WEBVTT - Wall Street’s Predictions for 2026 0:00:02.720 --> 0:00:07.200 Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. 0:00:07.880 --> 0:00:10.760 This has been a busy stretch for Sam Potter, a 0:00:10.840 --> 0:00:13.520 senior editor for Markets at Bloomberg, And it's like this 0:00:13.880 --> 0:00:16.600 every year. Starting in mid November. 0:00:17.000 --> 0:00:19.560 That's when the very earliest outlooks for the next year 0:00:19.640 --> 0:00:23.159 start to arrive on my desk, coming through email. I 0:00:23.239 --> 0:00:26.799 generally let a little pile build up til I'm ready 0:00:26.840 --> 0:00:27.640 to tackle them. 0:00:27.760 --> 0:00:31.080 Then Sam starts reading, looking for the big themes Wall 0:00:31.080 --> 0:00:35.200 Street strategists and economists and portfolio managers expect will shape 0:00:35.240 --> 0:00:37.320 the year ahead. It's a lot. 0:00:37.600 --> 0:00:40.559 I mean, there are dozens and dozens of these things, 0:00:40.640 --> 0:00:42.760 and many of them run to hundreds of pages. 0:00:43.159 --> 0:00:46.640 For years now, Sam has boiled all that down, synthesizing 0:00:46.680 --> 0:00:49.120 how some of the top names and finance are thinking 0:00:49.159 --> 0:00:52.680 about the coming year. The end product is this amazing 0:00:52.760 --> 0:00:54.680 tool you can find at Bloomberg dot com. 0:00:54.880 --> 0:00:57.400 What I try and do is take the top line 0:00:57.480 --> 0:01:00.520 calls and then we piece them all together in the 0:01:00.560 --> 0:01:03.279 feature and we make it searchable. You know, you can 0:01:03.280 --> 0:01:07.120 filter buy the financial institution, or by the topic, or 0:01:07.120 --> 0:01:10.800 buy the asset, and it allows you to compare and 0:01:10.840 --> 0:01:12.400 contrust all the different calls. 0:01:12.640 --> 0:01:16.240 Sam identifies each firm's base case for the economy and 0:01:16.440 --> 0:01:19.000 markets and what he's keeping an eye out for are 0:01:19.120 --> 0:01:20.520 high conviction calls. 0:01:20.880 --> 0:01:24.600 Lots of them are very much they sit on the fence. 0:01:24.760 --> 0:01:28.360 They say, well, this could happen all that conviction. We're optimistic, 0:01:28.400 --> 0:01:32.280 but they're at risk. Or you get these ones that 0:01:32.360 --> 0:01:35.440 try and be creative and thematic, and they will say, 0:01:35.480 --> 0:01:39.000 here are the top five trends that we think will 0:01:39.000 --> 0:01:42.679 shape humanity in the year's ahead. They are ultimately their 0:01:42.760 --> 0:01:47.880 marketing tools, but some of them can be super interesting, 0:01:48.200 --> 0:01:51.400 either super bullish or super bearish. 0:01:51.920 --> 0:01:54.560 It may not surprise you, given how twenty twenty five 0:01:54.640 --> 0:01:57.320 shaped up, that the biggest theme for twenty twenty six 0:01:57.840 --> 0:01:59.120 is artificial intelligence. 0:01:59.400 --> 0:02:01.280 The thing it sort of leapt out of me in 0:02:01.320 --> 0:02:05.400 this year's outlet was this idea that everyone on Wall Street, 0:02:05.480 --> 0:02:08.840 or seemingly everyone in Wall Street, is bullish about AI. 0:02:09.600 --> 0:02:13.440 They talk of it as a game changing, revolutionary technology, 0:02:14.000 --> 0:02:17.239 but at the same time, the biggest risk that most 0:02:17.280 --> 0:02:23.440 of them see is that the AI investment cycle is overhyped, 0:02:23.600 --> 0:02:26.359 that we could be in a bubble and that things 0:02:26.520 --> 0:02:27.360 could turn ugly. 0:02:27.600 --> 0:02:29.880 And it wasn't lost on me as I talked to 0:02:29.919 --> 0:02:32.280 Sam about all the work that went into this project, 0:02:32.840 --> 0:02:36.760 that maybe AI, the technology that led markets to record highs, 0:02:37.320 --> 0:02:39.239 could have made his job a lot easier. 0:02:39.440 --> 0:02:41.240 Actually, in the end, I made a point of not 0:02:41.400 --> 0:02:43.960 using AI for this. I used the same method that 0:02:44.040 --> 0:02:47.760 I was using seven years ago, which means possibly I'm 0:02:47.760 --> 0:02:53.000 inserting my own bias and misfunctioning brain instead of AIS. 0:02:53.160 --> 0:02:55.360 But at least it's consistent over the years. 0:02:58.600 --> 0:03:00.959 I'm David Gerat, and this is the take from Bloomberg 0:03:01.000 --> 0:03:05.000 News today on the show, From AI to Geopolitical Risks 0:03:05.040 --> 0:03:08.360 to Gold What Wall Street expects for twenty twenty six. 0:03:15.480 --> 0:03:17.799 We're at this moment where more investors seem to be 0:03:17.880 --> 0:03:21.720 questioning or thinking differently about AI's growth, in particular, how 0:03:21.760 --> 0:03:24.560 much money is being poured into the infrastructure that power 0:03:24.600 --> 0:03:27.440 is AI. How does Wall Street see that playing out 0:03:27.600 --> 0:03:28.480 in twenty twenty six? 0:03:28.880 --> 0:03:34.000 On balance, they lean on optimism here. Most of them 0:03:34.080 --> 0:03:38.640 see the transformative power of AI changing the way we work, 0:03:38.800 --> 0:03:43.760 changing the way we innovate, boosting productivity. They also look 0:03:43.800 --> 0:03:46.880 at the expenditure and say, well, who's paying for all this? 0:03:47.040 --> 0:03:50.880 And in many cases, these multi multi billion dollar deals 0:03:50.880 --> 0:03:54.560 that we see hit the headlines. The company behind them 0:03:54.640 --> 0:03:58.240 is one of the tech megacaps, you know, heavily cash rich. 0:03:58.880 --> 0:04:02.320 They can afford to make this expenditure until they see 0:04:02.360 --> 0:04:06.840 returns on it. And these tech megacaps, their earnings are 0:04:06.880 --> 0:04:10.000 still super solid. It's not like the dot com where 0:04:10.800 --> 0:04:13.800 the firms that were throwing out these huge deals didn't 0:04:13.800 --> 0:04:18.039 really have earnings potential, were very concentrated. You know. The 0:04:18.120 --> 0:04:22.720 Magnificent Seven are highly diversifized companies with massive earnings potential. 0:04:23.360 --> 0:04:25.839 So a lot of Wall streak takes comfort from that, 0:04:26.240 --> 0:04:29.280 and it sort of backs them into thinking that this 0:04:29.400 --> 0:04:32.400 AI expansion is going to be sustainable for the near 0:04:32.440 --> 0:04:33.200 future at least. 0:04:33.279 --> 0:04:36.640 Are there any outliers of note, anyone who is calling 0:04:36.680 --> 0:04:37.520 this a bubble? 0:04:38.040 --> 0:04:42.839 Definitively, there's not an awful lot this year. There's not 0:04:42.880 --> 0:04:46.520 an awful lot of kind of outlier that firms Vanguard 0:04:46.600 --> 0:04:51.120 springs to mind. They're very cautious on the valuations currently 0:04:51.160 --> 0:04:55.400 being quoted for the Magnificent Seven. They're worried about it. 0:04:56.040 --> 0:05:01.360 But even there they say, we think that market's over concentrated. 0:05:01.440 --> 0:05:05.440 We think these companies are potentially overvalued, but we don't 0:05:05.520 --> 0:05:08.680 recommend you get out of AI investing instead, look for 0:05:08.720 --> 0:05:11.120 the second order, so the company is the ones who 0:05:11.160 --> 0:05:14.360 will benefit from AI, or look for the infrastructure investments 0:05:14.400 --> 0:05:16.120 that are tied in with it. 0:05:18.080 --> 0:05:20.200 Twenty twenty five was this year in which so much 0:05:20.200 --> 0:05:22.000 focus was on in so many of the returns came 0:05:22.040 --> 0:05:24.479 from just a handful of stocks. It's also true of 0:05:24.480 --> 0:05:26.800 twenty twenty four. I should say, all the while, there's 0:05:26.839 --> 0:05:30.200 been this conversation, this persistent conversation in the background about 0:05:30.200 --> 0:05:32.839 whether this market is going to broaden out, the need 0:05:32.880 --> 0:05:35.960 for it to broaden out. As these strategists look ahead 0:05:36.000 --> 0:05:37.919 to twenty twenty six, is there any confidence that is 0:05:37.960 --> 0:05:38.560 going to happen? 0:05:39.160 --> 0:05:43.240 They certainly think so. A lot of the recommendations are 0:05:43.760 --> 0:05:46.679 AI is not a bubble, or it's not yet a bubble, 0:05:47.080 --> 0:05:51.880 but given the valuations and the market concentration surrounding the megacaps, 0:05:52.360 --> 0:05:56.040 it may be time to diversify and bind. Diversify they 0:05:56.080 --> 0:05:59.320 mean look for the sectors that are going to really 0:05:59.320 --> 0:06:04.400 benefit from implementing AI. Look at where this expenditure is going, 0:06:04.440 --> 0:06:09.320 so in infrastructure and data centers. So these outlooks are 0:06:09.360 --> 0:06:12.640 telling us get ready for this market to broaden out. 0:06:12.920 --> 0:06:16.200 But would just point out, this isn't the first year 0:06:16.279 --> 0:06:20.040 we've heard that, and probably not the second year we've 0:06:20.040 --> 0:06:23.560 heard that. Either. I was interested to write the summary 0:06:23.600 --> 0:06:26.839 section for AI, and as I wrote it, I was 0:06:26.839 --> 0:06:29.520 actually in the on the back end in the system 0:06:29.520 --> 0:06:31.720 we use. I was deleting the old one from last year, 0:06:32.440 --> 0:06:34.880 and the old one from last year was talking about 0:06:35.240 --> 0:06:38.159 we expect the gains of AI to broaden out into 0:06:38.200 --> 0:06:41.719 more sectors, and you look for the winners from AI. 0:06:42.640 --> 0:06:46.200 So it seems like we're still waiting for that broadening 0:06:46.200 --> 0:06:50.240 out and for those sectors to really adopt and apply it. 0:06:50.320 --> 0:06:53.040 So a good question is whether in a year's time 0:06:53.120 --> 0:06:56.480 we're going to be having a very similar conversation to this, 0:06:56.560 --> 0:06:57.039 I suppose. 0:06:57.440 --> 0:07:01.240 So what about other risk gas That's something stocks commodities. 0:07:01.680 --> 0:07:03.720 Does Wallstreet expect they're going to continue to climb? 0:07:03.880 --> 0:07:08.520 Yeah, mostly again off the back of the AI boom 0:07:08.640 --> 0:07:13.280 and the frenzy around that. Plus we have very fiscally 0:07:13.320 --> 0:07:19.560 loose governments. Plus we have central banks leaning towards easier 0:07:19.720 --> 0:07:24.320 policy in most major geographies. All of these things are 0:07:24.360 --> 0:07:28.160 seen as a tailwind for risk assets. So while no 0:07:28.200 --> 0:07:33.960 one's predicting huge double digit returns this year, everyone seems 0:07:34.000 --> 0:07:36.840 pretty confident that you're better off being invested than not. 0:07:36.960 --> 0:07:39.440 Put in that way, I wanted to ask you about gold. 0:07:39.520 --> 0:07:42.800 What do these outlooks say about the prospects for assets 0:07:42.800 --> 0:07:45.240 that aren't risky, ones that are considered kind of more 0:07:45.280 --> 0:07:46.680 haven or safer assets. 0:07:47.200 --> 0:07:50.840 Yeah, there's some advice to look for new hedges. I 0:07:50.840 --> 0:07:54.640 think one thing noted that given the situation where we've 0:07:54.640 --> 0:07:58.280 potentially got short term boring rates coming down, but very 0:07:58.280 --> 0:08:02.200 fiscally expansive program in government, that means the long end 0:08:02.720 --> 0:08:04.880 yields are going to stay high, so a steeper curve. 0:08:05.600 --> 0:08:09.040 What that can mean is that maybe bonds bonds will 0:08:09.040 --> 0:08:11.480 provide you income, they're not necessarily going to act as 0:08:11.560 --> 0:08:15.520 that hedge against equity risk. So there's talk about where 0:08:15.520 --> 0:08:19.560 you find your hedges. Gold is still up. There seems 0:08:19.600 --> 0:08:21.960 like not many firms want to predict the end of 0:08:22.440 --> 0:08:23.280 gold's upswing. 0:08:25.440 --> 0:08:28.200 We start twenty twenty six with the Federals are still 0:08:28.240 --> 0:08:31.000 very much focused on inflation higher than it wants it 0:08:31.040 --> 0:08:34.840 to be, also very clearly worried about future prospects of 0:08:34.840 --> 0:08:36.960 the labor market. What did you learn say from these 0:08:37.000 --> 0:08:39.880 outlooks about what Wall Street expects from the economy in 0:08:39.880 --> 0:08:40.680 twenty twenty six. 0:08:41.080 --> 0:08:43.959 Yes, so it's interesting. The FED is definitely a big 0:08:44.040 --> 0:08:49.160 question because they are very much seen caught between slowly 0:08:49.280 --> 0:08:53.319 declining but still very sticky inflation that's way above target 0:08:54.080 --> 0:08:57.920 and a labor market that is sort of feeling the 0:08:57.960 --> 0:09:02.880 pressures of rising costs of tariffs and the political pressure, 0:09:03.200 --> 0:09:06.960 let's face it, from the Trump administration for lower rates, 0:09:06.960 --> 0:09:09.920 and we also have the FED chair set to be 0:09:09.960 --> 0:09:12.680 replaced a number of votes surrounding other members of the 0:09:12.720 --> 0:09:18.000 Federal Reserve. On balance, mostly people expect the FED to 0:09:18.040 --> 0:09:21.280 ease a little bit, but the stickiness of inflation will 0:09:21.360 --> 0:09:24.560 mean they can't go quite as far as perhaps Trump 0:09:24.559 --> 0:09:28.920 and the politics want. Economy wise, the various tailwinds mean 0:09:29.400 --> 0:09:32.679 moderating growth, most of them saying growth is going to 0:09:32.760 --> 0:09:35.120 be pretty much in line with the long term trend. 0:09:35.520 --> 0:09:39.120 Another big theme in twenty twenty five was private markets, 0:09:39.160 --> 0:09:41.680 private credit, and a couple of bankruptcies in that space 0:09:41.720 --> 0:09:45.280 that really raised worries that an economic downturn could maybe 0:09:45.320 --> 0:09:49.120 expose troubled companies. We had JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie 0:09:49.160 --> 0:09:52.319 Diamond now famously warning that when you see a cockroach, 0:09:52.600 --> 0:09:54.720 there are probably more that could emerge in the space. 0:09:55.440 --> 0:09:57.680 I'm curious how much ink was spilled about that in 0:09:57.720 --> 0:10:00.920 these outlooks, kind of raising concerned raising quests, thinking about 0:10:00.960 --> 0:10:03.480 sort of the way that private markets are going to 0:10:03.480 --> 0:10:05.560 play a role, a continued role in the economy in 0:10:05.600 --> 0:10:06.440 twenty twenty six. 0:10:07.000 --> 0:10:09.920 Yeah, a lot of them tackle that pretty much head on. 0:10:10.920 --> 0:10:15.320 They see the various you know, the cockroaches. It's pretty 0:10:15.400 --> 0:10:18.400 much contained, to be honest, there's a lot of positivity 0:10:18.679 --> 0:10:23.800 around private market still, private equity and credit, various credit structures. 0:10:24.480 --> 0:10:28.559 I think their argument is that it's a good diversifier, 0:10:28.840 --> 0:10:34.560 that their returns are potentially good, that mostly companies corporations 0:10:34.559 --> 0:10:38.160 are in pretty rude health. It does bear saying, though 0:10:38.200 --> 0:10:41.600 that most of them say, private markets look good, but 0:10:41.760 --> 0:10:44.160 what you need is expertise to guide you through it, 0:10:44.440 --> 0:10:46.760 and we're the ones to give you that expertise. So 0:10:46.880 --> 0:10:51.319 I'm always well aware that the more complicated or obscure 0:10:51.880 --> 0:10:54.800 or hard to invest in the market, the more money 0:10:54.800 --> 0:10:59.000 that Wall Street can make from helping you invest in it. So, yeah, 0:10:59.040 --> 0:11:01.840 a lot of talk about private markets. They think that 0:11:01.920 --> 0:11:04.360 bandwagon has got some distance to go. 0:11:04.320 --> 0:11:10.440 Yet coming up, How accurate were last year's calls and 0:11:10.480 --> 0:11:12.520 what does that say about how we should look at 0:11:12.520 --> 0:11:25.600 this year's Bloomberg. Sam Potter has done this analysis of 0:11:25.640 --> 0:11:28.120 Wall Street outlooks for seven years in a row now, 0:11:28.720 --> 0:11:31.640 and while he looks ahead, Sam also takes stock of 0:11:31.679 --> 0:11:34.840 how accurate the preceding years outlooks were. So I asked 0:11:34.880 --> 0:11:37.840 him how often Wall Street's predictions pan out? 0:11:38.080 --> 0:11:41.760 That's so hard to answer because so often they couch 0:11:42.040 --> 0:11:44.839 everything and this could happen, this may happen. This is 0:11:44.880 --> 0:11:49.040 what we're worried about. I think if you're in our business, 0:11:49.080 --> 0:11:52.600 if you're in the financial business, what you're probably dealing 0:11:52.640 --> 0:11:57.520 in as much as anything else's ideas, ideas and possibility, 0:11:58.280 --> 0:12:01.360 and oftentimes the audience to these things are going to 0:12:01.360 --> 0:12:03.000 be making their own mind up as well. They're going 0:12:03.000 --> 0:12:06.679 to be experienced professionals, They're going to have their own expertise. 0:12:07.120 --> 0:12:09.920 When I look through them, I'm looking for something, anything 0:12:09.960 --> 0:12:13.120 that jumps out as unique or sticks out about a 0:12:13.160 --> 0:12:16.440 year ahead. And also the common themes when we see 0:12:17.360 --> 0:12:20.520 dozens of reports saying we don't think AI is a 0:12:20.520 --> 0:12:24.920 bubble that lends you some maybe confidence, I don't know, 0:12:24.960 --> 0:12:27.560 maybe we should be worried everyone thinks it's not a bubble. 0:12:27.640 --> 0:12:29.920 Maybe that's the contrarian warning sign. 0:12:30.920 --> 0:12:34.400 Sam says. One of last year's most prescient calls also 0:12:34.480 --> 0:12:35.800 involved breaking from the pack. 0:12:36.160 --> 0:12:40.480 We saw that actually in twenty twenty five. One that 0:12:40.559 --> 0:12:46.600 stood out last year BCA were extremely bearish on tariffs, 0:12:47.160 --> 0:12:52.520 and they basically in their outlook said, everyone's underestimating Trump 0:12:52.520 --> 0:12:54.439 and what he wants to do with tariffs. It's going 0:12:54.440 --> 0:12:56.000 to be ugly. This is what we think is going 0:12:56.000 --> 0:12:59.800 to happen. And of course come April they were pretty 0:12:59.840 --> 0:13:00.440 much spot on. 0:13:01.080 --> 0:13:03.000 Sam, You've been through this cycle a few times now, 0:13:03.040 --> 0:13:04.960 and every year you start with a stack of calls 0:13:04.960 --> 0:13:08.320 that may look totally reasonable. What sort of things tend 0:13:08.320 --> 0:13:10.000 to upbend them? What are the X factors? 0:13:10.360 --> 0:13:13.480 Geopolitics is always the one that they worry most about 0:13:13.559 --> 0:13:17.920 because it's the hardest to foresee, particularly with Trump administration, 0:13:18.360 --> 0:13:21.480 and he's a fairly unpredictable guy. In fact, at one 0:13:21.520 --> 0:13:24.360 point that was seen as a deliberate policy that he 0:13:24.800 --> 0:13:29.960 would sort of surprise people. But the shocks, Yeah, I 0:13:30.000 --> 0:13:33.480 think it's not so much shocks they're worried about this 0:13:33.640 --> 0:13:40.560 year as any major shift in trend. So AI maybe 0:13:40.559 --> 0:13:42.760 it's a bubble. Maybe it isn't a bubble. Even if 0:13:42.760 --> 0:13:45.760 it's not a bubble, if confidence starts to weigh in AI, 0:13:46.000 --> 0:13:48.560 then it would be it would be like the tanker turning, 0:13:48.600 --> 0:13:52.160 you know, it'd be a big mega trend turning and 0:13:52.320 --> 0:13:56.320 in credit and private credit and private markets. If they're 0:13:56.360 --> 0:13:59.880 wrong and there are more cock croaches than they think, 0:14:00.240 --> 0:14:02.040 it could bring to an end a sort of long 0:14:02.120 --> 0:14:06.640 term trend. If Trump does do something unexpected and there 0:14:06.720 --> 0:14:10.720 is more trade friction and inflation actually starts to increase, 0:14:11.200 --> 0:14:15.240 a big inflation shock is actually probably that's one of 0:14:15.280 --> 0:14:18.800 the biggest potential tail risks that people say. You know, 0:14:18.880 --> 0:14:21.960 that's the fat tale. If inflation goes the wrong way, 0:14:21.960 --> 0:14:26.800 then it throws so much other stuff, fiscal monetary out 0:14:26.800 --> 0:14:27.440 of the window. 0:14:27.840 --> 0:14:30.960 We've talked about AI, We've talked about the megacaps, talked 0:14:30.960 --> 0:14:34.880 about this narrow market. When you compare the outlooks for 0:14:34.920 --> 0:14:37.600 twenty twenty six the outlooks for twenty twenty five, how 0:14:37.680 --> 0:14:40.160 much do they have in common? How similar are they 0:14:40.360 --> 0:14:41.680 this year to what we saw last year? 0:14:42.200 --> 0:14:45.840 Thematically? Yeah, last year, I remember leading the story part 0:14:45.880 --> 0:14:49.040 of the feature with Trump because he had just been 0:14:49.080 --> 0:14:54.440 re elected, he was set to take office, and that 0:14:54.440 --> 0:14:58.720 that kind of overhung everything. Obviously, that's much more if 0:14:58.760 --> 0:15:00.720 you can ever call Trump and I'm quantity, but it 0:15:00.760 --> 0:15:03.480 is much more of a known quantity. Now the tariff 0:15:03.480 --> 0:15:08.680 situation is seen as stable, if not settled, So we've 0:15:08.680 --> 0:15:10.760 been able to move on from last year, move on 0:15:10.840 --> 0:15:13.280 a little bit from Trump. I think people also look 0:15:13.320 --> 0:15:15.600 ahead and see the midterms and think that that might 0:15:15.720 --> 0:15:21.880 restrain Trump's excesses a little bit. But there remain some 0:15:22.160 --> 0:15:23.280 big similarities. 0:15:25.760 --> 0:15:28.000 Before I let him go, I ask Sam how he 0:15:28.000 --> 0:15:31.479 helps people in the industry. Readers and the generally curious 0:15:31.640 --> 0:15:32.560 will use his tool. 0:15:32.920 --> 0:15:38.400 So I think that such as the volume of stuff 0:15:38.400 --> 0:15:42.000 that Wall Street produces for the year ahead and so 0:15:42.280 --> 0:15:46.600 sort of disparate, I don't think people have the time 0:15:47.240 --> 0:15:50.360 or necessarily the easy access to read it or to 0:15:50.440 --> 0:15:53.560 consume it, or I hope what I do, if nothing else, 0:15:54.200 --> 0:15:58.840 is give them a tool that aggregates and allows them 0:15:58.880 --> 0:16:01.520 to compare and control, and it allows them to sort 0:16:01.520 --> 0:16:04.480 of fix their place in the Wall Street universe, their 0:16:04.520 --> 0:16:09.320 firm standing alongside others. I'd also hope that if I 0:16:09.400 --> 0:16:11.400 was in the industry, I'd want to be checking it 0:16:11.480 --> 0:16:14.400 and make sure that I wasn't accidentally in a huge 0:16:14.400 --> 0:16:20.320 outlier position with all my money on betting against AI 0:16:20.520 --> 0:16:23.120 or something when everyone else on Wall Street feels differently. 0:16:27.680 --> 0:16:30.080 This is the Big Take from Bloomberg News. I'm David Gura. 0:16:30.320 --> 0:16:33.200 The show is hosted by me Wanha and Sarah Holder. 0:16:33.640 --> 0:16:36.480 The show is made by Aaron Edwards, David Fox, Eleanor 0:16:36.520 --> 0:16:40.680 Harrison Dengate, Patty Hirsch, Rachel Lewis, Krisky, Naomi, Julia Press, 0:16:40.800 --> 0:16:44.880 Tracy Samuelson, Naomi Shaven, Alex Cura, Julia Weaver, Young Young, 0:16:45.160 --> 0:16:47.720 and Takei Yasuzawa. To get more from the Big Take 0:16:47.760 --> 0:16:50.920 and unlimited access to all of Bloomberg dot Com, subscribe 0:16:50.920 --> 0:16:54.960 today at Bloomberg dot com Slash Podcast Offer. Thanks for listening. 0:16:55.080 --> 0:16:56.120 We'll be back on Monday.