:20:10.720
<v Speaker 1>in the coming week. I'm Tom Busby in New York.

0:20:11.280 --> 0:20:15.640
<v Speaker 1>The incredibly complex, high stakes business of making semiconductors has

0:20:15.640 --> 0:20:18.880
<v Speaker 1>always been a battle of corporate giants. Now it's also

0:20:18.920 --> 0:20:23.320
<v Speaker 1>a race among governments, especially between China, the US and Taiwan,

0:20:23.800 --> 0:20:27.119
<v Speaker 1>with the Taiwan election now underway, an event closely watched

0:20:27.119 --> 0:20:29.280
<v Speaker 1>by China, we take a look at the chip industry

0:20:29.640 --> 0:20:31.840
<v Speaker 1>and how the geopolitics play out.

0:20:32.119 --> 0:20:35.280
<v Speaker 3>Tom will know the full results of the Taiwan election shortly.

0:20:35.560 --> 0:20:37.800
<v Speaker 3>In the meantime, we thought it was a good time

0:20:37.840 --> 0:20:40.280
<v Speaker 3>to take a look at the business climate on the island,

0:20:40.640 --> 0:20:45.240
<v Speaker 3>especially through the prism of TSMC. Taiwan Semi is arguably

0:20:45.440 --> 0:20:48.480
<v Speaker 3>one of the most important companies in the world and

0:20:48.600 --> 0:20:51.240
<v Speaker 3>sits at the nexus of the relationship among the US,

0:20:51.359 --> 0:20:54.840
<v Speaker 3>China and Taiwan. Joining US now to look at TSMC

0:20:55.200 --> 0:20:58.879
<v Speaker 3>and possibly the up and coming challenge from Huawei Technologies

0:20:59.240 --> 0:21:04.000
<v Speaker 3>is Bloomberg's savov Tech editor here in Hong Kong, so Vlad.

0:21:04.160 --> 0:21:09.200
<v Speaker 3>Recently we learned that Huawei Technology's latest laptop was running

0:21:09.200 --> 0:21:12.240
<v Speaker 3>on a chip made by TSMC. This was a five

0:21:12.359 --> 0:21:16.399
<v Speaker 3>nanimeter chip and it was actually made by TSMC instead

0:21:16.400 --> 0:21:18.840
<v Speaker 3>of Huawei, and that seemed to head off some of

0:21:18.880 --> 0:21:22.920
<v Speaker 3>the talk about a Chinese technological breakthrough. How much did

0:21:22.960 --> 0:21:26.359
<v Speaker 3>that revelation sort of mean in lowering the temperature in

0:21:26.400 --> 0:21:29.399
<v Speaker 3>the relationship between US and China and chips.

0:21:29.240 --> 0:21:31.560
<v Speaker 11>Well, a good way to think about it is if

0:21:31.560 --> 0:21:34.320
<v Speaker 11>it wasn't the case, if it was Huawei actually making

0:21:34.320 --> 0:21:36.800
<v Speaker 11>five and animated chips. This would be the story we're

0:21:36.800 --> 0:21:40.719
<v Speaker 11>we're talking about for the inside January. National Security Adviser

0:21:40.800 --> 0:21:46.199
<v Speaker 11>Jake Sullivan would have dropped everything else. He's got a

0:21:46.320 --> 0:21:48.680
<v Speaker 11>very busy agenda, but he would have dropped everything else

0:21:48.680 --> 0:21:51.879
<v Speaker 11>because this would have been a breakthrough that would have

0:21:51.880 --> 0:21:54.800
<v Speaker 11>been entirely unforeseen. When you think about the sanctions that

0:21:54.840 --> 0:21:57.679
<v Speaker 11>the US is imposed on Chinese chip makers, this was

0:21:57.720 --> 0:21:59.960
<v Speaker 11>what they were trying to prevent, so you can say

0:22:00.080 --> 0:22:02.119
<v Speaker 11>they've been effective. But the reason we're talking about this

0:22:02.160 --> 0:22:04.640
<v Speaker 11>in the first place is because of Huawei seven nanimeter,

0:22:04.760 --> 0:22:08.960
<v Speaker 11>a generation behind breakthrough that happened in August last year

0:22:09.280 --> 0:22:11.400
<v Speaker 11>that was also unforeseen and unexpected.

0:22:12.320 --> 0:22:14.040
<v Speaker 8>It's worth bearing in mind again.

0:22:13.920 --> 0:22:16.360
<v Speaker 11>That this chip that Huawei would have stuck part from

0:22:16.359 --> 0:22:19.480
<v Speaker 11>TSMC way back in twenty twenty is still one or

0:22:19.480 --> 0:22:22.280
<v Speaker 11>two generations ahead of what Huawei is capable of doing.

0:22:22.600 --> 0:22:27.040
<v Speaker 11>Where China and manufacturers such a Smick, which is Huawe's

0:22:27.400 --> 0:22:31.199
<v Speaker 11>domestic partner, our positioned at the moment. So what we

0:22:31.200 --> 0:22:36.120
<v Speaker 11>can really say is that Huawei is certainly trying. There

0:22:36.119 --> 0:22:38.600
<v Speaker 11>are a number of voices, including a video one of

0:22:39.760 --> 0:22:43.200
<v Speaker 11>TSMC's biggest customers that say that Huawei and a whole

0:22:43.200 --> 0:22:47.760
<v Speaker 11>bunch of China mainline startups are going to be legitimate competitors.

0:22:47.960 --> 0:22:49.919
<v Speaker 11>But we haven't seen the evidence this would have been

0:22:49.960 --> 0:22:51.119
<v Speaker 11>it it didn't happen.

0:22:51.640 --> 0:22:53.879
<v Speaker 3>Let me ask a question that may sound political, but

0:22:53.960 --> 0:22:57.479
<v Speaker 3>it's not really. The sanctions that are in place by

0:22:57.480 --> 0:23:00.879
<v Speaker 3>the US, is this slowing down the develop and Bismic

0:23:01.080 --> 0:23:04.520
<v Speaker 3>and by Juawei and others, or in a sense, is

0:23:04.560 --> 0:23:08.040
<v Speaker 3>it actually speeding it up because now in China domestically

0:23:08.280 --> 0:23:09.200
<v Speaker 3>they know they need this.

0:23:10.000 --> 0:23:14.280
<v Speaker 11>Well, absolutely, it's political, but I keep saying every tech

0:23:14.320 --> 0:23:17.440
<v Speaker 11>story nowadays a political story. Every political story has attach angle,

0:23:17.560 --> 0:23:20.480
<v Speaker 11>So of course it is. I think the answer is

0:23:20.560 --> 0:23:24.240
<v Speaker 11>yes to both aspects of your question. It has categorically

0:23:24.280 --> 0:23:29.240
<v Speaker 11>slowed down Chinese domestic chip making. You have these key

0:23:30.240 --> 0:23:33.240
<v Speaker 11>machines which are bus sized and they cost hundreds of

0:23:33.320 --> 0:23:37.640
<v Speaker 11>thousands millions of dollars each made by ASML in the Netherlands.

0:23:38.040 --> 0:23:42.240
<v Speaker 11>Because of US and Dutch relations, SMO doesn't ship those

0:23:42.800 --> 0:23:46.520
<v Speaker 11>super advanced machines into China. They are the effectively the

0:23:46.560 --> 0:23:49.600
<v Speaker 11>gateway to get into five ninimeters and beyond. TSMC has

0:23:49.640 --> 0:23:51.760
<v Speaker 11>a bunch of them, is spent tens of billions of

0:23:51.800 --> 0:23:54.800
<v Speaker 11>dollars acquiring them. They can't get into China without them.

0:23:55.400 --> 0:23:59.320
<v Speaker 11>China has to invent effectively alternative methods to get to

0:23:59.320 --> 0:24:00.240
<v Speaker 11>those super advice.

0:24:00.040 --> 0:24:02.840
<v Speaker 8>On manufacturing techniques.

0:24:03.119 --> 0:24:05.359
<v Speaker 11>Now that being said again to the latter aspect of

0:24:05.440 --> 0:24:11.960
<v Speaker 11>your question, because China, Beijing, its government sees no breakthrough,

0:24:12.080 --> 0:24:16.280
<v Speaker 11>no path to coming to terms and acquiring those machines

0:24:16.880 --> 0:24:21.400
<v Speaker 11>in straightforward fashion, it is pouring money resources. Like I say,

0:24:21.440 --> 0:24:25.119
<v Speaker 11>all these startups are effectively state back startups to again

0:24:25.200 --> 0:24:28.800
<v Speaker 11>invent its way out of its issue or maybe come

0:24:28.880 --> 0:24:30.880
<v Speaker 11>up with more inventive ways of acquiring the machines.

0:24:31.720 --> 0:24:34.680
<v Speaker 3>Can these companies in China catch up or will they

0:24:34.760 --> 0:24:37.879
<v Speaker 3>always be one or two generations behind?

0:24:38.560 --> 0:24:41.560
<v Speaker 11>Well, if you ask the US, they want them a

0:24:41.640 --> 0:24:44.639
<v Speaker 11>couple of generations behind. That's effective their entire agenda. They

0:24:44.640 --> 0:24:48.440
<v Speaker 11>don't want to shut down Chinese tech manufacturing altogether. They

0:24:48.480 --> 0:24:51.600
<v Speaker 11>have repeatedly said that it's tailored sanctions that they have

0:24:51.760 --> 0:24:55.040
<v Speaker 11>to prevent China's military from acquiring advanced tech. So if

0:24:55.119 --> 0:24:58.760
<v Speaker 11>it's two three generations behind, they're comfortable with that. Will

0:24:58.800 --> 0:25:01.359
<v Speaker 11>they make I mean effectively the answer to your question

0:25:01.440 --> 0:25:04.160
<v Speaker 11>is we'll try to make a breakthrough that nobody is expecting.

0:25:04.680 --> 0:25:07.440
<v Speaker 11>We saw some of that again last year from Huawei.

0:25:07.680 --> 0:25:12.200
<v Speaker 11>Will they repeat defeat? It's open to a member of guesswork.

0:25:12.200 --> 0:25:12.680
<v Speaker 8>I suppose.

0:25:12.960 --> 0:25:16.959
<v Speaker 3>In recent days, TSMC gave us its fourth quarter revenue.

0:25:17.040 --> 0:25:20.200
<v Speaker 3>Some of these numbers were pretty decent. They did beat

0:25:20.440 --> 0:25:24.280
<v Speaker 3>estimates of a decline, but there's obviously a little bit

0:25:24.280 --> 0:25:27.320
<v Speaker 3>of a slow path ahead. What they said was that

0:25:27.359 --> 0:25:32.879
<v Speaker 3>demand from AI players offset the slower smartphone and laptop

0:25:33.000 --> 0:25:36.879
<v Speaker 3>chip sales. Where are we now in terms of full

0:25:36.920 --> 0:25:39.399
<v Speaker 3>recovery by the chip makers, including TSMC.

0:25:40.119 --> 0:25:41.840
<v Speaker 11>Well, one of the things that we did over the

0:25:41.840 --> 0:25:44.360
<v Speaker 11>course of the year on the terminal is we tracked

0:25:44.480 --> 0:25:48.560
<v Speaker 11>Taiwanese supplies to Apple, surely the most important tech company

0:25:48.600 --> 0:25:51.960
<v Speaker 11>in the world, and every month it was red figures.

0:25:52.040 --> 0:25:55.320
<v Speaker 11>It's TSMC, Fox gone, et cetera. It was always down

0:25:55.359 --> 0:25:57.680
<v Speaker 11>on the prior year's results. So just having a quarter

0:25:57.840 --> 0:25:59.720
<v Speaker 11>that was flat that was the same as the prior

0:25:59.800 --> 0:26:05.080
<v Speaker 11>year is heading in the right direction. TSMC executives, including

0:26:05.160 --> 0:26:07.919
<v Speaker 11>CEO cc Way, have said that they expect to rebound

0:26:07.920 --> 0:26:10.840
<v Speaker 11>in twenty twenty four. Canna lists, one of the market

0:26:10.960 --> 0:26:13.639
<v Speaker 11>research companies. They said that in the final quarter of

0:26:13.680 --> 0:26:16.960
<v Speaker 11>the year, the PC market and laptop market were up

0:26:17.080 --> 0:26:20.080
<v Speaker 11>just by a couple of percentage points, like three percent altogether,

0:26:20.160 --> 0:26:24.119
<v Speaker 11>But again, comparing that to double digit declines over the

0:26:24.160 --> 0:26:27.720
<v Speaker 11>previous several months, that's a big upside. So all of

0:26:27.760 --> 0:26:31.960
<v Speaker 11>it seems to point toward an improvement in consumer demand.

0:26:32.400 --> 0:26:34.280
<v Speaker 11>In Ventory glots that used to exist at the start

0:26:34.280 --> 0:26:36.080
<v Speaker 11>of the year I have gone away, so things are

0:26:36.080 --> 0:26:36.520
<v Speaker 11>looking up.

0:26:37.080 --> 0:26:40.919
<v Speaker 3>You referred earlier to the Huawei May sixty pro and

0:26:40.960 --> 0:26:44.680
<v Speaker 3>the fact that it had a seven nanometer processor in it.

0:26:45.359 --> 0:26:48.199
<v Speaker 3>What sort of progress is Smick making in selling that

0:26:48.480 --> 0:26:49.399
<v Speaker 3>outside of China.

0:26:50.480 --> 0:26:53.679
<v Speaker 11>Well, I think whatever Snick is able to make in

0:26:53.760 --> 0:26:57.800
<v Speaker 11>terms of manufacturing that particular chip, it's probably all going Huawei.

0:26:57.880 --> 0:27:01.399
<v Speaker 11>When we talk to analysts looking at teas prospects. It

0:27:01.440 --> 0:27:04.639
<v Speaker 11>has already taken market share back from Apple in the

0:27:04.680 --> 0:27:08.360
<v Speaker 11>iPhone in mainland China. One of the topics that might

0:27:08.400 --> 0:27:10.840
<v Speaker 11>actually intensify in importance over the course of this year

0:27:11.040 --> 0:27:15.600
<v Speaker 11>is the iPhone's fate in China, which has been increasingly down.

0:27:16.680 --> 0:27:18.560
<v Speaker 11>It was bad to begin with, it was underwhelming, and

0:27:18.560 --> 0:27:21.320
<v Speaker 11>then it got worse. So Huawei is reclaiming that market

0:27:21.320 --> 0:27:23.240
<v Speaker 11>share but when we talk to analysts, they say that

0:27:23.359 --> 0:27:26.600
<v Speaker 11>its limitation, if anything, on shipments is the amount of

0:27:26.800 --> 0:27:28.280
<v Speaker 11>chips and devices that it can produce.

0:27:29.320 --> 0:27:32.479
<v Speaker 3>So when we look at the diminishing sales of Apple,

0:27:32.720 --> 0:27:35.080
<v Speaker 3>who's gaining the lion's share of that in China?

0:27:35.840 --> 0:27:37.240
<v Speaker 8>Right as I say it is Huawei.

0:27:37.280 --> 0:27:39.520
<v Speaker 11>Huawei is number one, But then you have Honor, which

0:27:39.560 --> 0:27:43.240
<v Speaker 11>is a company that spun out of Huawei in twenty twenty.

0:27:43.280 --> 0:27:45.960
<v Speaker 11>It's an independent company. It's pursuing an IPO probably in

0:27:46.040 --> 0:27:48.240
<v Speaker 11>the next year or so. That's what the company has said.

0:27:48.840 --> 0:27:50.840
<v Speaker 11>Shaomi has done a really good job with over the

0:27:50.840 --> 0:27:54.840
<v Speaker 11>past few months. The company is Vivo and Appo, who

0:27:54.960 --> 0:27:56.280
<v Speaker 11>used to be number one.

0:27:56.240 --> 0:27:56.720
<v Speaker 8>Two, three.

0:27:57.000 --> 0:28:01.040
<v Speaker 11>Every quarter they would shift places. We are actually struggling.

0:28:01.720 --> 0:28:06.760
<v Speaker 11>The answer really is that the Chinese smallphone manufacturing ecosystem

0:28:06.880 --> 0:28:10.600
<v Speaker 11>is kind of shifting positions show me and huilbe I

0:28:10.600 --> 0:28:12.760
<v Speaker 11>would say in the strongest position at the moment, and

0:28:12.800 --> 0:28:16.360
<v Speaker 11>even worth mentioning, Samsung, which has had a tiny share

0:28:16.400 --> 0:28:18.600
<v Speaker 11>of the Chinese market for a long time, is making

0:28:18.640 --> 0:28:20.000
<v Speaker 11>efforts making in roads as well.

0:28:20.400 --> 0:28:23.119
<v Speaker 3>Lad outside of China, you mentioned Samsung, what are the

0:28:23.160 --> 0:28:24.680
<v Speaker 3>prospects for its latest phone?

0:28:25.440 --> 0:28:28.879
<v Speaker 11>Well, it's promising us the first AI phone, which is

0:28:29.080 --> 0:28:31.440
<v Speaker 11>a promise that we've heard actually for years. At this point,

0:28:32.359 --> 0:28:34.640
<v Speaker 11>the whole idea of branding your phone as an AI

0:28:34.720 --> 0:28:37.640
<v Speaker 11>device is going to be the theme of twenty twenty

0:28:37.680 --> 0:28:41.479
<v Speaker 11>four across every smartphone manufacturer, and I'm looking forward to

0:28:41.520 --> 0:28:45.320
<v Speaker 11>seeing Samsung, which is generally a serious company, try to

0:28:45.440 --> 0:28:46.360
<v Speaker 11>justify that label.

0:28:46.680 --> 0:28:48.720
<v Speaker 8>We can also look forward to Google.

0:28:49.120 --> 0:28:53.680
<v Speaker 11>The designer and provider of the Android software and ecosystem,

0:28:53.720 --> 0:28:56.280
<v Speaker 11>to do more on this front. I expect Google has

0:28:56.320 --> 0:28:59.200
<v Speaker 11>always been a leader in AI. One of the things

0:28:59.200 --> 0:29:01.000
<v Speaker 11>that came out of the Sea Yes Trade show just

0:29:01.080 --> 0:29:04.760
<v Speaker 11>recently is that Google and Samsung announced that they collaborating

0:29:04.840 --> 0:29:07.960
<v Speaker 11>on a quick sharing function, which is effectively the equivalent

0:29:08.000 --> 0:29:09.040
<v Speaker 11>to Apple's ed Drup.

0:29:09.120 --> 0:29:11.480
<v Speaker 3>All right, Lad, thanks so much for joining us. Bloomberg's

0:29:11.520 --> 0:29:14.800
<v Speaker 3>Lad Salvov, tech editor here in Hong Kong. I'm Brian

0:29:14.840 --> 0:29:17.440
<v Speaker 3>Curtis along with Doug Krisner. You can catch us every

0:29:17.520 --> 0:29:20.840
<v Speaker 3>weekday here for Bloomberg day Break Asia, beginning at seven

0:29:20.920 --> 0:29:24.280
<v Speaker 3>am in Hong Kong and six pm on Wall Street.

0:29:24.720 --> 0:29:27.720
<v Speaker 1>Tom Thank you, Brian. Coming up on Bloomberg day Break

0:29:27.720 --> 0:29:31.360
<v Speaker 1>weekend to look ahead to the Iowa Caucuses. I'm Tom

0:29:31.360 --> 0:29:44.160
<v Speaker 1>Busby and this is Bloomberg. I'm Tom Busby in New

0:29:44.240 --> 0:29:46.280
<v Speaker 1>York with your global look ahead at the top stories

0:29:46.280 --> 0:29:49.160
<v Speaker 1>for investors in the coming week. The official start to

0:29:49.200 --> 0:29:53.720
<v Speaker 1>the twenty twenty four GOP presidential nominating process, the Iowa caucuses,

0:29:53.840 --> 0:29:57.120
<v Speaker 1>begins on Monday, with just a handful of candidates on

0:29:57.160 --> 0:29:59.680
<v Speaker 1>the ballot, one of them former president and clear front

0:29:59.720 --> 0:30:03.120
<v Speaker 1>runner Donald Trump. What can we expect to see for more?

0:30:03.240 --> 0:30:05.760
<v Speaker 1>Let's add to our Bloomberg ninety nine one newsroom in

0:30:05.840 --> 0:30:09.400
<v Speaker 1>Washington and Bloomberg Sound On co host Joe Matthew and

0:30:09.520 --> 0:30:10.360
<v Speaker 1>Kaylee Lines.

0:30:10.600 --> 0:30:13.600
<v Speaker 4>Yeah. Tom. We spoke with Kyle Condick of Sabado's Crystal

0:30:13.640 --> 0:30:16.520
<v Speaker 4>Ball at the University of Virginia and started by asking him,

0:30:17.040 --> 0:30:19.720
<v Speaker 4>if we know Trump's probably gonna win in Iowa anyway,

0:30:20.280 --> 0:30:22.160
<v Speaker 4>what kind of margin matters?

0:30:22.560 --> 0:30:26.840
<v Speaker 12>So the Trump campaign has noted accurately that of all

0:30:26.880 --> 0:30:30.160
<v Speaker 12>the you know, contested, you know, non incumbent Republican Iowa

0:30:30.200 --> 0:30:33.160
<v Speaker 12>caucuses and over history, the biggest margin of victory is

0:30:33.680 --> 0:30:36.840
<v Speaker 12>twelve points, and so they're sort of setting the bar like, hey,

0:30:36.920 --> 0:30:39.440
<v Speaker 12>we win by more than twelve points, that's good. I

0:30:39.520 --> 0:30:41.720
<v Speaker 12>personally don't you know if they would buy like thirteen

0:30:41.800 --> 0:30:44.120
<v Speaker 12>or fourteen. I don't think that that's some sort of

0:30:44.200 --> 0:30:46.800
<v Speaker 12>impressive performance given what the polls are showing now, which

0:30:46.840 --> 0:30:49.640
<v Speaker 12>is more like he's up by like thirty points. You know,

0:30:49.880 --> 0:30:52.200
<v Speaker 12>what is the difference between a good performance and a

0:30:52.240 --> 0:30:55.080
<v Speaker 12>bad one? I don't know, maybe that's like forty percent

0:30:55.320 --> 0:30:58.480
<v Speaker 12>or something like that, which actually, you know, given the polls,

0:30:58.480 --> 0:31:01.320
<v Speaker 12>he's consistently but over fifty forty percent would seem maybe

0:31:01.360 --> 0:31:03.720
<v Speaker 12>not that great. So there is you know, there are

0:31:03.800 --> 0:31:06.720
<v Speaker 12>maybe there's maybe a higher bar for Trump to impress

0:31:06.800 --> 0:31:08.640
<v Speaker 12>in Iowa, but if he matches the polls, he will

0:31:08.640 --> 0:31:10.720
<v Speaker 12>have done that. I also think it's probably fair to

0:31:10.760 --> 0:31:14.720
<v Speaker 12>treat Trump differently than you would a normal non incumbent

0:31:14.800 --> 0:31:16.880
<v Speaker 12>race because he has sort of like a quasi incumbent,

0:31:17.120 --> 0:31:19.240
<v Speaker 12>given that he's the you know, he's aiming for a

0:31:19.280 --> 0:31:22.960
<v Speaker 12>third straight Republican presidential nomination and has already served the

0:31:23.000 --> 0:31:25.640
<v Speaker 12>term as president before. So I don't know where I

0:31:25.720 --> 0:31:29.560
<v Speaker 12>put the number necessarily, but you know, just just matching

0:31:29.640 --> 0:31:33.000
<v Speaker 12>or slightly exceeding that historical you know, twelve point margin

0:31:33.400 --> 0:31:36.200
<v Speaker 12>that that probably is not good enough to be impressive.

0:31:36.280 --> 0:31:38.360
<v Speaker 12>And in fact, I think would probably be disappointing if

0:31:38.400 --> 0:31:40.480
<v Speaker 12>it's close to that number. Again, given what the polls saying.

0:31:40.600 --> 0:31:42.760
<v Speaker 13>Well, of course everyone's banking on a surprise in New

0:31:42.760 --> 0:31:45.360
<v Speaker 13>Hampshire because it's New Hampshire. Of course it's not a

0:31:45.400 --> 0:31:48.760
<v Speaker 13>surprise if you're expecting it. But after Chris Christie dropped

0:31:48.800 --> 0:31:52.200
<v Speaker 13>out of the race, Kyle, I wonder your thoughts on

0:31:52.320 --> 0:31:55.440
<v Speaker 13>the impact it could have on Nikki Haley. We've seen

0:31:55.480 --> 0:31:58.560
<v Speaker 13>polls that show Donald Trump and Haley within single digits.

0:31:58.600 --> 0:32:00.960
<v Speaker 13>This would make up the different there. But we also

0:32:01.000 --> 0:32:05.080
<v Speaker 13>heard from Christy himself, hot Mike, she's not up for this,

0:32:05.800 --> 0:32:08.800
<v Speaker 13>She's going to get smoked, which Christie is right.

0:32:09.640 --> 0:32:13.280
<v Speaker 12>Look, I would not be surprised by Haley winning in

0:32:13.360 --> 0:32:16.160
<v Speaker 12>New Hampshire. I think she frankly needs to win New

0:32:16.160 --> 0:32:20.720
<v Speaker 12>Hampshire to really to really justify staying in the contest. Frankly,

0:32:21.440 --> 0:32:23.640
<v Speaker 12>you know, her home state of South Carolina votes like

0:32:23.720 --> 0:32:25.880
<v Speaker 12>a month after New Hampshire, and so you kind of

0:32:25.960 --> 0:32:27.960
<v Speaker 12>enter like a little bit of a dead period. There's

0:32:28.520 --> 0:32:32.560
<v Speaker 12>there are contests in Nevada in early February, but there's

0:32:32.600 --> 0:32:35.160
<v Speaker 12>a caucus that's actually awarding the delegates that Donald Trump's

0:32:35.160 --> 0:32:37.360
<v Speaker 12>probably gonna win easily, and then there's like a beauty

0:32:37.360 --> 0:32:40.080
<v Speaker 12>contest primary that Haley's competing and she's not competing for

0:32:40.120 --> 0:32:43.040
<v Speaker 12>the delegates, which she'll probably win comfortably. I don't know

0:32:43.040 --> 0:32:45.200
<v Speaker 12>what you really do with that. So after New Hampshire,

0:32:45.200 --> 0:32:49.320
<v Speaker 12>the focus will really go go to South Carolina. But again, Haley,

0:32:49.560 --> 0:32:52.040
<v Speaker 12>the coalition Haley is building is kind of kind of

0:32:52.280 --> 0:32:54.240
<v Speaker 12>centered on more moderate voters. You know, a lot of

0:32:54.320 --> 0:32:56.840
<v Speaker 12>independence can cross over and vote in the New Hampshire primary.

0:32:56.840 --> 0:32:59.520
<v Speaker 12>It probably will and probably incline to support a candidate

0:32:59.600 --> 0:33:02.120
<v Speaker 12>like her, particularly with Chris Crusty out of the race.

0:33:03.120 --> 0:33:04.880
<v Speaker 12>You know, if Haley can't win there, and let's say

0:33:04.880 --> 0:33:07.600
<v Speaker 12>Trump wins Iowa and New Hampshire, I don't know if

0:33:07.640 --> 0:33:09.400
<v Speaker 12>there's much of a rationale for anyone else to even

0:33:09.440 --> 0:33:11.560
<v Speaker 12>continue given that. You know, I guess at that point,

0:33:11.600 --> 0:33:14.080
<v Speaker 12>the only real threat that Trump would be some of

0:33:14.120 --> 0:33:16.480
<v Speaker 12>these legal matters he's dealing with. But he would have

0:33:16.800 --> 0:33:19.240
<v Speaker 12>you know, he would have basically stopped DeSantis in Iowa

0:33:19.280 --> 0:33:22.000
<v Speaker 12>and stopped Haley in New Hampshire. But again, I could

0:33:22.000 --> 0:33:25.520
<v Speaker 12>definitely see Haley winning New Hampshire. But that's not enough

0:33:25.560 --> 0:33:27.440
<v Speaker 12>to make this thing a real horse race. I think

0:33:27.560 --> 0:33:31.200
<v Speaker 12>Trump would have to lose South Carolina too in order

0:33:31.240 --> 0:33:33.040
<v Speaker 12>fore Weekness to go on to Super Tuesday and say, hey,

0:33:33.040 --> 0:33:34.160
<v Speaker 12>this thing is really opened up.

0:33:34.280 --> 0:33:38.200
<v Speaker 4>That's Kyle Condick from Savado's Crystal Ball and Tom, the

0:33:38.240 --> 0:33:41.240
<v Speaker 4>twenty twenty four race is really just about to get started.

0:33:41.560 --> 0:33:44.280
<v Speaker 1>Thank you, Kaylee and Joe. And that was Bloomberg Sound

0:33:44.320 --> 0:33:47.240
<v Speaker 1>On co host Joe Matthew and Kaylee Lines reporting from

0:33:47.280 --> 0:33:49.960
<v Speaker 1>our Bloomberg ninety nine one newsroom in Washington, and you

0:33:50.000 --> 0:33:52.680
<v Speaker 1>can hear sound on weekdays one to three pm on

0:33:52.760 --> 0:33:56.240
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Radio and coming up here on Bloomberg day Break Weekend,

0:33:56.320 --> 0:33:59.360
<v Speaker 1>we take a look at the geo political machination surrounding

0:33:59.360 --> 0:34:03.600
<v Speaker 1>the business of computer chip manufacturing. I'm Tom Busby, and

0:34:03.680 --> 0:34:04.840
<v Speaker 1>this is Bloomberg