Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane, along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Ferrell and Lisa Brownwitz Jay Leye. We bring
Speaker 1: you insight from the best and economics, finance, investment, and
Speaker 1: international relations. Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple podcast, SoundCloud, Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot Com, and of course on the Bloomberg terminal. We've
Speaker 1: been very lucky over the last month with a fantastic
Speaker 1: team at Bloomberg, including Bloomberg's Maria. Today, I'm bringing us
Speaker 1: some of the conversations out of Brussels and out of
Speaker 1: the continent as well. And we have another one right now,
Speaker 1: Hey Maria. Yes, Jonathan, and we're now joined by Latvia's
Speaker 1: UH defense Minister of Babis Atkis who of course he
Speaker 1: he's one of the most outspoken ministers, I would say
Speaker 1: in in the European Union when it comes to defense, Sir,
Speaker 1: you were telling me off camera Europe really needs a
Speaker 1: reality check. We needs to be much more forceful on Russia.
Speaker 1: When you say that, what do you mean? I would
Speaker 1: like to say that the job is half done, because yes,
Speaker 1: we reacted in quite a unitary form as far as
Speaker 1: the sanctions towards Russia. And also as far as the
Speaker 1: military and umlitarian assistance to Ukraine. But now we are
Speaker 1: already in the third force week of this aggression from
Speaker 1: Russian side, and the job is half done because there
Speaker 1: are still companies in Russia which are functioning for different
Speaker 1: types of reasons. Then as far as Europe itself, I
Speaker 1: think we have to go complete with completion of this
Speaker 1: deep butinization of these societies where the corrupt oligarchic, autoritarian
Speaker 1: Russian people have been really very deeply routed now in
Speaker 1: these societies and this have to be done. And as
Speaker 1: far as the military and other support to Ukraine, I
Speaker 1: would say that maybe it's sounds at the beginning very
Speaker 1: kind of even dangerous approach, but I think we should
Speaker 1: consider to reverse this very early escape of number of
Speaker 1: our embassies from Kiev because the country needs to support
Speaker 1: Ukraine needs to support. And And so when you say deepotinized,
Speaker 1: I wonder what do you mean by that, and if
Speaker 1: and if it means what I think it means. Many
Speaker 1: europe say that's very provocative, but you say Europe should
Speaker 1: not be scared being provocative when it comes to Russia.
Speaker 1: So how do you go about that? Well, first, of all,
Speaker 1: Kremlin thinking about provocation is very simple. If they will
Speaker 1: be willing to do they will always find an excuse
Speaker 1: to tell that this is a provocation. So that's not important.
Speaker 1: I think we simply should looten to the eyes of
Speaker 1: Kremlin leaders and say, now you committed the crime. You
Speaker 1: committed aggression. Now we will act. And there is nothing
Speaker 1: provocative by simply telling. Look, you have been by corruptive
Speaker 1: or other means, buying these villas, buying these proper taste,
Speaker 1: and you are now waging an aggressive war, just like
Speaker 1: Hitler's Germany against a neighboring country. But at the same
Speaker 1: time you still want to enjoy a great life in
Speaker 1: the rest which you despise. This is not possible. And
Speaker 1: and and of course I want to ask you one thing.
Speaker 1: You know, you say deputinize, you say a lot of
Speaker 1: this is almost like Hitler after Nazi Germany. Uh, your
Speaker 1: country has a history with Russia. Of course, it is
Speaker 1: no not a secret that you were a part of
Speaker 1: the Soviet Union. I wonder when you look at what's happening,
Speaker 1: is this Vladimir Putting being a madman? Or is this
Speaker 1: someone who has made very clear over twenty years. My
Speaker 1: idea is to restore the U. S. S R. Because
Speaker 1: it's greatness for Russia that I'm after. In many ways,
Speaker 1: we have been warning already for almost twenty years. So
Speaker 1: he's not a madman that's happening. What is his state
Speaker 1: of mind personally at this moment. It's difficult to say,
Speaker 1: because we don't know the information from the first hands,
Speaker 1: And of course he is kind of confused because he
Speaker 1: was obviously not thinking that this type of war will
Speaker 1: not succeed. But at the same time time we still
Speaker 1: have to act in a way that we force all
Speaker 1: the Russian society also to think it stands and I
Speaker 1: think it includes also very much of information sphere and
Speaker 1: and all the possibility to break this bubble of information
Speaker 1: which Kremlin is using for their own population and and searches.
Speaker 1: Two very brief questions. There's a real debate about what
Speaker 1: to do with energy imports. It is becoming clear that
Speaker 1: your sanctions and you said this is going to be
Speaker 1: the mother of all sanctions, but they're not for Russia.
Speaker 1: They continue to meet females and dollars. Is it time
Speaker 1: to step it up and target energy? Well, first of all,
Speaker 1: we have to get out all the Western companies from Russia,
Speaker 1: it's their model duty to leave this country now. As
Speaker 1: far as energy, of course, if the country have been
Speaker 1: on the gas or oil needle for twenty or thirty years,
Speaker 1: it's difficult to do it in one day. But imagine
Speaker 1: the situation. What if that not be Ukraine invaded by Russia,
Speaker 1: but would be European Union invaded. Would be still go
Speaker 1: into the war and buy GUS. So it's so it's
Speaker 1: a mistakes. So when Germany says the reality is we
Speaker 1: can unplug, you're thinking, as a Germany is wrong. You
Speaker 1: can't do it. Well, it's probably very difficult to do
Speaker 1: it immediately, but let's put it like this, to be rational.
Speaker 1: At the same time, we probably have to be hyper
Speaker 1: active and very fast to unplug as fast as we can,
Speaker 1: really as fast as we can, and not to think
Speaker 1: about returning to this anymore. So you say after this
Speaker 1: is a point of no return. Essentially it's it's isolation
Speaker 1: for Russia. But when it comes to Ukraine, there's many
Speaker 1: out there who believe at this point this is a
Speaker 1: hell of awards. Twenty six days, it's been brutal on
Speaker 1: the Ukrainian population, just negotiate any ceasefire and get on
Speaker 1: with it. What's your take on that ceasefire is not
Speaker 1: a way out, as a way out is immediate withdrawal
Speaker 1: of all the Russian troops from Ukrainian territory. There is
Speaker 1: no other way out. And I would say that Ukrainians
Speaker 1: buy their blood paid also for the membership in your union.
Speaker 1: So I understand you cry Ukraine cannot become a member
Speaker 1: today tomorrow, but there must be a certain fast track
Speaker 1: established along with the way how we will pay because
Speaker 1: we would have to pay for the construction of this country.
Speaker 1: So I believe that five years that would be the
Speaker 1: limit put also in our planning when we, if everything
Speaker 1: goes okay, should accept this country as a member country.
Speaker 1: And and over the weekend we saw the Russian say
Speaker 1: you have to surrender Marouble. We also saw them bringing
Speaker 1: out the big weapons of the hypersonic missiles. When you
Speaker 1: look at the situation on the ground, do you really believe, seriously,
Speaker 1: look into your heart, the Ukraine can win this war.
Speaker 1: You can already won this war. Yes, there will be
Speaker 1: more sacrifices. But even if Mariopo falls, even if key
Speaker 1: of falls, which I don't think will happen as a
Speaker 1: struggle will continue because these people have nowhere to retreat.
Speaker 1: And in fact I must say also our particularly Western
Speaker 1: European and friends and sisters and brothers also we have
Speaker 1: nowhere to retreat. This is a way where we have
Speaker 1: to stand and keep the lot time because we have
Speaker 1: been retreating on the front of this aggressive and dictator
Speaker 1: for too long and that was our hugest mistake. And
Speaker 1: just the final question. I know you have communications with
Speaker 1: the Ukrainian government. Were you here for Zelenski? Is it
Speaker 1: obvious to you that does man will either win or
Speaker 1: die in Ukraine and that's his thinking here will win
Speaker 1: and we should stand with him. Well, sir, thank you
Speaker 1: so much. Of course, always good to speak to you,
Speaker 1: and you certainly are are very open with your words.
Speaker 1: Of course I was glad VIA's Defense minister. Mr Fabric's
Speaker 1: joining us here in Brussels today, Jonathan Maria, thank you.
Speaker 1: Wonderful work has always Leslie Felconio joined us now seeing
Speaker 1: your fixed income strategies for the America's at UBS Global
Speaker 1: Wealth Management, Leslie, I want to start with this bond market.
Speaker 1: Can I be blunt? Is bizarre coming out of chairman
Speaker 1: pound the news conference on Wednesday to see break even's higher,
Speaker 1: not lower, real yields lower, not higher, the curve starting
Speaker 1: to invert a little bit, Leslie, can you make sense
Speaker 1: of this why we're pricing almost in some parts some
Speaker 1: pockets are fixed income. It was as if we had
Speaker 1: a Dovish news Comforts and a Dovish meet sinc. Well,
Speaker 1: I don't think it's surprising that the short end of
Speaker 1: the break evens are actually moving higher. And when you
Speaker 1: think about really what's happening with sanctions and now with
Speaker 1: Russian Ukraine and some of the an increase in the
Speaker 1: supply chain bottleneck and the increase in oil that we're seeing.
Speaker 1: But to your point, I mean, having the tenure break
Speaker 1: even reached that three percent level, you know, it's not
Speaker 1: you know, concerning, but it's something that definitely believe that
Speaker 1: the FED is going to watch going forward. I mean,
Speaker 1: and I think the real gield rate now our expectation
Speaker 1: for real guilds, at least in the tenure area is
Speaker 1: to move higher. Ian we do expect break evens, particularly
Speaker 1: the long end, as the FED starts to become a
Speaker 1: bit more aggressive, to come down. But that short end,
Speaker 1: which is really you know, moved by sentiment, and things
Speaker 1: like oil might stay the breake evens might say happen
Speaker 1: quite some time. So Leslie, this is the aspect that
Speaker 1: really doesn't make sense to me that not only do
Speaker 1: we see tenure treasury yield still relatively low versus the
Speaker 1: expectations for inflation over the next ten years, but also
Speaker 1: people are pouring money at the fastest pace, uh, some
Speaker 1: of the fastest paces we've seen in the past decade.
Speaker 1: If you look at the e t F that tracks
Speaker 1: the longest dated e t f s. Does this make
Speaker 1: sense to you that people see value in two point
Speaker 1: one eight percent yields on a ten year note. Well,
Speaker 1: I think that the expectation is at least our expectation
Speaker 1: is only looking for about like a two point three
Speaker 1: percent ten year yield. And you have to remember how
Speaker 1: quickly Removed went from one a half percent in the
Speaker 1: beginning of the year all the way to a two
Speaker 1: point two four within ten weeks. That is an incredible move.
Speaker 1: And now that the ft is has become fairly aggressive,
Speaker 1: not to menagtion, the fact we do have qut in
Speaker 1: may more than likely, you know, there is a normalization
Speaker 1: of the yield curves, So I do understand why people
Speaker 1: would really want to stop and take on some interest
Speaker 1: rate risk at these levels. Normalization of the yield curve.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about the yield curve. Leslie's two stands. Does
Speaker 1: it invert? If so, when I think there's a potential
Speaker 1: that you know, two tents can invert, you know, the
Speaker 1: latter half the year. But I also think it's important
Speaker 1: to note that it's not just tipps and verts, it's
Speaker 1: a magnitude of the inversion and how sustainable that vision is.
Speaker 1: I mean, we all know when the curb and verts,
Speaker 1: you know, it's a it's a coincident indicator in our opinion,
Speaker 1: you know, two or three years out, you know, does
Speaker 1: can indicate a recession. But we look at things like
Speaker 1: the two year yield which went to two percent. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is some of the biggest moves that we've seen,
Speaker 1: with the FED only going twenty five basis points right,
Speaker 1: that magnitude of the moved two year yield, the FED
Speaker 1: funds ring would already be a one and a a quarter
Speaker 1: one and a half min now nicely, just looking at
Speaker 1: the yield curve, then let's sum it up. Threes are
Speaker 1: basically in line with tens. Five yields above tens seven
Speaker 1: year yields above tens should not constrain risk appetite our
Speaker 1: swhere or do you think investors will just look through
Speaker 1: some of this. I think it's really gonna depend on
Speaker 1: real guilds. I remember, real guilds are still negative. The
Speaker 1: term premiums on me, you know. And at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, again, I know we always say this,
Speaker 1: but it's true. It really does come down to the consumer,
Speaker 1: and you know, real consumption is still still very strong.
Speaker 1: Let's not forget the majority of consumer debt is mortgages,
Speaker 1: and the majority of those mortgages are fixed. So I mean,
Speaker 1: we do think that obviously that you could have some
Speaker 1: headwinds from the inversion, but really you'll still remain negative.
Speaker 1: So Leslie, what are you actually doing well? We've been,
Speaker 1: you know, are we've had we would say, in the
Speaker 1: fixed income side, more of a risk on. I mean,
Speaker 1: our expectation was an interest rates of rise heading into
Speaker 1: the year. We've liked that floating rate asset things like
Speaker 1: senior loans, so we've had a bit of what we
Speaker 1: could consider credit exposure. But now again as we started
Speaker 1: starting normalize Advan, and we've seen this headwind from interest
Speaker 1: rates going higher and spreads widening the two variables, which
Speaker 1: is a major headwind towards total return and performance on
Speaker 1: the fixed income side. You know, it may not be
Speaker 1: a bad time to you know, go a little bit
Speaker 1: up and fality, and as we said, even on the
Speaker 1: right side, we don't expect indust rates to really move
Speaker 1: materially higher from here. Leslie, thank you for your perspective,
Speaker 1: and so White so Lesie found county of that of
Speaker 1: UBS Global Wealth Management. We have got a perfect conversation
Speaker 1: now with Dave Eltzic, the executive vice president and director
Speaker 1: of Research at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, the
Speaker 1: president also of the National Association for Business Economics as well. David,
Speaker 1: come to you first. That survey is pretty brutal. That's
Speaker 1: the fact that these respondents think is going to stay
Speaker 1: behind the curve. Dave, what's this fact going to do
Speaker 1: about it? Well, I mean, the the the form C
Speaker 1: is going to do what the fform C does and
Speaker 1: and conduct monetary policy of course as they deem appropriate
Speaker 1: to meet the committee's goal. So I'm not quite sure
Speaker 1: the survey is going to move the needle and it's
Speaker 1: worth recognizing and remembering that the survey was done a
Speaker 1: week it was in the field a week before the
Speaker 1: meeting itself, so we're not quite certain how that might
Speaker 1: have moved the needle on sentiment. Uh. I imagine I
Speaker 1: will be talking to a lot of people today who
Speaker 1: are going to let me know exactly how it's going
Speaker 1: to move the needle in the sentiment um. But the
Speaker 1: messages were pretty clear that are our members on in
Speaker 1: name have some concerns about inflation and about the course
Speaker 1: of FED policy. Do they think that the FED is
Speaker 1: deliberately going to remain behind the curve or do they think, Dave,
Speaker 1: that we're going to get a FED incapable of curbing
Speaker 1: inflation at a cycle when it's a lot of supply
Speaker 1: chain driven issues, when you have really a conunsum we're
Speaker 1: the only way for them to counter it is to
Speaker 1: damp in demand in a tenuous recovery moment. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: a little bit hard always to kind of uh interpret
Speaker 1: what any group of individuals mean when they answer a
Speaker 1: survey like this. There are a couple of the details
Speaker 1: sort of in the survey itself, which gives some clues
Speaker 1: about what might be generating some of this um, not
Speaker 1: so sanguine view of inflation. Um, Ukraine is very deaf
Speaker 1: only sort of looming large, and it's loom and it
Speaker 1: shows up in two places really in the survey. In
Speaker 1: In the first place, uh, there is a clear sentiment
Speaker 1: that the situation Ukraine is going to exacerbate and sort
Speaker 1: of elongate the process of getting the supply chain disruption
Speaker 1: sort of back into order. Uh. And the second is
Speaker 1: reaction that, because of the uncertainty associated with the situation
Speaker 1: in Ukraine and probably broader geopolitical concerns, that it will
Speaker 1: create a scenario where, um, there will be a more
Speaker 1: cautious approach than what otherwise would be. So I think
Speaker 1: in part those are elements underneath of the pessimism. I
Speaker 1: don't think it's a didn't pick up any sense that
Speaker 1: it's a belief that the situation with the rate of
Speaker 1: with the inflation rate is not being taken seriously, or
Speaker 1: that the pivot towards of the inflation fight is being
Speaker 1: uh just just lip service. I just think it's a
Speaker 1: lot of the confluence of a lot of these other
Speaker 1: things that are making people a little concerned about whether
Speaker 1: things will be as aggressive as they would like them. David,
Speaker 1: moving beyond the survey, what's your view on the ground
Speaker 1: as head of research at the Atlanta Fed, because they
Speaker 1: do concredible research on GDP, on wages, of the resilience
Speaker 1: of the American consumer. Well, I mean, we're still detecting
Speaker 1: virtually no signals of any um softening of demand when
Speaker 1: we talked to firms. Uh, and we talked to a
Speaker 1: lot of them. I mean, we spend a great deal
Speaker 1: of our time with our boots on the ground talking
Speaker 1: to the people actually making pricing decisions and employment decisions. Uh,
Speaker 1: there really is not much of a signal we're getting
Speaker 1: that of consumer demand is substantially weakening. UM. Pricing power
Speaker 1: appears to not be waning at all, at least from
Speaker 1: the anecdotal reports and actually from survey reports as well.
Speaker 1: And there's some you know, the question is always how
Speaker 1: long can that last? UM? But no one is sort
Speaker 1: of ringing the bell about the process of of fairly
Speaker 1: strong uh consumer demand and fairly resilient demand. Uh. That
Speaker 1: seems to still be the play on the subject of demand,
Speaker 1: and it's in elasticity or elasticity though, Dave, at what
Speaker 1: point would you start to expect demand destruction to to
Speaker 1: kick in. Is there this historical level that you'd be
Speaker 1: watching um no um. I mean, one of the things
Speaker 1: that we've obviously been fairly uh concerned about and tuned
Speaker 1: into is the waning of the fiscal stimulus. But if
Speaker 1: you if you, for example, track consumer spending with wage
Speaker 1: and salary income, those things tracked very closely, and what
Speaker 1: that means is there was an awful lot of the
Speaker 1: stimulus that was essentially kept in reserve and not used
Speaker 1: to um support in a substantial way, uh spending beyond
Speaker 1: the early age, you know, early days of the pandemic.
Speaker 1: So it would seem just from that sort of information
Speaker 1: and that sort of data that there um uh there's
Speaker 1: not a situation where the consumers way out over their
Speaker 1: skis and unable to kind of sustain through uh the
Speaker 1: fading away of all the support that happened as a
Speaker 1: result of the pandemic. I've awsome to catch up because
Speaker 1: I've got a busy a few days, busy week ahead
Speaker 1: of you. So thanks for spending some time with this
Speaker 1: stavertic that of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Devid
Speaker 1: Raley join US now Chief Investment strategist of Blue Pay
Speaker 1: Asset Management, David. I won't ask you a pointed question,
Speaker 1: I'll ask you an open one. Your reaction to what's
Speaker 1: happening in this bond market at the moment. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think the bond market is um you know, clearly signaling
Speaker 1: that it is not as bullish as certainly the equity market.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think there is a little bit of
Speaker 1: a sort of disconnect between those two, and if you
Speaker 1: look at the one year forward tend to it is
Speaker 1: already inverted. That being said, I don't think the bond
Speaker 1: market is necessarily pricing you know, a high risk of recession.
Speaker 1: I think what it's pricing at the longer end, it's
Speaker 1: just a wider distribution of outcomes. This uncertainty that you
Speaker 1: know you've been talking about in during the program. You know,
Speaker 1: where is inflation going to settle, how far is the
Speaker 1: Fed going to raise rates, and what's the outlook for growth?
Speaker 1: Not this year, which I think is reasonably going to
Speaker 1: be reasonably kind of solid, but you know, if we're
Speaker 1: going to twenty twenty three, and what we do know
Speaker 1: and is getting priced in the two year no, is
Speaker 1: that the Fed is on a hiking cycle. Um, they're
Speaker 1: going to be raising rates twenty five basis points every
Speaker 1: every meeting, is going to start balance sheet reduction as well,
Speaker 1: and also wants some tiding and financial conditions, and that
Speaker 1: I think it's going to be quite a meaningful headwind
Speaker 1: for risk assets and particularly for equities. David, if we
Speaker 1: were to price stagflation in fixed income, and this is
Speaker 1: not a view of mine, a personal opinion, this is
Speaker 1: an observation about what is happening in fixed income, you
Speaker 1: would say what would happen ultimately is that you would
Speaker 1: start to see an inversion of the yield curve because
Speaker 1: this market would start to smell out slowing growth. And
Speaker 1: what you would also see is elevated break evens because
Speaker 1: this market would believe that even with slowing growth, inflation
Speaker 1: will remain elevator. And David, I have to say, that's
Speaker 1: exactly what I could see post Federal Reserve. What we've
Speaker 1: seen is the curve slowly invert. Nominal yields to his
Speaker 1: out to tens. We've got three ye yeelds above tens,
Speaker 1: five or year olds above tens, seven year olds above tens.
Speaker 1: That's nominal sorted. Look at break evens at the highs
Speaker 1: of the year last week, David on ten year break evens.
Speaker 1: Isn't that what stagflation starts to look like in fixed income?
Speaker 1: I mean, you're right to highlight that, Jonathan, But also
Speaker 1: I would say, look at the five year, five year
Speaker 1: in terms of inflation break evens, and that's actually not
Speaker 1: that far above what you would consider to be over
Speaker 1: the medium term the Fed's target. What the market has
Speaker 1: done and what the bond market has done is say,
Speaker 1: we've got a stagflationary shock coming from uh, the Russian
Speaker 1: war on Ukraine. We don't know how severe that's going
Speaker 1: to be, both in terms of growth and in terms
Speaker 1: of inflation, because you know, it depends on how that
Speaker 1: conflict develops, what happens in terms of commodity prices. But
Speaker 1: but we do know that inflation is going to be
Speaker 1: higher um as as a result of that, particularly in
Speaker 1: the nearer terms. So you know, clearly the market, I
Speaker 1: think is pricing, and the bond market, as I say,
Speaker 1: is pricing a sort of broader distribution of of of risk,
Speaker 1: and I think that's why you know we're starting to
Speaker 1: get a bit of a bid at the longer end.
Speaker 1: Um well, that inflationary pressure is feeding through. In terms
Speaker 1: of this, you know, more hawk is few if you like,
Speaker 1: in terms of the FED. But you know, I actually
Speaker 1: think now we're pretty fairly priced at the short end.
Speaker 1: I mean, we've closed are sort of short duration positions
Speaker 1: at the short end of the curve because I don't
Speaker 1: think the FED is going to be more aggressive than
Speaker 1: they're setting out at the moment. But I do think
Speaker 1: the FED is clearly signaling and power is very clear.
Speaker 1: I thought on this in the press conference is if
Speaker 1: we want to avoid those stagflationary risks, we need to
Speaker 1: get to neutral sooner rather than later. So I think,
Speaker 1: you know they are on a path to more aggressive
Speaker 1: or you know, hence whether they kind of validated that
Speaker 1: more aggressive path for for for eight heights and then
Speaker 1: you know, let's see what happens in three. My bias
Speaker 1: is actually the FED will have to do more big
Speaker 1: as are those sticky in inflation. But right now I
Speaker 1: think the market is recently well priced, particularly at the
Speaker 1: short end. David, just quickly here, if you're just as
Speaker 1: confused as we are, what's the safest as a class
Speaker 1: right now? The safest as a class, I think, I
Speaker 1: mean where I would go and where we've been, you know,
Speaker 1: at the margin, adding some risk is basically for example,
Speaker 1: in in in credit, I mean the credit market. You know,
Speaker 1: it is the other part of the broader bomb market,
Speaker 1: and it's not signaling near term recession risk. But we've
Speaker 1: seen a pretty meaningful repricing both in yield and spread terms,
Speaker 1: and I think you're getting adibly compensated for the default
Speaker 1: risk over the next twelve months or so. So UM,
Speaker 1: I actually do like some of um you know, parts
Speaker 1: of the credit market, and in places like within structured credit,
Speaker 1: getting exposure to the US consumer through for example, mortgage
Speaker 1: securities and other structured credit. I think, as your previous
Speaker 1: guest was highlighting, the U s consumers still proving to
Speaker 1: be pretty resilient. So if you're a little bit cautious
Speaker 1: around sort of corporate risk, I think actually US consumer
Speaker 1: risk is a good place to take exposure. Interesting David Raleigh,
Speaker 1: Thank you, sir. Fantastic to catch up with flood Bay
Speaker 1: asset Management. This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Thanks for listening.
Speaker 1: Join us live weekdays from seven to ten a m.
Speaker 1: Eastern on Bloomberg Radio and on Bloomberg Television. Each day
Speaker 1: from six to nine am for insight from the best
Speaker 1: in economics, finance, investment, and international relations. And subscribe to
Speaker 1: the Surveillance podcast on Apple podcast, SoundCloud, Bloomberg dot com,
Speaker 1: and of course, on the terminal. I'm Tom Keene, and
Speaker 1: this is Bloomberg.