Speaker 1: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane, along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Farrell and Lisa Abramowitz. Join us each day
Speaker 1: for insight from the best and economics, geopolitics, finance and investment.
Speaker 1: Subscribe to Bloomberg Surveillance on demand on Apple, Spotify and
Speaker 1: anywhere you get your podcasts, and always I'm Bloomberg dot Com,
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business App. A wide
Speaker 1: ranging conversation. Now with a little bit of red on
Speaker 1: the screen. Here features at negative four Carl Weinberg Joints.
Speaker 1: He's chief economists Aday Frequency Economics and Carl, you had
Speaker 1: such a stunning note and it's off our radar. We
Speaker 1: have not mentioned Japan today, but for our American viewers
Speaker 1: and listeners maybe not schooled in this, guys like you say,
Speaker 1: Japan is really really important and the tension point is
Speaker 1: not yield curve control. In their experiment out to ten years,
Speaker 1: it's a dead out past ten years and that is
Speaker 1: deteriorated priced down and dramatic yield up. What does that
Speaker 1: part tend for Japan? Hi, Good morning, Tom, So the
Speaker 1: Bank of Japan has work to do, the end of
Speaker 1: the fiscal year is now just a few weeks away
Speaker 1: March thirty first, and there are substantial capital losses on
Speaker 1: what I'll call the ultralong segment of the JGD market,
Speaker 1: the part where they haven't been trying to control the
Speaker 1: yiel curve. So those yields are up about seventy basis
Speaker 1: points compared to where they were at the end of
Speaker 1: the last fiscal year, and that implies oh between thirty
Speaker 1: and sixty trillion yen worth of capital losses, which are
Speaker 1: big enough to wipe out the balance sheets of a
Speaker 1: lot of the institutions. So the Bank of Japan and
Speaker 1: the Finance Ministry are going to be out there in
Speaker 1: size over the next few weeks buying up this asset.
Speaker 1: Encouraging by the asset, they're going to move the market lower.
Speaker 1: They'll do it, but it'll be quite a challenge for them.
Speaker 1: How close are they, and I don't mean to an
Speaker 1: absolute the bond market, but on a trendline or a
Speaker 1: glide path to owning the bond market. Where is the
Speaker 1: Bank of Japan? Maybe use a baseball analogy. Are they
Speaker 1: in the third inning or the eighth inning of buying
Speaker 1: every bond that's issued in Japan. Well, at the short
Speaker 1: end of the Yale curve between out to ten years,
Speaker 1: they own I think the number is about sixty five
Speaker 1: to seventy percent of the market. And then at the
Speaker 1: ultralong end they own a lot less because their target
Speaker 1: has been to control yields from overnight out to ten years,
Speaker 1: so they still have scope to buy at the ultralong
Speaker 1: end of the market. But yes, you're right, and Bank
Speaker 1: of Japan Governor designatet Uleta said this in testimony the
Speaker 1: other day. The boj can't buy bonds forever and some
Speaker 1: point this has to come to an end. When it does,
Speaker 1: there will be capital losses in the bond market, and yes,
Speaker 1: I think that will imply that will generate some institutional risk.
Speaker 1: The odd monetary experiment of Japan aside, the rest of
Speaker 1: the world is grappling with deeply entrenched inflation, at least
Speaker 1: by all accounts, and what we saw this morning out
Speaker 1: of Europe with respect to Germans nine point three percent
Speaker 1: February CPI read year over year. Carl, you've ascribed to
Speaker 1: this idea that we will see inflation rollover, perhaps at
Speaker 1: prices stabilize at a higher rate. How do you hold
Speaker 1: that conviction if we're just not seeing it in the data.
Speaker 1: You know, let me let me frame my handswer in
Speaker 1: terms of the interview that you just a broadcast with
Speaker 1: mister Noggle. All right, I was so glad to see
Speaker 1: him talk about quantitative tightening. All Right, the inflation adjusted
Speaker 1: money supply in Europe is still four and a half
Speaker 1: percent higher than it ought to be given the current
Speaker 1: level of output in recent trends. So sure, there's too
Speaker 1: much money chasing too few goods, and that's pushing up prices.
Speaker 1: I view this as a price adjustment that will run
Speaker 1: its course when real money supply is deflated back to
Speaker 1: where it should be by a combination of quantitative tightening
Speaker 1: and by rising prices. So we still have more price
Speaker 1: increases to go, but there is an end insight to
Speaker 1: this process. This is not the spiraling inflation that we
Speaker 1: saw in the seventies. I don't think interest rates matter
Speaker 1: nearly as much to the ECB and to the course
Speaker 1: of inflation in Europe as quantitative tightening does. So aside
Speaker 1: from just to understanding the quantitative tightening, which I do
Speaker 1: want to get into, since that is something that's being
Speaker 1: raised by the German Central banker, how much are we
Speaker 1: looking at what you view as an overreaction by central
Speaker 1: banks to something that is perhaps stickier but not inevitably
Speaker 1: protracted and spiraling. Well, I think that they're chasing the
Speaker 1: wrong thing with higher interest rates, which is not to
Speaker 1: say that I don't think this rise in interest rates
Speaker 1: isn't a good thing in the longer run. We've had
Speaker 1: negative real interest rates in Europe since the financial crisis,
Speaker 1: and it's time to straighten that out so that investment
Speaker 1: doesn't get misallocated and so the economy can grow in
Speaker 1: a healthy way. That's a good outcome here. But as
Speaker 1: they move much beyond two hundred basis points or three
Speaker 1: hundred basis points above inflation expectations, it'll become restrictive and
Speaker 1: they'll start to make recession that are already going on
Speaker 1: even worse. Carl, You know, and I could go for
Speaker 1: two hours this morning on your wonderful heritage of Latin America,
Speaker 1: which is falling apart, Argentine pay so, but I really
Speaker 1: got to stay on Europe. Here. A lot of people
Speaker 1: publishing right now and cooling commerce banking modelity to Bono
Speaker 1: over at Pantheon, and Carl, the basic idea is, Look,
Speaker 1: there's EU inflation, and I know our listeners and viewers
Speaker 1: are saying, do we import that what happened? Do we
Speaker 1: bring their inflation at the margin over to give us
Speaker 1: a lesser disinflation? Well, I mean, surely at the margin.
Speaker 1: You know, what happens in Europe does transmit to us
Speaker 1: through trade prices and other forms of arbitrage. But it's
Speaker 1: really quite at the margin. The price increases we're seeing
Speaker 1: in the United States are coming about, in my opinion,
Speaker 1: because we've got excessive cash balances in the United States. Also,
Speaker 1: cash balances are over two trillion dollars higher than where
Speaker 1: they ought to be given trends in the growth of
Speaker 1: the and and until that gets sorted out by a
Speaker 1: one time rise in prices and or by quantitative tightening,
Speaker 1: we're still going to see prices going up here. That's
Speaker 1: that's the main event. That's the show. Tom, Carl, thank
Speaker 1: you so much. Carl Weinberg have frequency economics, senior investment
Speaker 1: strategist at Edward Giants. Let's start with this equity market.
Speaker 1: You like quality growth? What is quality growth? Yeah? Hi, John,
Speaker 1: thanks so much. You know, look, I think we started
Speaker 1: this year looking at a market that was driven by
Speaker 1: better than expected economic data. We saw strong January jobs
Speaker 1: or poor we saw better than expected retail sales, and
Speaker 1: we certainly saw inflation at least towards the back half
Speaker 1: of last year's starting to move lower. But I think
Speaker 1: the trade into what we'd call more cyclical parts of
Speaker 1: the market probably happened too fast, too soon earlier on
Speaker 1: this year. So to your question, as we get through
Speaker 1: this year, we need to see a couple of things
Speaker 1: before we can kind of revisit that recovery playbook or
Speaker 1: that cyclical playbook. We would still need to see one,
Speaker 1: of course, inflation move meaningfully lower. Two, we'd like to
Speaker 1: see the Fed actually step to the sidelines at some point,
Speaker 1: probably middle of this year. And then three, we are
Speaker 1: starting to see earnings being revised meaningfully lower. At this
Speaker 1: point for twenty twenty three, we haven't seen that bottom yet.
Speaker 1: So until those conditions are in place, we'd say probably
Speaker 1: the market is going to take a more defensive tilt.
Speaker 1: We could see continued volatility, but at some point when
Speaker 1: those conditions are met, maybe towards the back half of
Speaker 1: this year, we do think that investors should think about
Speaker 1: diversifying into those more recovery parts of the market. That
Speaker 1: includes quality growth that means growth that is not negative
Speaker 1: earnings yielding, probably not as speculative parts of the market.
Speaker 1: And then of course areas like cyclicals, even parts of
Speaker 1: small caps international interesting as well. So all part of
Speaker 1: a recovery playbook that could happen down the road. Money.
Speaker 1: You've got a wonderful single sentence in your note which
Speaker 1: I totally agree with, which extrap lation right now is
Speaker 1: very dangerous to your net worth if it's an extrapolate
Speaker 1: free two thousand and three, if you have a faith
Speaker 1: to be in the market, how far are you reaching
Speaker 1: over to the next horizon? Are you looking out a year?
Speaker 1: Or dare I say, is the new extrapolation out to
Speaker 1: three years? That's interesting? John and Tom? Sorry, and to
Speaker 1: your point, you can call me Lisa as well. That's happen.
Speaker 1: I love all three of you. So I do think
Speaker 1: January data it's very dangerous, as you noted, to extrapolate
Speaker 1: the strength we saw, certainly in the labor market, certainly
Speaker 1: in the consumer to the rest of the year. You know,
Speaker 1: keep in mind the labor market does tend to be
Speaker 1: one of the lagging indicators. You know, we have leading indicators,
Speaker 1: we have coincident indicators, then we have lagging indicators, and
Speaker 1: the labor market tends not to usually be the first
Speaker 1: shoe to drop, perhaps towards one of the last shoes
Speaker 1: to drop. But to your question on time horizon, we
Speaker 1: do still think a twelve month time horizon, although we've
Speaker 1: been talking about twelve to twenty four months because that's
Speaker 1: really when we can see this cycle go through a
Speaker 1: bottoming process and then markets can then start looking towards
Speaker 1: a recovery process. And we do think, you know, investors
Speaker 1: have a very unique opportunity in the twelve months ahead,
Speaker 1: and that you know, we know beer markets don't happen
Speaker 1: all that often, one every four to five years. But
Speaker 1: in history, the good news is every beer market has
Speaker 1: ended in every beer market has been followed by a
Speaker 1: potential bull market. So we look out twelve to twenty
Speaker 1: four months, we do think investors are position for better
Speaker 1: opportunities ahead. What's the leadership going to be in that
Speaker 1: next bull market? Yeah, it's a great question. And look,
Speaker 1: I think when we look the last ten years or so,
Speaker 1: the ten years after the financial crisis, that was an
Speaker 1: environment that was characterized by bed funds rate towards the
Speaker 1: zero bound. Growth outperformed value for much of that period
Speaker 1: because investors were pushed out the risk spectrum. We think
Speaker 1: about the next ten year curator, so we don't necessarily
Speaker 1: see yields back at the zero pound. Certainly the Fed
Speaker 1: funds rate could go from this five five and a
Speaker 1: half percent back to more neutral territory. But in that environment,
Speaker 1: we do think investors have to consider a balance between
Speaker 1: value and growth and think about a more diversified picture
Speaker 1: and leadership going forward. So that's interesting for the next
Speaker 1: longer term period. I do think over the next twelve
Speaker 1: to twenty four months or so, we think we'll go
Speaker 1: from a more defensively oriented tilts from more offensively oriented tilt.
Speaker 1: As we noted earlier, that recovery playbook does come into
Speaker 1: play when we use this word defense. I discussed this yesterday.
Speaker 1: I'd love your insight on it be hugely valuable. To me.
Speaker 1: Defense is usually just what works when things are bad.
Speaker 1: And last year defense was energy because that's what works
Speaker 1: when things were bad. What is defense in twenty twenty three. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And it's a great point because the energy is not
Speaker 1: usually always the defensive part of the market, but we
Speaker 1: think more traditional defensive sectors healthcare staples in particular, if
Speaker 1: we do go into any sort of economic downturn, slow
Speaker 1: down those sectors which have underperformed thus far this year,
Speaker 1: we may see some you know, some interests and some
Speaker 1: more leadership come out of that more traditional recession proof
Speaker 1: and even to some extent inflation proof part of the market.
Speaker 1: What's interesting, I think this time around, defense is also
Speaker 1: your shorter duration CD one to two year treasury bond
Speaker 1: space as well. Of course, what's notably different this cycle
Speaker 1: is that cash and cash like instruments are yielding anywhere
Speaker 1: from four to five percent plus, and that is an
Speaker 1: environment where, you know, if investors do want to hang out,
Speaker 1: think about a recovery playbook, but in the meanwhile put
Speaker 1: their money in very attractively yielding assets. That is a
Speaker 1: place that we're seeing a lot of defense right now.
Speaker 1: This was great as always. Manahajan of Edward johnsna Mahajan
Speaker 1: on defense and basically, Kesh, let's get to this right now,
Speaker 1: and it's perfect time. He's been digesting this. German Data
Speaker 1: Global Head of macro Strategy, Wells Fargo, Michael Schumacher joins
Speaker 1: us this morning, Mike is well, forget about transitory, but
Speaker 1: are we get are we moving away from disinflation to
Speaker 1: actual price stability or outright inflation very sticky inflation time.
Speaker 1: And I think that's really the challenge. I think the
Speaker 1: point about Germany and core Europe reacting viscerally to inflation
Speaker 1: is excellent talking to clients over many, many years. That's
Speaker 1: always been the big fear in Germany for obvious historical reasons.
Speaker 1: So this just doesn't work. It doesn't fly, whether it's sticky,
Speaker 1: whether it's accelerating, it's just simply too high. Mike. When
Speaker 1: you look at what's taking place in a bond market
Speaker 1: off the back of this, it's been orderly so far
Speaker 1: in places like Italy, and Mike, Lisa, Tom and myself
Speaker 1: we all talked about this moments ago. If you told
Speaker 1: us that this ECB was going to go to four,
Speaker 1: I think we would all have said, the Italian bondmark
Speaker 1: is not going to survive that. Mike, We're going to
Speaker 1: have real trouble. Mike. Have you've been surprised by the
Speaker 1: stability on the periphery and are we getting to a
Speaker 1: point in your mind where things could become a little
Speaker 1: bit more troublesome. It has been surprising John, and I
Speaker 1: think the comments about fragmentation, about the periphery, we haven't
Speaker 1: heard much about them in the last month or two,
Speaker 1: and I think now it's because the ECB has the
Speaker 1: main challenge right in front of it. It simply has
Speaker 1: to get inflation down. It's going to have to tolerate
Speaker 1: some volatility and peripheral spreads. It's a little bit surprising
Speaker 1: as and come up previously, but I think that's why
Speaker 1: it's not There is a larger issue though, Mike. We
Speaker 1: were talking for years about how we couldn't really exit
Speaker 1: the zero rate regime, this negative rate regime without more ripples,
Speaker 1: without more consequences in financial markets. Now we're talking about
Speaker 1: a four or five six percent regime, depending on which
Speaker 1: nation you look at, and we're not seeing the ripples
Speaker 1: in terms of difficulty and borrowing questions around the validity
Speaker 1: of stock valuations in any kind of existential level. What's
Speaker 1: going to cause this to change at a time when
Speaker 1: people seem to be just resetting their understandings of the
Speaker 1: interest rate sensitivity of this global economy. I think it's
Speaker 1: going to happen les says a couple of things. Number
Speaker 1: one is governments are going to have some difficulty over time,
Speaker 1: but not yet. And secondly, when you think about corporate borrowers,
Speaker 1: there's a bit of a leg function. Probably takes a
Speaker 1: couple of quarters for corporate to fall rates to go
Speaker 1: up meaningfully, but it's very likely going to happen here
Speaker 1: in the US. You probably look at something like a
Speaker 1: seven percent to fall ready, for instance, in high yeal
Speaker 1: this year. That's material, but it takes a while to
Speaker 1: get through the system. We've been talking about how difficult
Speaker 1: it is to really game out the macro data and
Speaker 1: then to understand what the market's reaction would be to
Speaker 1: set macro data. When you take a look at inflation
Speaker 1: coming in hotter than expected on consecutive days France, Spain
Speaker 1: and now Germany, what do you do with that information?
Speaker 1: How much does that shift your view or your trades
Speaker 1: that you're recommending. Yeah, for us, one thing we've been
Speaker 1: looking at quite a bit, as you can imagine, is
Speaker 1: relative pricing for the various central banks, So for instance
Speaker 1: ECB versus FED, and usually we'd fade the ECB, and
Speaker 1: right now you just can't do it. So I've been
Speaker 1: more in the camp the ECB would not deliver. But
Speaker 1: after seeing this parade of very nasty inflation prints, I
Speaker 1: think you've got a lean towards the ECB. Going fifty
Speaker 1: this month is virtually a lock, and fifty next month
Speaker 1: looks more and more likely, So very tough to fade
Speaker 1: Thec'd be very tough to fade the euro. Right now.
Speaker 1: Let's take that further. Do you think there's more chance
Speaker 1: the ECB gets the four than the Fed getting to six?
Speaker 1: Tough call. I'd give the Fed the edge there, John,
Speaker 1: So if you look at market pricing now it's called
Speaker 1: a twenty percent probability. Look at an option pricing the
Speaker 1: FED as it six at the end of the year,
Speaker 1: so a little bit higher than that in terms of
Speaker 1: terminal rate. I'd leaned slightly toward the Fed. But it's
Speaker 1: a tough call right now. Wow, the fact that that's
Speaker 1: even a tough call, just that conversation, not even sitting listen.
Speaker 1: Four is ridiculous. Six is nuts. But ra actually taking
Speaker 1: that seriously just tells you where we are. My shoemaker
Speaker 1: of Weils FACA, thank you, Mike. As alwaysa we speak
Speaker 1: with jam Securities. Devin Ryan with years of following the
Speaker 1: travails of Wall Street, Devin, I know you memorized all
Speaker 1: one hundred and eighteen pages. You know what I did.
Speaker 1: I went to the money chart. It's on page sixty eight.
Speaker 1: Enterprise Partnerships, disciplined growth, and the Hope and a Prayer
Speaker 1: out two years is on the consumer area. The net
Speaker 1: revenue goes up and the change in net reserves comes down.
Speaker 1: The Hope and a Prayer is a two year path
Speaker 1: to a better consumer bank. Were you sold on that?
Speaker 1: Were you convinced yesterday? Eight morning? Tom? So? Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: a it's a it's a road here that it's gonna
Speaker 1: be a little bit complicated on consumer. But you know,
Speaker 1: I think you have to give them some credit. You know,
Speaker 1: they had their first yesterday three years ago. They hit
Speaker 1: all their targets they laid out there, you know, least
Speaker 1: in terms of ROE and efficiency ratios and the key drivers.
Speaker 1: I know we're talking about consumer here, but the key
Speaker 1: drivers are what they're doing in the investment bank and
Speaker 1: asset management, and consumer is one piece. It looks like
Speaker 1: they're gonna look at some strategic alternatives there and maybe
Speaker 1: even look to sell some of those assets. But Yeah,
Speaker 1: we think they're going to hate their targets as they
Speaker 1: did over the last three years. So I feel pretty
Speaker 1: good about that. Is there an Eaton Vans out there
Speaker 1: to buy? How do they jump start this olive fortress? Gorman? Yeah, so, yeah,
Speaker 1: they've been doing some small talking asset manager acquisitions. You know,
Speaker 1: really the big focus in asset management is in alternatives,
Speaker 1: and you know, they've already raised you know, pushing two
Speaker 1: hundred billion dollars of the last a few years here.
Speaker 1: They're going to raise another fifty billion or so over
Speaker 1: the next two and so they're seeing you know, thirteen
Speaker 1: percent revenue growth KAGER on their asset management fees and
Speaker 1: I think that's going to continue here. So they've made
Speaker 1: a really credible pitched there. I don't think they need
Speaker 1: to do inorganic things, but yeah, I think they're going
Speaker 1: to look opportunistically. That is an area where I think
Speaker 1: they could look to do some M and A and
Speaker 1: Tevin at times he was described as getting flustered. You
Speaker 1: were there, How would you describe his performance? Yeah? I think, well,
Speaker 1: first off, you know, the stocks up one hundred and
Speaker 1: ten percent since the beginning of twenty nineteen. You know,
Speaker 1: he took over in twenty eighteen, so they've they have
Speaker 1: two x the SMP, so I think I've got to
Speaker 1: give him a little bit of a passer, and they've
Speaker 1: hit their targets over the last three years. I think
Speaker 1: he's frustrated with some of the narrative in the market,
Speaker 1: and I think the company's sharing more than I've ever
Speaker 1: given before. And you know, they're not hating everything, and
Speaker 1: I think they're they're clear that you know, there's been
Speaker 1: some missteps here, and I think that's frustrating the pushback
Speaker 1: that they're getting. But he did mention that their partner headcount,
Speaker 1: you know, the turnover there is it a low since
Speaker 1: twenty fourteen, and their employee turnover is it a five
Speaker 1: year low. So they're not seeing a mass exodus in
Speaker 1: any way. And you know, again, their book values grown
Speaker 1: what was forty percent since their last invest today, and
Speaker 1: the stock has outperformed the SMP by more than two
Speaker 1: x since that day. So I think they deserve a
Speaker 1: little bit of a past year. And I do think
Speaker 1: they're executing, just not hitting on all cylinders. It's just
Speaker 1: in the problem is that they're not Morgan Stanley, and
Speaker 1: he's not James Coleman. Yeah, well, listen, I mean Morgan Stanley.
Speaker 1: You know, there's only one Smith Barney, Morgan Stanley. It
Speaker 1: did that deal, and that's been kind of a transformational
Speaker 1: opportunity for them, and they've made some good decisions and
Speaker 1: so yeah, Morgan Stanley is outperformed in some areas. I think,
Speaker 1: you know, Goldman Sachs is saying, listen, we've outperformed in
Speaker 1: a lot of other areas, and so, you know, I
Speaker 1: think it's a slightly different business mix, and the last
Speaker 1: few years, the business mix has definitely been towards Morgan
Speaker 1: Stanley's favor. But the Goldman Sachs, you know, they had
Speaker 1: a phenomenal outperformance in twenty twenty one, did better than
Speaker 1: anyone else in the industry. Twenty twenty two, you know,
Speaker 1: we're talking about the most recent year. Twenty twenty two
Speaker 1: was a really tough and I would argue abnormally difficult
Speaker 1: backdrop and we get some mean reversion. I think Goldman
Speaker 1: Sachs will be right back in the in the running
Speaker 1: and people probably stop giving David Saloman a hard time.
Speaker 1: There have been a lot of discussions about repairing some
Speaker 1: of the mistakes that Goldman Sachs is perceived to have
Speaker 1: been made and this is really focusing on the consumer
Speaker 1: banking unit. There was a discussion yesterday about finding strategic
Speaker 1: alternatives for a number of different units, including green Sky,
Speaker 1: the specialty lender, as well as the credit card partnerships
Speaker 1: with Apple and others. Do you think that this is
Speaker 1: a good move on their part. Do you think that
Speaker 1: trying to offload big parts of that consumer credit business
Speaker 1: is the way to go? You know, I think that
Speaker 1: based on new directive and consumer which is to be
Speaker 1: more profitable and more targeted, it makes sense. Obviously you
Speaker 1: have to have the right buyer and right transaction if
Speaker 1: that's what they're going to do. Yeah, but I think
Speaker 1: Goldman in their ethos came up yesterday. But you know,
Speaker 1: when they have a bad trade, they normally don't sit
Speaker 1: on it. And I think this is a situation where,
Speaker 1: you know, they get a little bit of mode by
Speaker 1: making a mistake in this one area, but they need
Speaker 1: to move on and get themselves in the best position.
Speaker 1: And this is a small part of the story in
Speaker 1: our thesis. But I do think that, you know, potentially
Speaker 1: looking to exit some of those businesses could make sense
Speaker 1: at the right price, and it will just kind of
Speaker 1: take away also some of this I think overhang that's
Speaker 1: getting more attention than you probably deserves, but that they
Speaker 1: would like. That's the theme of this conversation Devon, that
Speaker 1: maybe they are getting too much criticism than perhaps they deserve.
Speaker 1: As you looked across the coverage of this name, the
Speaker 1: stock that you cover both in the media and from
Speaker 1: the analyst community, from your peers as well, Jeff get
Speaker 1: the sense of this is personal, it's actually just about him,
Speaker 1: the individual. You know, I don't know that it's personal.
Speaker 1: I think it's you know, Goldman Sachs for you know,
Speaker 1: really it's history has delivered you know, I think outstanding performance,
Speaker 1: and so I think it's just kind of human nature
Speaker 1: that when you know firms are really performing well, people
Speaker 1: want to, you know, fight areas to knock them down.
Speaker 1: And you know, Goldman, you know, before David Solomon came in,
Speaker 1: was really a black box. And last three or four
Speaker 1: years they've given a lot of transparency and they've given
Speaker 1: a really detailed roadmap on their expect patients and how
Speaker 1: they're going to get to their targets. And so when
Speaker 1: you do that, you're always going to find things to critique,
Speaker 1: and this consumer area is one thing that they haven't
Speaker 1: really delivered on. But also the market mentality shifted. You know,
Speaker 1: people don't want to subsidize anything losing money, whether it's
Speaker 1: a Goldman or tech company or fintech, and so that's
Speaker 1: really for the mood. And so yeah, I don't think
Speaker 1: it's just David. I think it's more of a you know,
Speaker 1: Goldman's done well, people want to nitpick here, DEMI, thanks
Speaker 1: for that. Devin. Run there MP securities on the Lightist
Speaker 1: with Goldman and they're invest today. Subscribe to the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Surveillance podcasts on Apple, Spotify, and anywhere else you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts. Listen live every weekday starting at seven am Eastern.
Speaker 1: I'm Bloomberg dot Com, the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Business app. You can watch us live. I'm
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Television and always I'm the Bloomberg Terminal. Thanks for listening.
Speaker 1: I'm Tom Keane and this is Bloomberg