Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Markets Podcast. I'm Paul Sweeney, along
Speaker 1: with my co host of Bonnie Quinn. Every business day
Speaker 1: we bring you interviews from CEOs, market pros, and Bloomberg experts,
Speaker 1: along with essential market moving news. Kind the Bloomberg Markets
Speaker 1: Podcast on Apple podcast or wherever you listen to podcasts,
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com. Now, let's turn our attention
Speaker 1: to the economic data that came out this morning, because
Speaker 1: consumer confidence is not quite as robust as we might
Speaker 1: have thought. Consumer confidence for October coming in at one
Speaker 1: point nine, so not a terrible reading, but not as
Speaker 1: good as economis are anticipating. On the September number was
Speaker 1: revised lower. Lynn Franco is Director of Economic Indicators at
Speaker 1: the Conference Board. Lynn, should we start getting concerned or
Speaker 1: is this still healthy reading? It's a healthy reading. What
Speaker 1: we're really seeing is that there's been sort of no
Speaker 1: significant traction in consumer confidence. We had sort of a
Speaker 1: sharp rebound, um, you know, sort of post pandemic, but
Speaker 1: then we've sort of been moving a little bit sideways here.
Speaker 1: So Lynn, I mean, I guess it's not surprising that
Speaker 1: we're moving sideways, as you suggest, given where we are
Speaker 1: with the labor market and even some of the metrics
Speaker 1: for the virus on a global scale. Um, what are
Speaker 1: what are the consumers? What's their outlook? I guess for
Speaker 1: the near term, Well, what we're seeing right now is um.
Speaker 1: You know, it's the labor market that grove both the
Speaker 1: improvement in the present Situation Index and also the decline
Speaker 1: and expectations. So while they're telling us that the job
Speaker 1: market has improved, you know, sort of from the lows
Speaker 1: of post pandemic levels, they really don't expect much of
Speaker 1: that momentum to continue through the end of the year
Speaker 1: and into next year. So it's kind of a glass
Speaker 1: half empty, half full, where you know, conditions have not improved,
Speaker 1: but they necessarily haven't gotten much worse either. Yeah. I
Speaker 1: mean the three months moving average has gone to nine
Speaker 1: point two, all the way from one seven point re
Speaker 1: back in March. What's a useful comparison here, Lynn, So
Speaker 1: obviously March probably isn't the best comparison, even though it
Speaker 1: looks quite quite the difference. I think the key here
Speaker 1: is the trend, right, So we've seen your confidence to
Speaker 1: bounce up, they then bounce down and up and down.
Speaker 1: So would really like to see it gain a little
Speaker 1: bit of traction in and upward direction, and that's going
Speaker 1: to be heavily dependent on what happens in the labor market.
Speaker 1: And while you know, unemployment claims have have come down,
Speaker 1: they still remain high. Unemployment is still high, and we
Speaker 1: expect to you know, softening in the labor market. So
Speaker 1: we could continue around these levels through the end of
Speaker 1: the year. And you know, one of the areas of
Speaker 1: the economy that just it surprises me a little bit
Speaker 1: how strong it is is the housing market. How does
Speaker 1: that play into the consumer um given that it can
Speaker 1: be such a big part of the consumer's net worth. Well,
Speaker 1: I guess it's probably having a little bit of a
Speaker 1: positive impact. We did see a slight uptick in the
Speaker 1: percent of consumers which had the intern intended to purchase
Speaker 1: home over the next six months. That has to do
Speaker 1: a lot with low interest rates. But the key is
Speaker 1: going to be the labor market and what happens there
Speaker 1: is really going to determine the direction that consumer competence procedures.
Speaker 1: Well in the state of you dive into all sorts
Speaker 1: of things like when consumers might be planning to buy
Speaker 1: a refrigerator or a major appliance when there's a vacation
Speaker 1: intended and it's interesting to see that. Yeah, there's a
Speaker 1: reading of forty four point six for people intending to
Speaker 1: vacation within six months, but almost all of those are
Speaker 1: intending to vacation in the United States, and there's only
Speaker 1: a tiny number that's a seven point two number looking
Speaker 1: to vacation in a foreign country. Absolutely, you know, we
Speaker 1: did have a pretty good rebound in terms of the
Speaker 1: vacation intention to this month, but it's well below fifty
Speaker 1: four nine that we saw, you know, back earlier this year.
Speaker 1: And again we've got a lot of travel restrictions. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, there's also pandemic concerns, so we're seeing that
Speaker 1: people are choosing to vacation locally and the means of
Speaker 1: travel preferred is an auto. We did see a little
Speaker 1: bit of an uptick in terms of those willing to
Speaker 1: sort of you know, fly to destinations, but it's really
Speaker 1: sort of more about local vacation. Hey, Lynn, thanks so
Speaker 1: much for joining us. We appreciate this getting an update
Speaker 1: on the consumer. Lynn Franco, Senior Director of Economic Indicators
Speaker 1: and Surveys at the Conference board. Vannie, would you hop
Speaker 1: on a plane to go on vacation. You know, I
Speaker 1: wouldn't bull Yeah, yeah, but then I'm not even doing
Speaker 1: outdoor dining yet, so not really typical down the middle.
Speaker 1: All right, you're taking a conservative we I'm coming into
Speaker 1: Q So I guess there's a few other things too. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you worry about Yeah, you listen to the airlines of
Speaker 1: an you know, they're just not seeing that pick up
Speaker 1: and demand. And I guess it's probably not surprising given
Speaker 1: that we're seeing a surgeon cases. So you know, consumer
Speaker 1: travel leisure continues to be under pressure. Well, Vannie. When
Speaker 1: I started my career, it was at the Chase Manhattan Bank,
Speaker 1: and we made big corporate loans to big media companies,
Speaker 1: and the way we charged interest was libor plus some
Speaker 1: premium rate, uh, depending upon the credit worthiness of the borrower,
Speaker 1: so live or the limit. I think it's the London
Speaker 1: interbank offer rate effect. Can remember back all the way
Speaker 1: back to my Chase days. Um, that's kind of been
Speaker 1: the basis of borrowing rates. But that's about the change.
Speaker 1: Let's get some color on that with Ira Jersey, chief
Speaker 1: US interest rate strategist for Bloomberg Intelligence. Ira tell us
Speaker 1: about libor and what maybe changing UH with that base rate. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so the base rate is UH basically scheduled to go
Speaker 1: away at the end of UM at least that's what
Speaker 1: the Financial Conduct Authority, which is the regulator of almost
Speaker 1: everything financial in in England. UM. You know, LIBOR was
Speaker 1: much aligned during the Great UH financial Crisis back in
Speaker 1: two thousand seven to two thousand nine, and starting in
Speaker 1: two thousand thirteen, there was a real push by regulators
Speaker 1: to find replacement rates for live war globally and UM
Speaker 1: and a lot of countries have have different rates, and
Speaker 1: many of them found different rates that that they're comfortable using.
Speaker 1: In the US, the primary rate that a lot of
Speaker 1: instruments will UH will basically transfer to is called the
Speaker 1: secured Overnight Financing Rate or SOFA, which is basically UH
Speaker 1: calculated based on repurchase agreements which are loan secured by
Speaker 1: treasuries so UM. So that's why you know that there's
Speaker 1: hundreds of trillions of dollars of these loans outstanding. So
Speaker 1: this is quite a big deal, and I think it
Speaker 1: hasn't gotten attention it really deserves by the broader market. Well,
Speaker 1: and let's just fill in the reasoning why this all happened.
Speaker 1: Lie war was one of the sort of the old
Speaker 1: guards of finance. It was hilarious. The way it was
Speaker 1: calculated daily was you just put out a bunch of
Speaker 1: asks to different banks and you've got a whole bunch
Speaker 1: back and the top three in the bottom three were
Speaker 1: mixed together and you've got some kind of the rate
Speaker 1: and d and then you know this. Well, then it
Speaker 1: turned out that people were actually manipulating it a little
Speaker 1: bit give us some background. Yeah, so so the way
Speaker 1: that that librars calculated it's basically a survey of the
Speaker 1: banks within the panel that are all London based banks
Speaker 1: and they then take a trim mean And what happened
Speaker 1: was during the crisis, um there there were um uh
Speaker 1: banks basically that that put in rates that weren't real
Speaker 1: that that it wasn't really where they could fund because
Speaker 1: they're supposed to be basically honest about what what they
Speaker 1: where they can fund in any given day, and that's
Speaker 1: the rate they're supposed to submit and they didn't do that.
Speaker 1: And what what what regulators found and what even courts
Speaker 1: found because there were court cases based on this is
Speaker 1: as well as just regulatory finds that that were passed
Speaker 1: out in the tunes of hundreds of millions of dollars UM.
Speaker 1: They basically that they found that it was open to manipulation.
Speaker 1: So some banks wanted to pull out of these panels
Speaker 1: to limit their litigation risk um for being part of
Speaker 1: the Liveboard panel. And as as part of them not
Speaker 1: pulling out UM, some of the regulators said, well, let's
Speaker 1: think about getting getting away from live board at some
Speaker 1: point in the future, and that date was tagged at
Speaker 1: the end of So so this whole transition process has
Speaker 1: really started in earnest in two thousand and seventeen, but
Speaker 1: it's really had to pick up steam because we're we're
Speaker 1: only you know, we're only fourteen months away from from
Speaker 1: basically library going away, which like I mentioned and like
Speaker 1: like Paul had mentioned before, it's been ubiquitous for the
Speaker 1: last three generations, right, So, um, this is not an
Speaker 1: easy task and something that everyone has to pay more
Speaker 1: attention to. So if I'm holding a bond and it
Speaker 1: pays me live War plus two and a half percent
Speaker 1: come the end of what's going to happen? So so
Speaker 1: that's a good question. So for most instruments, what will
Speaker 1: happen is live Board will become this secured overnight financing
Speaker 1: rate plus a spread and and we estimate, we actually
Speaker 1: put this out, uh, just a small wing, we estimate
Speaker 1: that that spread will be twenty three basis points at
Speaker 1: the end of So basically you're going to be paid
Speaker 1: twenty three basis points plus plus whatever SOFA is on
Speaker 1: an ongoing basis UM. And so this is a problem
Speaker 1: for some banks because with a fixed spread or with
Speaker 1: using this you know, treasury based secured rate instead of
Speaker 1: a credit based rate like library was supposed to be UM,
Speaker 1: it changes a lot of the calculus in the way
Speaker 1: that UM, in a way that banks fund, and in
Speaker 1: a way that they're going to make loans going forward.
Speaker 1: So if you have a loan, it will still be
Speaker 1: a floating rate, but it will be more interest rate
Speaker 1: based as opposed to the credit spread based, which which
Speaker 1: does have implications for the way that you hedge or
Speaker 1: the way that you you think about your loans going forward. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and just full disposure. Bloomberg had actually put in an
Speaker 1: idea for replacing the librar at the time as well.
Speaker 1: There was a sort of a request out there for
Speaker 1: public commentary, and I believe that Bloomberg had one POTENTI
Speaker 1: chill replacement for a library. So so fur then, I mean,
Speaker 1: is it still going to be you know, London banks
Speaker 1: based or I mean if I'm if I'm paying a
Speaker 1: mortgage in Wisconsin and my credit is not particularly high,
Speaker 1: am I still going to be you know, basing my
Speaker 1: repayments on on what some bankers and London thank you
Speaker 1: so so no, so SOFA is based on an actual market.
Speaker 1: So it's based on the the way that that banks
Speaker 1: and and hedge funds and um and broker dealers basically
Speaker 1: trade and and lend treasury securities to each other within
Speaker 1: the US. So it's it's a very very liquid market.
Speaker 1: There's over nine billion dollars of transactions every day. It's
Speaker 1: one of the most liquid markets in the world. So
Speaker 1: um so so basically you're you're at the whim more
Speaker 1: of dealer balance sheets and bank balance sheets than you
Speaker 1: are worrying about, you know, whether or not you know,
Speaker 1: in London, there's enough dollars for Barclay's Bank to the
Speaker 1: fund themselves, which is what happened during the during the
Speaker 1: financial crisis. So so it's it's a it's a big
Speaker 1: shift and it's a change of mentality because um, you
Speaker 1: won't be paying more if banks find find it hard
Speaker 1: to fund. Um, you'll be paying more if uh um,
Speaker 1: basically if there's too many treasuries out there for the
Speaker 1: amount that people can lend. I thank you so much,
Speaker 1: Ira Jersey of Bloomberg Intelligence. They're a chief interest rate
Speaker 1: strategists explaining everything to do with s O F or sofer.
Speaker 1: Time for Bloomberg Opinion. We're joined by John Author's Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Opinion columnists covering all things on the markets. He joined
Speaker 1: us from our Bloomberg Interactive Broker studio out within a
Speaker 1: very interesting column just about a topic that you and
Speaker 1: I were talking about just recently. Vanni. It seems like,
Speaker 1: you know, the numbers are so bad as it relates
Speaker 1: to the pandemic. Here, some of the numbers, you know,
Speaker 1: as bad as we saw back in March and April.
Speaker 1: Yet the markets generally behaving much much better now than
Speaker 1: they were back in March, and able to get a
Speaker 1: sense of why that might be. We welcome John John,
Speaker 1: thanks so much for joining us here. Let's talk about
Speaker 1: your recent column, Covics nineteen. What are you thinking about?
Speaker 1: I think we're getting to a point where the market
Speaker 1: has to accept that the risks of COVID to economic activity,
Speaker 1: and that's obviously what matters primarily to two markets is
Speaker 1: how much of an effect it has on stuff being
Speaker 1: bought and sold, have risen, have returned, and that does
Speaker 1: need now to be reflected in prices. Now. It's obviously
Speaker 1: very easy to get very much into big, polarized oppositional
Speaker 1: discussions on this. It's obvious that the medical community is
Speaker 1: getting much better at people keeping people alive when they
Speaker 1: catch this, and it's also obvious that we're all learning
Speaker 1: how to keep at least a certain level of activity
Speaker 1: going on, even at points when we're worried about it. Um. So,
Speaker 1: you know, there's no question as far as I can see,
Speaker 1: of needing to go down to the kind of depths
Speaker 1: we saw in March. But if you look at the
Speaker 1: economic activity data, you can see even in Germany, which
Speaker 1: is of the you know, the major Western economy is
Speaker 1: the one that's dealt with the virus best to date,
Speaker 1: you are seeing an unmistakable tick up in hospitalizations and
Speaker 1: you're seeing an unmistakable tick down in economic activity, which,
Speaker 1: unlike in the States, really had just about got back
Speaker 1: to normal for a few weeks at the end of
Speaker 1: the summer, and that's obviously likely to be repeated here
Speaker 1: in the States. It doesn't matter exactly what governors say
Speaker 1: or mandate. If people are worried about the virus, that
Speaker 1: that much less likely to go out. It's not like
Speaker 1: we didn't know this was coming, though, John, I mean,
Speaker 1: we've known for a long time that we were likely
Speaker 1: to not get a vaccine this year, at least for
Speaker 1: for the clubs among us. Sorry, m well, there is that.
Speaker 1: I think the issue that arises there the administration calling
Speaker 1: for me. I think the issue that arises there is
Speaker 1: um that. Uh there was and this wasn't ridiculous. There's
Speaker 1: a widespread belief within the market that the the the
Speaker 1: disease had reached what you could call a choke point
Speaker 1: or even herd immunity either. Once a certain number of
Speaker 1: the people who are the most connected, who of of
Speaker 1: necessity on the day to day lives, are the people
Speaker 1: who come into contact with the most other people once
Speaker 1: they've got it. The theory, and it's not that bad.
Speaker 1: Theory was that it would be much harder for the
Speaker 1: disease to spread again, and so in places like where
Speaker 1: we are here in New York or other cities where
Speaker 1: they have been particularly severe outbreaks. The reasonable belief was
Speaker 1: that it just wasn't going to come back with anything
Speaker 1: like that amount of force. Now, you could still argue
Speaker 1: that in most places around the world, cases are picking
Speaker 1: up worst in areas where they've been least problematic before,
Speaker 1: such as the Upper Midwest here in the States. But
Speaker 1: that's beginning to look ever more tenuous that yeah, there
Speaker 1: there are there is a steady drip of news about
Speaker 1: cases here in New York. There's a number of the
Speaker 1: European places that are having problems had already had quite
Speaker 1: severe outbreaks before. So I think there was a reasonable
Speaker 1: degree of hope, justified or not, that we really weren't
Speaker 1: going to get a sign significant recurrence in the places
Speaker 1: we've had it already. And we're now seeing the markets
Speaker 1: beginning to retreat from that hope. And John, you know,
Speaker 1: I think just looking at Europe there seemed to be
Speaker 1: a little bit of ahead of us again here, and
Speaker 1: we're starting to see some shutdowns in France and Spain
Speaker 1: and other areas and the UK and the UK and
Speaker 1: it's only October, you know, I think it's would it
Speaker 1: be reasonable for people to say this could get materially
Speaker 1: worse as we really get into December, January, February. Yes,
Speaker 1: it would be reasonable to to say that this is
Speaker 1: a time when people are more likely to stay in anyway,
Speaker 1: we have the psychological issue of Christmas coming up. In Britain.
Speaker 1: The rule at the present is is no more than
Speaker 1: six people gathering together in more you know, in indoors,
Speaker 1: even if they're members of the family in the areas
Speaker 1: that are most affected, which basically for most extended families
Speaker 1: means no Christmas dinner, which is a very big families.
Speaker 1: By the way, well there is there there is that
Speaker 1: it might it might actually be bad for the marriage
Speaker 1: its industry, but bad for divorce lawyers. But yet there
Speaker 1: might be slightly at stress there. But but those are
Speaker 1: those are significant issues. And also I nearly missed this
Speaker 1: interview because I was having my flu shot. We are
Speaker 1: now into flu season, uh, and the symptoms of the
Speaker 1: two are quite similar to each other, which gives reasons
Speaker 1: for concern. If you've just had COVID and then you
Speaker 1: get flu, we don't know what that's going to be like, etcetera. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that there are I think there are good reasons to
Speaker 1: believe that this is not going to be as deadly
Speaker 1: per se as it was before, but it could easily
Speaker 1: be very disruptive if Biden wins the presidency, Do the
Speaker 1: markets price out a little bit of the COVID premium
Speaker 1: or the COVID discount in the sense that it's unlikely
Speaker 1: that Biden wouldn't implement some federal sort of orders if
Speaker 1: it came to that, Whereas at the moment we know
Speaker 1: we're not getting those kinds of orders. I I doubt
Speaker 1: partly because he's not getting it. He's not getting in
Speaker 1: until January the earliest um, by which point, even if
Speaker 1: things are terrible, you would if things are at the
Speaker 1: very worst, then the precedent of Spanish flu in nine
Speaker 1: eighteen suggests that by then it would more or lesser
Speaker 1: blown itself out anyway, So I doubt I doubt it
Speaker 1: would have that big There are many other reasons why
Speaker 1: a Biden victory would affect the market. I don't see
Speaker 1: it's having that big of an effect. And at this point,
Speaker 1: masks are so politicized. You could have a federal mask mandate,
Speaker 1: and I'm not sure how big an effect on people's
Speaker 1: behavior that would have a good point here, So I
Speaker 1: it just feels like, you know, you could make an
Speaker 1: argument for uh, you know, some real risk in the
Speaker 1: near term. On yes, I mean, there are plenty of
Speaker 1: other reasons for risk in the very near term as well,
Speaker 1: but people were hoping COVID wasn't one of them, and
Speaker 1: they're giving up on that type. Hi, John, thanks so
Speaker 1: much for joining us, and congratulations on your flu shot.
Speaker 1: Always going to get that out of the way. John Authors,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Markets Senior editor, giving us his thoughts on potential
Speaker 1: for near term volatile I'm looking at the vix here,
Speaker 1: which is something that Tom Pein loves to call out
Speaker 1: every morning. The vix is above thirty three. That's a
Speaker 1: relatively high level, indicating some risky in the market. Well,
Speaker 1: our next guest has degrees in Russian, Eastern European, and
Speaker 1: Central Asian studies from Harvard University, so the natural place
Speaker 1: for her to end up is leading up Third Bridges
Speaker 1: coverage in therapeutics if you don't mind. Thanks to Jaylan Mamadama,
Speaker 1: who does lead up the healthcare analysis at Third Bridge,
Speaker 1: for joining us. Jollen, you know, I was being a
Speaker 1: little facetious earlier, but it is wonderful to have all
Speaker 1: of that in the background, because we're dealing with a
Speaker 1: global pandemic right here, and we're dealing with global companies
Speaker 1: trying to come up with therapeutics, with vaccines and with cures.
Speaker 1: And I'm curious as to you know, where you think
Speaker 1: the first of the the better vaccines. Let's say we'll
Speaker 1: come out of perfect Thank you so much. Funny and
Speaker 1: justin starting up with earnings from Lily Merchanciser this morning,
Speaker 1: he's really key that you're looking at the second half
Speaker 1: in Q three is to see who's done a better
Speaker 1: job in terms of weathering the storm. And this comes
Speaker 1: down to the vaccine conversation. Um. The media has really
Speaker 1: portrayed us to who's going to come to the market
Speaker 1: first and our experts. Do you really think fisor biontic
Speaker 1: and what that maderna will be making up the first
Speaker 1: generation of vaccines. Now, having said that, we do think
Speaker 1: that the most important mechanism to look after is them
Speaker 1: to be the durability for longevity of the efficacy in
Speaker 1: a mass population, as well as the safety pertaining to
Speaker 1: the durability mechanism. And what I mean by that is
Speaker 1: that there's a window of time where the patient isn't
Speaker 1: client uh to get more infected due to declining antibodies.
Speaker 1: Now as we were pertain to the RNA vaccine, So
Speaker 1: both fives are in Maderna. They have historically shown poured
Speaker 1: your ability and T cell responses, but there are um
Speaker 1: not too many safety concerns, and looking at the ste
Speaker 1: Way guideline not being a strict but efficiency and the
Speaker 1: meeting two months follow up, we essentially see these first
Speaker 1: coming to market, capturing maybe about fifty percent share, and
Speaker 1: then leveling off until we see more durable options come
Speaker 1: out out of the novavaxes, the j and Jason and
Speaker 1: the Marks and especially also both on the preventative vaccines
Speaker 1: and on the prophylactic sides like with the oral antivio
Speaker 1: agents that both fives are working on. So, Jaylen, is
Speaker 1: it the expectation within the health care community that um,
Speaker 1: there will be one kind of go to vaccine or
Speaker 1: will there be kind of a cocktail or uh approach
Speaker 1: where maybe some people will get one or more of
Speaker 1: this vaccine and others will get one or more of
Speaker 1: that vaccine. What's the expectation currently? Yeah, So definitely, although
Speaker 1: I don't like to talk about this in terms of winners,
Speaker 1: there will be three four candidates out there, right, and
Speaker 1: just from the standpoint of of getting the vaccine administrat
Speaker 1: a mass scale, we are going to need a few
Speaker 1: of those players now. In terms of considerations on administration,
Speaker 1: the elderly are the average population and the We saw
Speaker 1: a recent JAMA article noting that you know, living your
Speaker 1: technology platforms like the R and AS, there are safety
Speaker 1: reservations as to the adoption uh in in those you know,
Speaker 1: older populations. For us, when you look at Mark although
Speaker 1: much later entrance in the in the game um they're
Speaker 1: using their established DSc vector platform that has shown amazing
Speaker 1: efvocacy of the bowl of vaccine. Right, it's also going
Speaker 1: to be potentially in single dose and oral formulation, which
Speaker 1: is super convenient and again no reservations when it comes
Speaker 1: to administration for the elderly, You're absolutely right, they're different
Speaker 1: age categories that are probably going to adapt to this differently.
Speaker 1: Having said that, um Nova vacs also has a combined
Speaker 1: potentially combining to the COVID nineteen vaccine with their flu vaccine,
Speaker 1: so from an administration standpoint, that's going to be much
Speaker 1: more convenient and those are the players that we're going
Speaker 1: to be seeing, you know, three or four of those
Speaker 1: gaining adoption at mass scales, but definitely not not one
Speaker 1: player that would not be sufficient in terms of UM,
Speaker 1: in terms of uh mascale adoption, which is really the
Speaker 1: case with really any other therapeutic indications, Jayleen, At some
Speaker 1: point we should have several vaccines, I mean hopefully, right,
Speaker 1: that would be the idea. Do they all stay in
Speaker 1: existence then or or do some end up with better
Speaker 1: marks than others. Yeah, that's a really good question. I
Speaker 1: mean with the RNAs, for example, we do see these
Speaker 1: phasing out and then the URNA platforms being used in
Speaker 1: different affections to be duringn oncology indications, right because on
Speaker 1: fibers partnering with BioNTech um, that's really they're investing in
Speaker 1: the in the in the platform with COVID nineteen as
Speaker 1: a starting point. But likely it is going to be
Speaker 1: faced out when these more durable mechanisms comes to the
Speaker 1: floor out of you know j J and NOLO vax
Speaker 1: and MARK and the two areas to really track are
Speaker 1: both the antibody responses UM as well as the T
Speaker 1: cell responses. As we are still trying to understand better
Speaker 1: the passagenesses of of of COVID nineteen UM. Now, the
Speaker 1: prophylactics options are also going to be interesting to track.
Speaker 1: UM the merk oral anti viral combination with bridge back
Speaker 1: bio UM. We're looking out for the safety data out
Speaker 1: of that. But before we get a vaccine and mass scale,
Speaker 1: these types of prophylactic options, especially in oral formulation, will
Speaker 1: will really we're expecting to see why viceprea adoption, especially
Speaker 1: in skilled nursing facilities. Hey, Jalan, just about the thirty
Speaker 1: seconds left? UM, how confident is the industry that they
Speaker 1: can actually produce and distribute this at scale? Yeah, So
Speaker 1: we were looking at the first hundred million doses by year,
Speaker 1: and our experts don't think that that is viable. I
Speaker 1: mean we're seeing visor bions and keep pushing the timeline
Speaker 1: out further and further. UM, we're probably going to see
Speaker 1: the first hundred million doses sometime you know, mid next year.
Speaker 1: And what I mean by that is not just ready
Speaker 1: to go, but ready to go and administer to the population. UM.
Speaker 1: In terms of viability, looks the urns are easiest to
Speaker 1: man a factor right the but then that becomes a
Speaker 1: little bit more complicated with the two dozing regiments, so
Speaker 1: anything that single dose will probably catch up to the
Speaker 1: two dozen regimen vaccines. Hey, Jalen, thanks so much for
Speaker 1: joining us. We really appreciate your insight getting us updated
Speaker 1: here on some of the therapeutics and vaccines and the timelines.
Speaker 1: Jalen Momadoba, global sector lead for healthcare at Third Bridge,
Speaker 1: joining us to lend her insights into what is the
Speaker 1: topic of the moment and that is exact see Thanks
Speaker 1: for listening to Bloomberg Markets podcast. You can subscribe and
Speaker 1: listen to interviews at Apple Podcasts or whatever a podcast
Speaker 1: platform you prefer. I'm Bonnie Quinn. I'm on Twitter at
Speaker 1: Bonnie Quinn. And I'm Paul Sweeney. I'm on Twitter at
Speaker 1: pt Sweeney. Before the podcast, you can always catch us
Speaker 1: worldwide at Bloomberg Radio