WEBVTT - Netflix Says Tax Dispute Hurt Solid Quarter

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:07.040
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.

0:00:08.680 --> 0:00:12.960
<v Speaker 2>This is Bloomberg business Week, Daily reporting from the magazine

0:00:13.000 --> 0:00:17.639
<v Speaker 2>that helps global leaders stay ahead with insight on the people, companies,

0:00:17.680 --> 0:00:22.560
<v Speaker 2>and trends shaping today's complex economy. Plus global business finance

0:00:22.600 --> 0:00:25.880
<v Speaker 2>and tech news as it happens. The Bloomberg Business Week

0:00:26.000 --> 0:00:31.480
<v Speaker 2>Daily Podcast with Carol Masser and Tim Steneveek on Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:32.080 --> 0:00:34.720
<v Speaker 1>Back to Netflix, where shares down five and a half

0:00:34.760 --> 0:00:38.400
<v Speaker 1>percent as we speak. The company forecast revenue are for

0:00:38.520 --> 0:00:41.400
<v Speaker 1>the full year. The guidance met the average analyst estimate.

0:00:41.760 --> 0:00:45.120
<v Speaker 1>There were some questions though about profitability. The company out

0:00:45.240 --> 0:00:48.400
<v Speaker 1>with a statement essentially saying that and this is the

0:00:48.440 --> 0:00:51.480
<v Speaker 1>headline in the This is the way the letter begins. Carol,

0:00:52.000 --> 0:00:54.880
<v Speaker 1>operating margin of twenty eight percent was below our guidance

0:00:54.920 --> 0:00:56.440
<v Speaker 1>of thirty one and a half percent due to an

0:00:56.440 --> 0:01:00.400
<v Speaker 1>expense related to an ongoing dispute with Brazilian taxi authorities

0:01:00.440 --> 0:01:02.840
<v Speaker 1>that was not in our forecast. After to this expense,

0:01:02.840 --> 0:01:05.319
<v Speaker 1>we would have exceeded our Q three twenty five operating

0:01:05.360 --> 0:01:08.000
<v Speaker 1>margin forecast. We don't expect this matter to have material

0:01:08.040 --> 0:01:09.640
<v Speaker 1>impact on future results, all right.

0:01:09.560 --> 0:01:10.560
<v Speaker 3>So let's get to it.

0:01:10.640 --> 0:01:14.240
<v Speaker 4>With our own Bloomberg Intelligence Senior media analyst, Guita Ringanathon.

0:01:14.600 --> 0:01:17.279
<v Speaker 4>She's at BI headquarters in Princeton, New Jersey. Take it away,

0:01:17.440 --> 0:01:19.680
<v Speaker 4>So tell us what we need to know and why

0:01:19.800 --> 0:01:20.800
<v Speaker 4>is the stock really down?

0:01:20.880 --> 0:01:22.959
<v Speaker 3>Is it because of that one time charge?

0:01:24.160 --> 0:01:25.080
<v Speaker 5>Absolutely, Carol.

0:01:25.400 --> 0:01:29.280
<v Speaker 6>So operating margin is now the new metric by you

0:01:29.720 --> 0:01:32.839
<v Speaker 6>how investors kind of look at this company. We've seen

0:01:32.920 --> 0:01:35.360
<v Speaker 6>just a tremendous increase in the way that they have

0:01:35.520 --> 0:01:38.240
<v Speaker 6>kind of grown their profits, in the way that they've

0:01:38.240 --> 0:01:40.559
<v Speaker 6>expanded their margins. It was up over six hundred basis

0:01:40.600 --> 0:01:43.640
<v Speaker 6>points last year. We were really expecting them to actually

0:01:44.200 --> 0:01:47.280
<v Speaker 6>exceed their guidance for both this quarter as well as

0:01:47.280 --> 0:01:50.280
<v Speaker 6>to take up guidance for the full year. So this

0:01:50.360 --> 0:01:52.440
<v Speaker 6>kind of really throws cold water and all of those

0:01:52.480 --> 0:01:57.080
<v Speaker 6>expectations and overall kind of looks really really underwhelming.

0:01:58.000 --> 0:02:00.520
<v Speaker 1>What's the biggest thing challenging the company right now?

0:02:01.960 --> 0:02:03.960
<v Speaker 6>I mean, the biggest thing I think tim over the

0:02:04.000 --> 0:02:06.760
<v Speaker 6>past few months has really been, you know, the growth

0:02:06.800 --> 0:02:09.080
<v Speaker 6>of AI and whether that's going to be a headwind

0:02:09.160 --> 0:02:11.800
<v Speaker 6>or a tailwind for Netflix. I think we've all kind

0:02:11.800 --> 0:02:14.839
<v Speaker 6>of finally come to the you know, conclusion at least

0:02:14.840 --> 0:02:16.240
<v Speaker 6>in the near term that it's going to be more

0:02:16.240 --> 0:02:19.120
<v Speaker 6>of a tailwind. We've seen Netflix kind of really lean

0:02:19.240 --> 0:02:22.600
<v Speaker 6>into AI, whether it's using a good user interface, whether

0:02:22.639 --> 0:02:26.440
<v Speaker 6>it's improving that or using you know AI for you know,

0:02:26.520 --> 0:02:30.200
<v Speaker 6>even more more and better content creation. So I think

0:02:30.240 --> 0:02:33.280
<v Speaker 6>definitely in the near term, don't expect it to be

0:02:33.400 --> 0:02:36.119
<v Speaker 6>much of a negative. But then, you know, I think

0:02:36.160 --> 0:02:38.639
<v Speaker 6>over the longer term that's going to definitely be one

0:02:38.639 --> 0:02:41.240
<v Speaker 6>of the concerns out there. For right now, I think

0:02:41.280 --> 0:02:44.800
<v Speaker 6>what investors are really looking to and we need guidance,

0:02:44.840 --> 0:02:47.920
<v Speaker 6>more guidance from Netflix management on this. There really wasn't

0:02:48.360 --> 0:02:51.920
<v Speaker 6>much spoken about this in the newsletter, was you know,

0:02:52.000 --> 0:02:55.560
<v Speaker 6>anything related to advertising. They talk about doubling their advertising revenue,

0:02:55.760 --> 0:02:58.680
<v Speaker 6>but again there are no concrete metrics. There was no

0:02:58.880 --> 0:03:01.680
<v Speaker 6>update in terms of monthly active users. The last time

0:03:01.680 --> 0:03:04.160
<v Speaker 6>we got an update from them was in May. We

0:03:04.240 --> 0:03:07.000
<v Speaker 6>really don't know what the number of subscribers are on

0:03:08.000 --> 0:03:10.640
<v Speaker 6>the APD here or even what the revenue is, and

0:03:10.680 --> 0:03:15.840
<v Speaker 6>I think that will definitely give investors some costs for concern.

0:03:16.200 --> 0:03:18.400
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, they talked about ads, I feel like in the

0:03:18.400 --> 0:03:20.959
<v Speaker 4>press release, but yeah, it sounds like we need a

0:03:20.960 --> 0:03:26.360
<v Speaker 4>little bit more concrete. Hey, thirty seconds, Geita, Warner Brothers Discovery.

0:03:26.360 --> 0:03:29.120
<v Speaker 4>Do you think Netflix to do something? And forgive me

0:03:29.200 --> 0:03:30.960
<v Speaker 4>for just asking for you to be brief?

0:03:32.000 --> 0:03:33.200
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, I know this is a little bit of a

0:03:33.200 --> 0:03:35.680
<v Speaker 6>head scratcher, So I really don't think this is a

0:03:35.720 --> 0:03:37.640
<v Speaker 6>make or break for them, Carol. Yes, it would be

0:03:37.720 --> 0:03:40.480
<v Speaker 6>nice to have. Do they absolutely need it? No, not

0:03:40.640 --> 0:03:43.160
<v Speaker 6>at all. So again there's a lot they can do

0:03:43.200 --> 0:03:45.720
<v Speaker 6>with it, especially the studio a lot and all of

0:03:45.720 --> 0:03:47.880
<v Speaker 6>the IP. But again I don't think it's do ordi.

0:03:47.920 --> 0:03:51.600
<v Speaker 4>As always looking forward to reading your research that comes

0:03:51.600 --> 0:03:53.720
<v Speaker 4>on the term a little bit later today and into tomorrow.

0:03:53.920 --> 0:03:55.360
<v Speaker 3>Gets to ringingough On. Thank you so much.

0:03:55.400 --> 0:03:58.840
<v Speaker 4>Bloomberg Intelligence senior media analyst with the breakdown and what

0:03:58.880 --> 0:04:01.360
<v Speaker 4>you need to know about Netflix stock down about five

0:04:01.360 --> 0:04:02.920
<v Speaker 4>point six percent in the aftermarket.

0:04:04.160 --> 0:04:06.960
<v Speaker 1>Stay with us more from Bloomberg Business Week Daily coming

0:04:07.040 --> 0:04:07.960
<v Speaker 1>up after this.

0:04:11.520 --> 0:04:15.520
<v Speaker 2>You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Weekdaily Podcast. Catch us

0:04:15.600 --> 0:04:19.039
<v Speaker 2>live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern. Listen

0:04:19.080 --> 0:04:22.640
<v Speaker 2>on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app,

0:04:22.800 --> 0:04:25.120
<v Speaker 2>or watch US live on YouTube.

0:04:25.480 --> 0:04:28.320
<v Speaker 1>President Trump's administration is involved in talks for a US

0:04:28.400 --> 0:04:31.640
<v Speaker 1>company to access one of the world's largest untapped deposits

0:04:31.640 --> 0:04:33.760
<v Speaker 1>of tungsten. This is a metal used by the Pentagon

0:04:34.040 --> 0:04:37.320
<v Speaker 1>to make ammunition, projectiles and other weapon Read this crossing

0:04:37.320 --> 0:04:40.440
<v Speaker 1>the Bloomberg terminal just a little earlier today. Yeah, it's

0:04:40.480 --> 0:04:41.480
<v Speaker 1>really interesting, right.

0:04:41.520 --> 0:04:46.119
<v Speaker 4>We continue to see that Rare Earth's share space move

0:04:46.240 --> 0:04:48.760
<v Speaker 4>as a result of these headlines coming out from the

0:04:48.800 --> 0:04:52.040
<v Speaker 4>White House. Keep in mind, as to mention the news yesterday,

0:04:52.040 --> 0:04:55.760
<v Speaker 4>President Trump signing that landmark pack with visiting Australian Prime

0:04:55.800 --> 0:04:59.599
<v Speaker 4>Minister Anthony Albanize to boost America's access to Rare Earth's

0:04:59.600 --> 0:05:00.839
<v Speaker 4>and other critical minerals.

0:05:00.839 --> 0:05:01.720
<v Speaker 3>It's an effort to.

0:05:01.720 --> 0:05:05.240
<v Speaker 4>Counter China's type grip on the supply chains of key metals. Now,

0:05:05.279 --> 0:05:07.800
<v Speaker 4>the two governments will jointly invested in a swath of

0:05:07.880 --> 0:05:11.120
<v Speaker 4>minds and processing projects in Australia to boost production of

0:05:11.120 --> 0:05:15.840
<v Speaker 4>commodities used in advance technologies, everything from electric vehicles to

0:05:15.839 --> 0:05:17.360
<v Speaker 4>setmicconductors and fighter plants.

0:05:17.360 --> 0:05:19.400
<v Speaker 3>It goes into a lot of stuff toom.

0:05:19.360 --> 0:05:20.520
<v Speaker 7>In a story on the Bloomberg.

0:05:20.560 --> 0:05:23.080
<v Speaker 1>Our next guest says, quote, this is the most significant

0:05:23.120 --> 0:05:27.240
<v Speaker 1>bilateral minerals minerals cooperation we have seen between two major

0:05:27.440 --> 0:05:30.719
<v Speaker 1>Western countries. Here to explain why is Graceland Basker, and

0:05:30.760 --> 0:05:33.839
<v Speaker 1>she's director of the Critical Minerals Security Program at the

0:05:33.839 --> 0:05:36.520
<v Speaker 1>Center for Strategic and International Study. She joins us from

0:05:36.560 --> 0:05:40.479
<v Speaker 1>the Washington, DC Bureau of Bloomberg News. Graceland, welcome back

0:05:40.480 --> 0:05:43.080
<v Speaker 1>to Bloomberg Business Week Daily. It's always great to have

0:05:43.160 --> 0:05:45.120
<v Speaker 1>you on the program. I do want to start with

0:05:45.400 --> 0:05:50.000
<v Speaker 1>the bilateral minerals cooperation that we are seeing between the

0:05:50.120 --> 0:05:53.520
<v Speaker 1>United States and Australia. Why is all of this happening

0:05:53.640 --> 0:05:54.120
<v Speaker 1>right now?

0:05:55.880 --> 0:05:56.880
<v Speaker 8>It's so great to be back.

0:05:56.920 --> 0:05:58.560
<v Speaker 9>You know, this is a really big deal, and it's

0:05:58.560 --> 0:06:01.880
<v Speaker 9>a big deal because this is mineral cooperation that's going

0:06:02.160 --> 0:06:04.800
<v Speaker 9>not just from conversation and we've been doing years of

0:06:04.839 --> 0:06:07.920
<v Speaker 9>talking about minerals to actually putting the resources in to

0:06:08.000 --> 0:06:11.719
<v Speaker 9>develop really strategic projects. I mean, we've agreed to commit

0:06:11.920 --> 0:06:15.320
<v Speaker 9>one billion dollars each to be deployed within six months

0:06:15.360 --> 0:06:19.880
<v Speaker 9>on strategic projects. And this could be Alcoa's landmark gallium refinery.

0:06:20.160 --> 0:06:21.920
<v Speaker 8>Keep in mind, China has cut us off of.

0:06:21.880 --> 0:06:26.360
<v Speaker 9>Gallium, really crucial material for semiconductors, and this gallium refinery

0:06:26.400 --> 0:06:28.120
<v Speaker 9>is going to produce one hundred tons a year in

0:06:28.120 --> 0:06:30.760
<v Speaker 9>Western Australia. That may not sound like a lot, but

0:06:30.839 --> 0:06:33.600
<v Speaker 9>remember the US only uses about twenty tons of gallium

0:06:33.680 --> 0:06:37.880
<v Speaker 9>a year, so it's actually really significant to Australia announcing

0:06:37.920 --> 0:06:39.839
<v Speaker 9>equity in a rare earth project there.

0:06:40.040 --> 0:06:41.240
<v Speaker 8>But what we've also.

0:06:41.000 --> 0:06:44.039
<v Speaker 9>Seen is the first time that these countries are making

0:06:44.080 --> 0:06:46.760
<v Speaker 9>a concerted effort to counter China. So you may have

0:06:46.800 --> 0:06:50.800
<v Speaker 9>seen that both countries have committed to preventing Chinese acquisitions

0:06:51.040 --> 0:06:53.920
<v Speaker 9>of new projects, both within their own countries but also

0:06:54.000 --> 0:06:57.560
<v Speaker 9>using diplomatic instruments. In other countries, we've seen a commitment

0:06:57.560 --> 0:07:01.040
<v Speaker 9>to using price price support. So really, when you take

0:07:01.240 --> 0:07:03.560
<v Speaker 9>the summation of all of these different efforts, we're really

0:07:03.560 --> 0:07:06.000
<v Speaker 9>seeing rubber hit the road with a country that has

0:07:06.440 --> 0:07:09.960
<v Speaker 9>enormous geological potential. We're talking about forty minerals that the

0:07:10.040 --> 0:07:13.760
<v Speaker 9>US identified as critical. Incredible financial market gets in deep

0:07:13.800 --> 0:07:14.840
<v Speaker 9>technical expertise.

0:07:15.000 --> 0:07:17.400
<v Speaker 4>Is this all bottom line about putting kind of a

0:07:17.440 --> 0:07:20.240
<v Speaker 4>hold on China?

0:07:20.400 --> 0:07:23.680
<v Speaker 9>This is about countering China from a supply and a

0:07:23.720 --> 0:07:26.720
<v Speaker 9>demand perspective. You know, let's be totally honest. This year

0:07:26.840 --> 0:07:29.160
<v Speaker 9>was a wake up call for the whole world. Until now,

0:07:29.720 --> 0:07:32.360
<v Speaker 9>a lot of the export restrictions on critical minerals were

0:07:32.400 --> 0:07:35.200
<v Speaker 9>really targeted at US here in the United States, but

0:07:35.240 --> 0:07:38.960
<v Speaker 9>the multiple rounds of restrictions this year actually hit companies

0:07:39.000 --> 0:07:42.080
<v Speaker 9>around the world. Like these recent rare earth export restrictions,

0:07:42.200 --> 0:07:44.520
<v Speaker 9>Australia is still on the other end of them. So

0:07:44.600 --> 0:07:47.000
<v Speaker 9>what we're really doing is we're uniting with our allies

0:07:47.000 --> 0:07:49.720
<v Speaker 9>and again Australia being the one country that has fought

0:07:49.760 --> 0:07:53.840
<v Speaker 9>beside US in every war since nineteen eighteen, right to say, okay,

0:07:53.880 --> 0:07:56.160
<v Speaker 9>if we work together, we can actually start to counter

0:07:56.240 --> 0:07:57.400
<v Speaker 9>China in a meaningful way.

0:07:57.840 --> 0:07:59.240
<v Speaker 3>Very then significant.

0:07:59.480 --> 0:08:01.680
<v Speaker 4>Again, it feels like we have gone through a bunch

0:08:01.720 --> 0:08:03.640
<v Speaker 4>of months where the US is like, we don't need you,

0:08:03.680 --> 0:08:05.080
<v Speaker 4>We're going to do it alone. We're going to build

0:08:05.120 --> 0:08:07.720
<v Speaker 4>up stuff, supply chain, so and so forth. At least

0:08:07.800 --> 0:08:09.920
<v Speaker 4>this is coming from the administration to do stuff here

0:08:09.920 --> 0:08:13.080
<v Speaker 4>in the United States. This feels like it's very significant

0:08:13.120 --> 0:08:16.240
<v Speaker 4>the US saying wait, we actually need to have global

0:08:16.280 --> 0:08:17.040
<v Speaker 4>partners on this.

0:08:17.160 --> 0:08:18.720
<v Speaker 3>And this is kind of a big message.

0:08:18.760 --> 0:08:21.240
<v Speaker 4>Again I'm going to point out to China and really

0:08:21.240 --> 0:08:22.480
<v Speaker 4>the world at large.

0:08:23.120 --> 0:08:25.520
<v Speaker 9>And this is a really important message because I want

0:08:25.560 --> 0:08:30.000
<v Speaker 9>you to understand the historical relationship of Australian mining. Historically,

0:08:30.080 --> 0:08:34.400
<v Speaker 9>Australian minerals have gone to China for processing, so it's

0:08:34.400 --> 0:08:38.240
<v Speaker 9>a highly vertically integrated industry between these two countries. So

0:08:38.360 --> 0:08:40.560
<v Speaker 9>this was a pretty big disruption. You know, if we

0:08:40.679 --> 0:08:43.760
<v Speaker 9>roll out restrictions on China, no one really bat's an eye,

0:08:43.760 --> 0:08:46.800
<v Speaker 9>But for Australia where those minerals go to China, this

0:08:46.880 --> 0:08:51.360
<v Speaker 9>is a really important realignment with US in breaking from

0:08:51.360 --> 0:08:53.920
<v Speaker 9>what has been their historical trade relationship as it relates

0:08:53.960 --> 0:08:54.920
<v Speaker 9>to the mining industry.

0:08:55.520 --> 0:08:58.160
<v Speaker 1>So I guess the question that we have is about

0:08:58.160 --> 0:09:01.480
<v Speaker 1>the US companies that are a part of this, and

0:09:01.559 --> 0:09:04.680
<v Speaker 1>we've spoken to quite a few of these. We spoke

0:09:04.800 --> 0:09:10.000
<v Speaker 1>to US Antimony yesterday, Gary Evans over there a critical mineral,

0:09:10.080 --> 0:09:14.680
<v Speaker 1>not a rare earth per se, but in the same space,

0:09:14.720 --> 0:09:17.760
<v Speaker 1>and with the idea that they're getting a government contract,

0:09:17.800 --> 0:09:20.360
<v Speaker 1>not investment from the government, but a government contract to

0:09:20.360 --> 0:09:24.560
<v Speaker 1>actually buy antimony for Defense Department purposes. But I'm curious

0:09:24.559 --> 0:09:27.480
<v Speaker 1>about US company's role and if there is such an

0:09:27.520 --> 0:09:31.640
<v Speaker 1>opportunity for many different US companies right now to take

0:09:31.679 --> 0:09:33.880
<v Speaker 1>advantage of this. And look, we have an investing audience.

0:09:34.200 --> 0:09:36.040
<v Speaker 1>They want to know which are the companies that are

0:09:36.080 --> 0:09:38.880
<v Speaker 1>best positioned right now to be in a place where

0:09:39.200 --> 0:09:41.920
<v Speaker 1>they can be the ones that benefit from this increased

0:09:42.000 --> 0:09:44.200
<v Speaker 1>need for critical minerals.

0:09:45.720 --> 0:09:48.079
<v Speaker 9>So one of the big parts of this a new

0:09:48.160 --> 0:09:50.880
<v Speaker 9>Framework agreement is that they will we will strategically together

0:09:51.120 --> 0:09:53.559
<v Speaker 9>identify priority projects and companies.

0:09:53.840 --> 0:09:56.480
<v Speaker 8>One of the early leaders here is Alcoa.

0:09:56.800 --> 0:09:59.240
<v Speaker 9>Again, Alcoa is a Philadelphia based company who is now

0:09:59.280 --> 0:10:03.280
<v Speaker 9>building this galleon refinery through support from the Department of War,

0:10:03.960 --> 0:10:07.640
<v Speaker 9>and it was announced by the US and Australian governments yesterday. Again,

0:10:07.679 --> 0:10:09.320
<v Speaker 9>I want to take you back to the fact that

0:10:09.360 --> 0:10:11.760
<v Speaker 9>gallium is a no brainer of a priority for both

0:10:11.800 --> 0:10:14.520
<v Speaker 9>sides because it was a commodity that China cut us

0:10:14.559 --> 0:10:16.000
<v Speaker 9>off from earlier this year.

0:10:16.400 --> 0:10:17.400
<v Speaker 8>So really, when we.

0:10:17.280 --> 0:10:19.880
<v Speaker 9>Start to look at what are the winners going to be,

0:10:19.960 --> 0:10:22.720
<v Speaker 9>I mean rare eerth Obviously we're going to see linus

0:10:22.760 --> 0:10:26.800
<v Speaker 9>being really important. But broadly speaking, for some of these

0:10:26.880 --> 0:10:29.560
<v Speaker 9>minor medals, which antimony is one of them, we've seen

0:10:29.600 --> 0:10:33.040
<v Speaker 9>tungsten emerge in the news quite recently. These minor medals

0:10:33.080 --> 0:10:35.319
<v Speaker 9>are going to be the ones where we're highly vulnerable

0:10:35.400 --> 0:10:38.440
<v Speaker 9>and where we do not always have the geology to

0:10:38.480 --> 0:10:40.520
<v Speaker 9>make it work and where Australia often does.

0:10:42.640 --> 0:10:44.920
<v Speaker 7>We both have questions, but Carole, you go first.

0:10:45.000 --> 0:10:47.320
<v Speaker 4>Well I want to go back forgive me for abouts

0:10:47.559 --> 0:10:49.400
<v Speaker 4>round because it's just sometimes you know, the brain is

0:10:49.440 --> 0:10:52.160
<v Speaker 4>a little slow and things settle in. But Grace, what

0:10:52.200 --> 0:10:54.760
<v Speaker 4>I want to ask you is going back to, as

0:10:54.800 --> 0:10:57.600
<v Speaker 4>you said, a big deal for Australia to do this

0:10:58.200 --> 0:11:02.120
<v Speaker 4>because they have been so interested with China when it

0:11:02.240 --> 0:11:07.319
<v Speaker 4>comes to Australia exporting large quantities of raw minerals and

0:11:07.360 --> 0:11:10.520
<v Speaker 4>then China processing. I mean, this has been a very

0:11:10.520 --> 0:11:14.200
<v Speaker 4>important trading relationship and so we know US and China

0:11:14.240 --> 0:11:17.280
<v Speaker 4>has been antagonistic for a while. But to have them

0:11:17.440 --> 0:11:19.520
<v Speaker 4>do that, that's really significant.

0:11:21.120 --> 0:11:22.480
<v Speaker 8>It's extremely significant.

0:11:22.480 --> 0:11:25.640
<v Speaker 9>But you've been seeing that growing tension for but probably

0:11:25.640 --> 0:11:28.760
<v Speaker 9>the last seven years. Remember that Australia was the first

0:11:28.800 --> 0:11:32.280
<v Speaker 9>country to theban howwey back into twenty eighteen. They also

0:11:32.360 --> 0:11:36.720
<v Speaker 9>passed legislation to prevent foreign interference in their higher education sector.

0:11:36.880 --> 0:11:39.520
<v Speaker 9>More recently, there was a one point twenty five billion

0:11:39.600 --> 0:11:43.400
<v Speaker 9>dollar Australian loan that was given to build the Iluca

0:11:43.480 --> 0:11:46.280
<v Speaker 9>refinery for Rare Earth. One of the t's and s's

0:11:46.320 --> 0:11:48.400
<v Speaker 9>of that was that off take had to go to

0:11:48.880 --> 0:11:52.720
<v Speaker 9>allied countries. But now what this really does now I mean,

0:11:53.040 --> 0:11:55.880
<v Speaker 9>is it starts to potentially re architecture supply chains in

0:11:55.920 --> 0:11:59.280
<v Speaker 9>a meaningful way. Australia, for example, is the biggest lithium

0:11:59.280 --> 0:12:01.959
<v Speaker 9>producer in the world. They produce about close to sixty

0:12:02.000 --> 0:12:05.360
<v Speaker 9>percent over world's lithium. Over ninety percent of that actually

0:12:05.400 --> 0:12:09.520
<v Speaker 9>goes to China for refining. If that didn't happen, China

0:12:09.559 --> 0:12:12.439
<v Speaker 9>would lose its grip on lithium ion batteries.

0:12:12.800 --> 0:12:14.800
<v Speaker 8>So what this deal really.

0:12:14.520 --> 0:12:18.920
<v Speaker 9>Stands to do is re architecture supply chains, not just

0:12:19.000 --> 0:12:21.480
<v Speaker 9>from mind but down to the manufactured good.

0:12:22.080 --> 0:12:24.560
<v Speaker 1>So if we think about this in the context of

0:12:24.800 --> 0:12:27.880
<v Speaker 1>the leverage that China could still have even after the

0:12:28.000 --> 0:12:30.440
<v Speaker 1>US makes deals such as this and deals with allies,

0:12:30.679 --> 0:12:32.320
<v Speaker 1>where's that leverage.

0:12:33.280 --> 0:12:35.079
<v Speaker 9>The leverage is still there in the short term with

0:12:35.200 --> 0:12:39.040
<v Speaker 9>rare earths, for sure, no doubt, right although Australian Australia's

0:12:39.040 --> 0:12:42.200
<v Speaker 9>Linus was the first company to separate heavy rare erths

0:12:42.200 --> 0:12:45.040
<v Speaker 9>earlier this year outside of China, But it's going to

0:12:45.120 --> 0:12:47.640
<v Speaker 9>go beyond that. There was a line in this framework

0:12:47.679 --> 0:12:50.880
<v Speaker 9>agreement that actually said that the US and Australia will

0:12:50.920 --> 0:12:55.320
<v Speaker 9>work with other international partners on price support mechanisms. So

0:12:55.480 --> 0:12:58.840
<v Speaker 9>this conversation is likely to extend beyond these two countries

0:12:59.120 --> 0:13:01.679
<v Speaker 9>to the G seven in later this year, to think

0:13:01.679 --> 0:13:05.880
<v Speaker 9>about how do we scale these partnerships up even more so, Really,

0:13:05.920 --> 0:13:08.280
<v Speaker 9>what we're starting to see is an economy of scale

0:13:08.320 --> 0:13:12.079
<v Speaker 9>that we're creating for the minerals and the processing capabilities.

0:13:12.160 --> 0:13:15.079
<v Speaker 9>I mentioned that i'll COED deal earlier, that our COED

0:13:15.080 --> 0:13:16.840
<v Speaker 9>deal is also getting Japanese financing.

0:13:16.960 --> 0:13:18.520
<v Speaker 8>It's actually a tripartheid effort.

0:13:18.800 --> 0:13:22.000
<v Speaker 9>So an example of how this bilateral is going to

0:13:22.000 --> 0:13:24.480
<v Speaker 9>set the stage for what's probably going to be a

0:13:24.559 --> 0:13:26.640
<v Speaker 9>much bigger play of countries to counter China.

0:13:26.800 --> 0:13:30.440
<v Speaker 4>How do we figure out, you know, especially as we

0:13:30.480 --> 0:13:34.400
<v Speaker 4>see investors, you know, pushing up shares on all of

0:13:34.400 --> 0:13:38.480
<v Speaker 4>these stories about the relationships, the investments by the US

0:13:38.559 --> 0:13:42.280
<v Speaker 4>government and various critical mineral companies, how do we figure

0:13:42.320 --> 0:13:46.680
<v Speaker 4>out which is investor speculation, you know, kind of chasing

0:13:46.679 --> 0:13:49.200
<v Speaker 4>a trade. Do you think it's misplaced or is it

0:13:49.240 --> 0:13:54.199
<v Speaker 4>a bit irrationally exuberant, or you think these investments, these relationships,

0:13:54.840 --> 0:13:57.439
<v Speaker 4>this is the build out. It's happening, and with good

0:13:57.480 --> 0:13:59.120
<v Speaker 4>reason because the demand's going to be there.

0:14:00.880 --> 0:14:03.839
<v Speaker 9>The broader build out of the sector when it comes

0:14:03.840 --> 0:14:07.200
<v Speaker 9>to mining being much more strategic, is absolutely here to stay.

0:14:07.440 --> 0:14:09.240
<v Speaker 9>And it's here to stay for a couple of reasons.

0:14:09.320 --> 0:14:12.400
<v Speaker 9>One of them is we are diversifying away from China, right.

0:14:12.720 --> 0:14:15.040
<v Speaker 9>But the second thing we have to remember is that

0:14:15.120 --> 0:14:17.880
<v Speaker 9>certain of these commodities, I need a lot more in

0:14:17.960 --> 0:14:21.440
<v Speaker 9>objective terms, I need a lot more copper to electrify,

0:14:21.560 --> 0:14:24.440
<v Speaker 9>to build data centers, to build defense technologies.

0:14:24.560 --> 0:14:26.120
<v Speaker 8>So it's also the growing demand.

0:14:26.200 --> 0:14:29.920
<v Speaker 9>So I'd say the larger macro trend in prioritization is

0:14:30.000 --> 0:14:33.800
<v Speaker 9>here to stay. And again remember that the US Australia relationship,

0:14:33.800 --> 0:14:34.760
<v Speaker 9>it's a continuation.

0:14:35.240 --> 0:14:38.000
<v Speaker 8>It was being built under the Biden administration as well.

0:14:38.320 --> 0:14:39.160
<v Speaker 8>But what you know.

0:14:39.200 --> 0:14:41.200
<v Speaker 9>The other thing though, is you know there are going

0:14:41.280 --> 0:14:43.240
<v Speaker 9>to be fads that come and go when it come

0:14:43.280 --> 0:14:46.200
<v Speaker 9>to specific minerals. There's no doubt, right some things are

0:14:46.200 --> 0:14:48.680
<v Speaker 9>going to you know, hit media attention. Certain deals are

0:14:48.680 --> 0:14:51.520
<v Speaker 9>going to hit media attention and they're going to fall away.

0:14:51.680 --> 0:14:54.360
<v Speaker 9>Not everything that this government is looking at is going

0:14:54.400 --> 0:14:56.880
<v Speaker 9>to succeed, but what we are hoping is that the

0:14:57.000 --> 0:14:59.480
<v Speaker 9>right number of them succeed to create a more resilient

0:15:00.000 --> 0:15:02.480
<v Speaker 9>fly chain. But there are a lot of coming and goings.

0:15:02.560 --> 0:15:05.320
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, certainly the relationship with Australia is on our radar

0:15:05.440 --> 0:15:08.480
<v Speaker 1>right now given the visit of the Prime Minister. But

0:15:08.520 --> 0:15:12.000
<v Speaker 1>I'm wondering what other countries the US could ally with

0:15:12.760 --> 0:15:15.880
<v Speaker 1>that would be able to offer some sort of countermeasure

0:15:15.960 --> 0:15:17.520
<v Speaker 1>to China and its capabilities.

0:15:19.040 --> 0:15:22.120
<v Speaker 9>So countries that like I'm looking at with interest in

0:15:22.160 --> 0:15:26.920
<v Speaker 9>South Korea, particularly because of their midstream and downstream capabilities.

0:15:27.040 --> 0:15:28.120
<v Speaker 8>I'm looking at the UK.

0:15:28.800 --> 0:15:31.520
<v Speaker 9>There have been you know, there's been some interesting acquisitions

0:15:31.560 --> 0:15:35.280
<v Speaker 9>there least come metals by USA rare earth that's an

0:15:35.280 --> 0:15:36.040
<v Speaker 9>interesting one.

0:15:36.880 --> 0:15:39.400
<v Speaker 8>The EU again, it's an interesting jurisdiction.

0:15:39.440 --> 0:15:42.400
<v Speaker 9>There's some there's some minerals, I mean things like Solvey

0:15:43.000 --> 0:15:45.920
<v Speaker 9>for their permanent magnets in France, and interesting one again

0:15:45.960 --> 0:15:48.880
<v Speaker 9>with some conversations happening with the US as well. So

0:15:48.920 --> 0:15:52.760
<v Speaker 9>there's certain pockets of interesting transactions happening from a global north,

0:15:52.880 --> 0:15:55.400
<v Speaker 9>obviously from the global south. Brazil is still a very

0:15:55.400 --> 0:15:58.440
<v Speaker 9>interesting jurisdiction to US because they have the heavy rare

0:15:58.480 --> 0:16:00.520
<v Speaker 9>earths that can come back and be separate rated here

0:16:00.520 --> 0:16:01.520
<v Speaker 9>in the United States.

0:16:01.560 --> 0:16:03.360
<v Speaker 3>Everything we need to know, Thank you. Thank you.

0:16:03.400 --> 0:16:06.240
<v Speaker 4>Doctor gracelnd Basker and director of the Critical Mineral Security

0:16:06.240 --> 0:16:09.040
<v Speaker 4>Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

0:16:10.360 --> 0:16:11.120
<v Speaker 7>Stay with us.

0:16:11.200 --> 0:16:19.000
<v Speaker 1>More from Bloomberg Business Week Daily coming up after this.

0:16:19.000 --> 0:16:22.880
<v Speaker 2>This is the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Listen live

0:16:22.960 --> 0:16:26.160
<v Speaker 2>each weekday starting at two pm Eastern on applecar Play

0:16:26.280 --> 0:16:29.080
<v Speaker 2>and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can

0:16:29.120 --> 0:16:32.320
<v Speaker 2>also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New

0:16:32.400 --> 0:16:35.800
<v Speaker 2>York station, just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty.

0:16:37.520 --> 0:16:40.000
<v Speaker 4>We wanted to talk about what is going on between

0:16:40.040 --> 0:16:43.880
<v Speaker 4>the US and Argentina. We did mention that Argentina's pay

0:16:43.920 --> 0:16:46.360
<v Speaker 4>so we can do our fresh record and bonds gave

0:16:46.360 --> 0:16:48.800
<v Speaker 4>back most of their gains. As US Treasury Secretary Scott

0:16:48.840 --> 0:16:51.720
<v Speaker 4>Passen's lead US boost to the nation proof short lived.

0:16:51.760 --> 0:16:55.440
<v Speaker 4>The US Treasury signed an economic stabilization agreement with the

0:16:55.440 --> 0:16:59.400
<v Speaker 4>Central Bank of Argentina, again coming from the Treasury Secretary

0:16:59.440 --> 0:17:02.600
<v Speaker 4>Scott Best so he put that post out on x him.

0:17:02.720 --> 0:17:06.080
<v Speaker 1>The Secretary characterized the Treasury's twenty billion dollar swap line

0:17:06.119 --> 0:17:08.560
<v Speaker 1>with the crisis pro nation central Bank is a quote

0:17:08.640 --> 0:17:10.320
<v Speaker 1>economic stabilization deal.

0:17:10.680 --> 0:17:10.960
<v Speaker 7>He said.

0:17:11.000 --> 0:17:13.240
<v Speaker 1>The agreement is quote a bridge to a better economic

0:17:13.280 --> 0:17:15.879
<v Speaker 1>future for Argentina, not a bell out.

0:17:16.080 --> 0:17:16.840
<v Speaker 7>We have a lot of.

0:17:16.840 --> 0:17:19.720
<v Speaker 1>Questions, Carol, and one voice we wanted to get on

0:17:19.840 --> 0:17:20.760
<v Speaker 1>the program today.

0:17:20.880 --> 0:17:22.520
<v Speaker 4>He has no idea, but we were like, no, we're

0:17:22.560 --> 0:17:24.120
<v Speaker 4>going to talk to Eric. We need to talk to Eric.

0:17:24.440 --> 0:17:26.600
<v Speaker 4>Eric Shasker is who we are talking about. He's Bloomberg

0:17:26.600 --> 0:17:29.960
<v Speaker 4>New Economy editorial director. He's covered numerous global financial market

0:17:30.000 --> 0:17:34.360
<v Speaker 4>cycles and crises. He's interviewed various Latin American leaders, including

0:17:34.440 --> 0:17:38.520
<v Speaker 4>Venezuela and President Maduro former Argentinian President Mauricio Macrie.

0:17:38.600 --> 0:17:40.720
<v Speaker 3>Hopefully I'm saying it correctly. I probably am not.

0:17:41.160 --> 0:17:43.600
<v Speaker 4>He also had the September cover story on Secretary Bessett

0:17:43.640 --> 0:17:44.720
<v Speaker 4>form Bloomberg BusinessWeek.

0:17:44.760 --> 0:17:47.040
<v Speaker 3>You are the voice we wanted to talk to. Thank

0:17:47.080 --> 0:17:48.320
<v Speaker 3>you wow for me.

0:17:48.600 --> 0:17:50.960
<v Speaker 4>No, I speak the truth. We speak the truth. Why

0:17:51.040 --> 0:17:53.720
<v Speaker 4>is this happening now? And why Argentina? Why does the

0:17:53.840 --> 0:17:54.639
<v Speaker 4>US want to do this?

0:17:55.080 --> 0:17:55.439
<v Speaker 5>Well?

0:17:55.480 --> 0:17:57.679
<v Speaker 10>Good, So there's I think we can unpack this in

0:17:57.720 --> 0:18:00.280
<v Speaker 10>three ways. One is why is.

0:18:00.320 --> 0:18:01.199
<v Speaker 5>The US doing this?

0:18:01.359 --> 0:18:05.680
<v Speaker 10>The second is what exactly have we got here? And

0:18:05.720 --> 0:18:07.679
<v Speaker 10>the third would be how.

0:18:07.640 --> 0:18:08.800
<v Speaker 7>Might it all end?

0:18:08.920 --> 0:18:12.440
<v Speaker 5>Perhaps in tears? I'll take on the why.

0:18:12.520 --> 0:18:15.199
<v Speaker 10>And this actually goes back to that story you mentioned

0:18:15.240 --> 0:18:18.439
<v Speaker 10>that I did about Scott Besson, the Treasury Secretary, for

0:18:18.440 --> 0:18:20.320
<v Speaker 10>Bloomberg Business Week in September.

0:18:20.480 --> 0:18:22.600
<v Speaker 5>I spoke to the Treasury Secretary.

0:18:22.160 --> 0:18:26.399
<v Speaker 10>Back in late July, and at the time he told

0:18:26.400 --> 0:18:30.200
<v Speaker 10>me that one of his overarching goals in office as

0:18:30.240 --> 0:18:32.720
<v Speaker 10>the Secretary of the Treasury was to quote unquote lock

0:18:32.840 --> 0:18:36.240
<v Speaker 10>in dollar supremacy. And I asked him, well, how do

0:18:36.280 --> 0:18:40.000
<v Speaker 10>you do that? And he said, and I didn't appreciate

0:18:40.080 --> 0:18:44.040
<v Speaker 10>the significance of it at the time, was by facilitating

0:18:44.760 --> 0:18:47.960
<v Speaker 10>swaps through the Treasury Department, as opposed to the way

0:18:48.000 --> 0:18:51.480
<v Speaker 10>that swaps have traditionally been facilitated, which is by the

0:18:51.520 --> 0:18:54.399
<v Speaker 10>FED from central bank to central bank. Now there is

0:18:54.480 --> 0:18:57.840
<v Speaker 10>precedent for this. The Treasury Department did that from Mexico

0:18:57.920 --> 0:19:01.320
<v Speaker 10>back in the mid nineties during the Peso crisis, and

0:19:01.400 --> 0:19:05.320
<v Speaker 10>it helped, and maybe it'll help Argentina. But it appears

0:19:05.440 --> 0:19:10.639
<v Speaker 10>that under the Trump administration, the government's focus is on

0:19:10.760 --> 0:19:13.240
<v Speaker 10>again cuts to the why. It's not just about locking

0:19:13.240 --> 0:19:17.080
<v Speaker 10>in dollar supremacy. It's using the dollar as an economic

0:19:17.119 --> 0:19:21.200
<v Speaker 10>tool to support countries with which the United States feel

0:19:21.240 --> 0:19:24.800
<v Speaker 10>it has some kind of ideological kinship or some kind

0:19:24.840 --> 0:19:28.200
<v Speaker 10>of trading relationship. It's not like Argentina has been one

0:19:28.200 --> 0:19:30.320
<v Speaker 10>of America's major trading partners.

0:19:30.359 --> 0:19:30.840
<v Speaker 5>It has not.

0:19:32.280 --> 0:19:34.400
<v Speaker 10>The amount of bilateral trade that goes on between those

0:19:34.400 --> 0:19:36.760
<v Speaker 10>two countries is a fraction of what it is with

0:19:36.800 --> 0:19:39.399
<v Speaker 10>the United States in Mexico, or the United States and Canada,

0:19:39.560 --> 0:19:41.760
<v Speaker 10>or even the United States and Europe.

0:19:41.800 --> 0:19:44.160
<v Speaker 5>So in that respect, it's unusual. I think.

0:19:44.200 --> 0:19:46.800
<v Speaker 10>If you think about it though, in terms of locking

0:19:46.800 --> 0:19:49.919
<v Speaker 10>in dollar supremacy and using the dollar as an economic tool,

0:19:51.920 --> 0:19:56.399
<v Speaker 10>a tool of geostrategy, if you will, it begins to

0:19:56.400 --> 0:19:57.359
<v Speaker 10>make a little more sense.

0:19:58.160 --> 0:20:00.480
<v Speaker 1>You said that there are three different l that we

0:20:00.520 --> 0:20:03.840
<v Speaker 1>could talk about with this. One is how another one

0:20:03.920 --> 0:20:05.480
<v Speaker 1>is how this could end.

0:20:06.440 --> 0:20:08.800
<v Speaker 10>Well, let's talk about what is it that we're actually

0:20:08.840 --> 0:20:12.879
<v Speaker 10>talking about, heo. You mentioned that the Treasure Secretary today

0:20:13.000 --> 0:20:15.760
<v Speaker 10>talked about it as a bridge to a better economic

0:20:15.800 --> 0:20:19.280
<v Speaker 10>future and not a bailout and not a bailout. But

0:20:19.920 --> 0:20:22.879
<v Speaker 10>the operative word there is bridge because bridge means something

0:20:22.880 --> 0:20:25.040
<v Speaker 10>from here to there. In other words, what's the there?

0:20:25.680 --> 0:20:27.440
<v Speaker 10>This is a bridge until when?

0:20:27.680 --> 0:20:27.960
<v Speaker 5>Right?

0:20:28.280 --> 0:20:31.280
<v Speaker 10>Is it a bridge until after Argentina's Mitrum elections on

0:20:31.320 --> 0:20:34.600
<v Speaker 10>the twenty sixth of this month, Sunday. Is it a

0:20:34.760 --> 0:20:37.080
<v Speaker 10>Trump seems to suggest as much the other day when

0:20:37.080 --> 0:20:39.320
<v Speaker 10>he said, well, you know, if Milay doesn't win, we'll

0:20:39.400 --> 0:20:42.440
<v Speaker 10>get rid of the swap line. So that's one possibility.

0:20:43.040 --> 0:20:46.119
<v Speaker 10>Is it a bridge until Argentina decides to abandon the

0:20:46.160 --> 0:20:52.120
<v Speaker 10>peso peg, which starts an agger the Minister for Deregulation

0:20:52.200 --> 0:20:56.280
<v Speaker 10>and State Transformation said was in the cards just last

0:20:56.320 --> 0:20:58.720
<v Speaker 10>week when I interviewed him here in New York. Is

0:20:58.760 --> 0:21:02.000
<v Speaker 10>it a is Is it a bridge until the twenty

0:21:02.040 --> 0:21:06.080
<v Speaker 10>billion dollars runs out, which might happen because Argentina was

0:21:06.080 --> 0:21:08.119
<v Speaker 10>burning through a billion and a half dollars worth of

0:21:08.119 --> 0:21:11.080
<v Speaker 10>foreign currency reserves a week, a billion and a half

0:21:11.119 --> 0:21:13.240
<v Speaker 10>a week before the swap line was put in place.

0:21:14.280 --> 0:21:19.760
<v Speaker 10>Is it until Argentina's economy can eventually support an exchange

0:21:19.800 --> 0:21:22.639
<v Speaker 10>rate at this level it certainly can't right now.

0:21:23.160 --> 0:21:23.960
<v Speaker 5>Or maybe is.

0:21:23.920 --> 0:21:27.119
<v Speaker 10>It a bridge until I don't know, President Trump just

0:21:27.200 --> 0:21:30.080
<v Speaker 10>loses patience or President Malay does something to annoy him.

0:21:30.160 --> 0:21:31.240
<v Speaker 5>It's a lot to be any of those.

0:21:31.359 --> 0:21:33.159
<v Speaker 4>It's a lot of questions, it's a lot of like

0:21:33.200 --> 0:21:36.200
<v Speaker 4>possible scenarios, you know. Bloomberg Report out yesterday that Jamie

0:21:36.200 --> 0:21:39.800
<v Speaker 4>Diamond is visiting Argentina this week, kind of an unprecedented

0:21:40.280 --> 0:21:43.160
<v Speaker 4>show of support for the government. Mean, at the same time,

0:21:43.160 --> 0:21:45.120
<v Speaker 4>we've had I think it's the Wall Street Journal reporting

0:21:45.160 --> 0:21:47.280
<v Speaker 4>that banks are having a hard time kind of getting

0:21:47.280 --> 0:21:49.040
<v Speaker 4>around this without some kind of guarantees.

0:21:49.520 --> 0:21:53.520
<v Speaker 10>Nobody knows. Nobody knows what Argentina is pledging as collateral.

0:21:53.920 --> 0:21:56.960
<v Speaker 10>In fact, nobody has seen the agreement. To our knowledge,

0:21:57.240 --> 0:22:00.640
<v Speaker 10>the banks themselves, which you're playing intermedia year roles here,

0:22:00.800 --> 0:22:07.120
<v Speaker 10>don't know what Argentina has agreed to pledge. You know,

0:22:07.600 --> 0:22:11.240
<v Speaker 10>so that the United States isn't just on the unlimited

0:22:11.280 --> 0:22:14.960
<v Speaker 10>losing end of a bad trade, and that is possible here, right.

0:22:15.359 --> 0:22:20.119
<v Speaker 10>The big difference between what's going on here and the

0:22:20.160 --> 0:22:22.760
<v Speaker 10>comparison that everybody wants to make with the trade that

0:22:22.800 --> 0:22:25.280
<v Speaker 10>broke the Bank of England that the Treasury Secretary was

0:22:25.320 --> 0:22:27.360
<v Speaker 10>involved in when he worked for George Soros and Stan

0:22:27.440 --> 0:22:29.960
<v Speaker 10>Druck and Miller back in the early nineteen nineties. The

0:22:29.960 --> 0:22:34.119
<v Speaker 10>big difference here is that then the UK had nobody

0:22:34.160 --> 0:22:38.440
<v Speaker 10>backstopping them. Now Argentina has the United States backstopping it.

0:22:39.080 --> 0:22:41.840
<v Speaker 10>But as I say, nobody knows until when nobody knows

0:22:42.840 --> 0:22:45.080
<v Speaker 10>if there are any mechanisms that have been put in

0:22:45.119 --> 0:22:48.800
<v Speaker 10>place to make the US taxpayer, if you will, hole,

0:22:49.359 --> 0:22:53.080
<v Speaker 10>should the Treasury Department sustain losses on this trade. I've

0:22:53.119 --> 0:22:57.240
<v Speaker 10>heard that Argentina's uranium reserves may be involved, that some

0:22:57.320 --> 0:23:01.040
<v Speaker 10>kind of preferential access to Argentine market might be involved.

0:23:01.359 --> 0:23:01.879
<v Speaker 5>Who knows.

0:23:02.160 --> 0:23:06.119
<v Speaker 10>It's just it's like it's like a ready aim fire,

0:23:07.000 --> 0:23:09.879
<v Speaker 10>you know, or a fire you know, ready aim, in

0:23:09.920 --> 0:23:11.800
<v Speaker 10>the sense that the swap line was put in place,

0:23:11.880 --> 0:23:15.480
<v Speaker 10>and then it appears, since no document has surfaced yet,

0:23:15.520 --> 0:23:19.320
<v Speaker 10>that all of the mechanics behind it are being taken

0:23:19.320 --> 0:23:20.439
<v Speaker 10>care of after the fact.

0:23:20.760 --> 0:23:21.399
<v Speaker 5>I don't know.

0:23:22.280 --> 0:23:25.119
<v Speaker 10>But my point is that if anybody knows, he or

0:23:25.119 --> 0:23:27.359
<v Speaker 10>she hasn't put in his hand to say, hey, I know.

0:23:28.000 --> 0:23:30.919
<v Speaker 1>The Treasury Secretary, as you mentioned, described this as a

0:23:30.920 --> 0:23:32.880
<v Speaker 1>bridge to a better economic future for Argentina.

0:23:33.000 --> 0:23:33.800
<v Speaker 7>Not a bail out.

0:23:34.280 --> 0:23:36.000
<v Speaker 1>Is the not a bailout part a fair way to

0:23:36.040 --> 0:23:38.240
<v Speaker 1>describe it in your view? Is this not a bail out?

0:23:38.520 --> 0:23:40.119
<v Speaker 10>I think a bailout is in the eye of the

0:23:40.119 --> 0:23:47.200
<v Speaker 10>beholder in some respects. It's unquestionably a gift to President

0:23:47.280 --> 0:23:52.119
<v Speaker 10>midlay ahead of these midterm elections. It isn't working for

0:23:52.200 --> 0:23:55.720
<v Speaker 10>the time being, right, The paesel fresh weakened today to

0:23:55.800 --> 0:23:59.880
<v Speaker 10>a fresh low, and Argentine bonds, which had gained earlier

0:24:00.160 --> 0:24:03.800
<v Speaker 10>on the formal announcement of this agreement, have since given

0:24:03.880 --> 0:24:06.520
<v Speaker 10>up those gains and I think are posting losses. So

0:24:06.680 --> 0:24:08.680
<v Speaker 10>it would appear to be a gift in the sense

0:24:08.720 --> 0:24:11.840
<v Speaker 10>that the PASO exchange rate or the PEG to the

0:24:11.840 --> 0:24:15.800
<v Speaker 10>dollar is unsustainable. Milay doesn't want to allow the PAESO

0:24:15.920 --> 0:24:18.600
<v Speaker 10>to float freely. He wants to maintain this peg so

0:24:18.640 --> 0:24:23.160
<v Speaker 10>that Argentine inflation is under control, a critical, critical economic

0:24:23.200 --> 0:24:28.600
<v Speaker 10>consideration going into the midterms. So even if Argentine I like,

0:24:28.640 --> 0:24:31.119
<v Speaker 10>there's no question if the PAESO peg were to be

0:24:31.200 --> 0:24:35.440
<v Speaker 10>abandoned today, it's not like inflation would Inflation would show

0:24:35.520 --> 0:24:39.560
<v Speaker 10>up immediately, but it wouldn't show up in official statistics.

0:24:39.600 --> 0:24:42.320
<v Speaker 10>Excuse me for some time to come, But argentine'es are

0:24:42.359 --> 0:24:45.800
<v Speaker 10>so conditioned to this they know what would happen.

0:24:46.200 --> 0:24:46.840
<v Speaker 3>Again, I want to.

0:24:46.840 --> 0:24:48.080
<v Speaker 4>Go back to you, and I know we've got a

0:24:48.119 --> 0:24:51.760
<v Speaker 4>couple more minutes here, But Eric, the US involvement, and

0:24:51.800 --> 0:24:54.280
<v Speaker 4>again it may be a relationship. President Trump wants to

0:24:54.320 --> 0:24:58.760
<v Speaker 4>have with the President of Argentina, but I mean Bloomberg

0:24:58.920 --> 0:25:01.840
<v Speaker 4>editors wrote an opinion piece why isn't the IMF coming

0:25:01.840 --> 0:25:04.680
<v Speaker 4>in here? And the other question we as a group

0:25:04.680 --> 0:25:06.639
<v Speaker 4>have been trying to figure out is it also to

0:25:06.720 --> 0:25:08.120
<v Speaker 4>kind of keep China at bay?

0:25:08.200 --> 0:25:09.879
<v Speaker 3>Is there that aspect as well?

0:25:10.480 --> 0:25:14.040
<v Speaker 10>Argentina also has an existing eighteen billion dollar currency swap

0:25:14.080 --> 0:25:17.760
<v Speaker 10>with China that goes back well before Sturtzenegger was the

0:25:17.760 --> 0:25:19.480
<v Speaker 10>Central Bank governor. I think it may go back to

0:25:19.520 --> 0:25:22.520
<v Speaker 10>twenty fifteen, and perhaps even before that. There has been

0:25:22.560 --> 0:25:25.000
<v Speaker 10>some talk that one of the conditions behind, or at

0:25:25.040 --> 0:25:27.520
<v Speaker 10>least one of the underlying conditions to this swap with

0:25:27.600 --> 0:25:32.159
<v Speaker 10>the treasury would be that Argentina somehow winds up that

0:25:32.280 --> 0:25:36.440
<v Speaker 10>previous swap agreement with the Chinese. Who knows as far

0:25:36.480 --> 0:25:39.280
<v Speaker 10>as why the IMF isn't involved.

0:25:40.200 --> 0:25:41.280
<v Speaker 5>I think the easy.

0:25:40.960 --> 0:25:43.280
<v Speaker 10>Answer to that question is how many months would it

0:25:43.280 --> 0:25:45.480
<v Speaker 10>take the IMF to get its act together? This was

0:25:45.520 --> 0:25:48.960
<v Speaker 10>something that this was a perceived need on the part

0:25:49.000 --> 0:25:52.400
<v Speaker 10>of the Argentine government the Malay government heading into these

0:25:53.000 --> 0:25:57.720
<v Speaker 10>critical midterm elections that I'll repeat are just five days.

0:25:57.520 --> 0:26:00.000
<v Speaker 3>Away Sunday, right right, Yeah.

0:25:59.800 --> 0:26:03.120
<v Speaker 10>There's no way there's no conceivable way that the IMF

0:26:03.520 --> 0:26:07.160
<v Speaker 10>in my mind, given everything that we've observed in our

0:26:07.240 --> 0:26:11.240
<v Speaker 10>careers and everything we know, that precedes that there's no

0:26:11.280 --> 0:26:13.200
<v Speaker 10>way that it could possibly acted without much haste.

0:26:13.320 --> 0:26:15.800
<v Speaker 1>So before we let you go, how could this end?

0:26:16.800 --> 0:26:18.240
<v Speaker 1>What could it mean for the US if it's a

0:26:18.240 --> 0:26:18.920
<v Speaker 1>bad trade.

0:26:19.520 --> 0:26:22.160
<v Speaker 10>Well, if it's a bad trade, it could I find

0:26:22.200 --> 0:26:25.480
<v Speaker 10>it hard to believe that the United States would put

0:26:25.520 --> 0:26:28.399
<v Speaker 10>itself in a position to ultimately lose money. But it

0:26:28.440 --> 0:26:31.320
<v Speaker 10>may lose money on paper and have to recover that money,

0:26:31.880 --> 0:26:34.840
<v Speaker 10>just like somebody who has been left holding the bag

0:26:35.160 --> 0:26:38.720
<v Speaker 10>on a bad debt by liquidating some kind of Argentine

0:26:38.760 --> 0:26:44.040
<v Speaker 10>assets or somehow you know, turning preferential access into Argentine

0:26:44.119 --> 0:26:49.560
<v Speaker 10>assets or Argentine markets into value over time, that wouldn't

0:26:49.600 --> 0:26:53.359
<v Speaker 10>look good. And again, it all depends on how long

0:26:53.440 --> 0:26:58.040
<v Speaker 10>this bridge is. We have seen in the credit markets

0:26:58.080 --> 0:27:01.040
<v Speaker 10>that you can paper things over for an awfully long

0:27:01.160 --> 0:27:07.200
<v Speaker 10>time before either things reflate and you're able to cash

0:27:07.240 --> 0:27:09.960
<v Speaker 10>out at par or you have to ultimately take some losses.

0:27:10.000 --> 0:27:12.520
<v Speaker 10>So it's not like that's necessarily going to happen next week.

0:27:12.560 --> 0:27:15.120
<v Speaker 10>It's not like it's necessarily going to happen next month,

0:27:15.160 --> 0:27:20.320
<v Speaker 10>next quarter, even next year. But if Malay doesn't succeed,

0:27:20.400 --> 0:27:24.119
<v Speaker 10>and if the Argentine economy doesn't continue to revive and

0:27:24.200 --> 0:27:27.560
<v Speaker 10>inflation doesn't remain under control, it's hard to see how

0:27:27.600 --> 0:27:31.640
<v Speaker 10>the speculative pressure against the peso won't continue. And we

0:27:31.720 --> 0:27:35.080
<v Speaker 10>may even see, I don't know. We can only speculate

0:27:35.160 --> 0:27:37.720
<v Speaker 10>here that twenty billion dollars may not end up being enough.

0:27:38.240 --> 0:27:40.199
<v Speaker 4>All right, we just got schooled by Eric Shasker in

0:27:40.240 --> 0:27:41.480
<v Speaker 4>a good way, in a good way.

0:27:41.600 --> 0:27:44.400
<v Speaker 3>Thank you so much, Eric, sure so appreciate it. It's

0:27:44.400 --> 0:27:45.040
<v Speaker 3>what we needed to know.

0:27:45.040 --> 0:27:47.960
<v Speaker 4>Bloomberg New Economy Editorial Director Eric Shatsker.

0:27:49.359 --> 0:27:52.160
<v Speaker 1>Stay with us more from Bloomberg Business Week Daily coming

0:27:52.240 --> 0:27:53.119
<v Speaker 1>up after this.

0:27:56.840 --> 0:28:00.640
<v Speaker 2>You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Catch

0:28:00.720 --> 0:28:03.960
<v Speaker 2>us live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern.

0:28:04.080 --> 0:28:07.119
<v Speaker 2>Listen on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg

0:28:07.200 --> 0:28:09.880
<v Speaker 2>Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.

0:28:11.000 --> 0:28:12.760
<v Speaker 3>A little bit higher, call it a little change on

0:28:12.800 --> 0:28:13.240
<v Speaker 3>the S and P.

0:28:13.400 --> 0:28:15.840
<v Speaker 4>Same story for the Nasdaq one hundred doubt that we've

0:28:15.880 --> 0:28:17.880
<v Speaker 4>been talking about hitting a record today, up about half

0:28:17.880 --> 0:28:18.600
<v Speaker 4>a percent, But.

0:28:19.400 --> 0:28:22.720
<v Speaker 3>Does anybody really care? Why about the Dow.

0:28:23.160 --> 0:28:25.719
<v Speaker 1>About the Dow, I think people today kind of care

0:28:25.720 --> 0:28:26.639
<v Speaker 1>about gold and silver.

0:28:26.880 --> 0:28:28.920
<v Speaker 3>Well, yeah, which is plunging.

0:28:28.760 --> 0:28:31.800
<v Speaker 1>It'saw their steepest self in years. Investors locking in profits.

0:28:31.800 --> 0:28:34.280
<v Speaker 1>I'm concerned that the recent historic rally and the precious

0:28:34.280 --> 0:28:36.360
<v Speaker 1>metals had left them overvalued.

0:28:36.560 --> 0:28:39.080
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, well you know they've had quite a run. So

0:28:39.280 --> 0:28:41.080
<v Speaker 4>maybe you just like, is that it take some money

0:28:41.120 --> 0:28:42.480
<v Speaker 4>off the I don't know. Lets see what our guest

0:28:42.480 --> 0:28:42.920
<v Speaker 4>has to say.

0:28:42.960 --> 0:28:45.920
<v Speaker 1>Andrew krist co cio of Crescent Grove Advisors. They've got

0:28:45.960 --> 0:28:48.880
<v Speaker 1>about five billion dollars in assets under management. The company

0:28:49.240 --> 0:28:51.480
<v Speaker 1>based in Milwaukee. He joins us here in our Bloomberg

0:28:51.480 --> 0:28:54.320
<v Speaker 1>Interactive Broker studio. Welcome back, How are you here? I'm great,

0:28:54.600 --> 0:28:56.080
<v Speaker 1>good to see you. I do want to start with

0:28:56.120 --> 0:29:00.800
<v Speaker 1>the precious metals and the idea of like what Carol said.

0:29:00.480 --> 0:29:01.800
<v Speaker 3>Does anybody really care?

0:29:02.040 --> 0:29:03.760
<v Speaker 1>Well, you were talking about the down and not precious

0:29:03.760 --> 0:29:05.520
<v Speaker 1>metals and said that that's right.

0:29:05.560 --> 0:29:05.720
<v Speaker 10>I do.

0:29:06.000 --> 0:29:11.280
<v Speaker 4>Are people just sorry, it's okay, it's Tuesday.

0:29:12.680 --> 0:29:13.480
<v Speaker 7>On what Carol said?

0:29:14.680 --> 0:29:17.040
<v Speaker 4>So is it just I think've had that to run,

0:29:17.320 --> 0:29:19.120
<v Speaker 4>like why not take some profits?

0:29:19.120 --> 0:29:20.560
<v Speaker 5>Like at this point, I think that's it.

0:29:20.600 --> 0:29:23.080
<v Speaker 11>I mean, it's it's it went parabolic essentially, right, and

0:29:23.120 --> 0:29:26.440
<v Speaker 11>you've seen incredible price move over the last several weeks even,

0:29:27.320 --> 0:29:30.600
<v Speaker 11>so yeah, why not sort of unwine that momentum trade

0:29:30.640 --> 0:29:32.480
<v Speaker 11>somewhat takes some chips off the table, but I think

0:29:32.480 --> 0:29:34.920
<v Speaker 11>the bigger picture is still intact. This idea of the

0:29:34.960 --> 0:29:38.360
<v Speaker 11>debasement trade, you know, concerned about deficits, concerned about us

0:29:38.440 --> 0:29:41.120
<v Speaker 11>D assets, a rotation from you know, central banks around

0:29:41.160 --> 0:29:43.760
<v Speaker 11>the world away from USD into gold.

0:29:44.440 --> 0:29:45.960
<v Speaker 5>That all still holds true, no.

0:29:45.920 --> 0:29:48.160
<v Speaker 3>Joke, right, Like it's happening, and it continues to happen.

0:29:48.240 --> 0:29:48.600
<v Speaker 7>That's right.

0:29:48.760 --> 0:29:51.440
<v Speaker 11>This looks way more like a technical kind of you know,

0:29:51.560 --> 0:29:52.640
<v Speaker 11>just a little bit of a correction.

0:29:52.760 --> 0:29:55.680
<v Speaker 1>But something weird happened yesterday and and that was that,

0:29:56.080 --> 0:29:59.440
<v Speaker 1>and it's been happening. You have some of the haven's

0:29:59.480 --> 0:30:03.160
<v Speaker 1>move higher, like gold, for example, but also risk assets

0:30:03.160 --> 0:30:05.400
<v Speaker 1>move higher on the same day, like the S and

0:30:05.440 --> 0:30:07.360
<v Speaker 1>P five hundred more than one percent yesterday.

0:30:08.160 --> 0:30:09.040
<v Speaker 7>What gives?

0:30:09.040 --> 0:30:09.360
<v Speaker 5>What gives?

0:30:09.480 --> 0:30:10.440
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, that's weird.

0:30:10.640 --> 0:30:12.360
<v Speaker 11>It is a little weird, But I think it's it's

0:30:12.440 --> 0:30:15.040
<v Speaker 11>the marriage of the debasement trade, if you want to

0:30:15.040 --> 0:30:17.760
<v Speaker 11>call it that, where you've got a scenario where you've

0:30:17.760 --> 0:30:21.520
<v Speaker 11>got real concern about the sort of fiscal and monetary

0:30:21.560 --> 0:30:25.200
<v Speaker 11>backdrop potentially debasing the US dollar, Right, so people then

0:30:25.520 --> 0:30:28.040
<v Speaker 11>flood into gold as sort of a I guess a

0:30:28.080 --> 0:30:30.400
<v Speaker 11>manifestation of that trade. But then along the same lines,

0:30:30.440 --> 0:30:33.560
<v Speaker 11>if you've got sort of a reflationary element to fiscal

0:30:33.600 --> 0:30:37.640
<v Speaker 11>policy monetary policy, you want assets that benefit from higher

0:30:37.680 --> 0:30:41.240
<v Speaker 11>nominal growth, which effectively is telling you higher inflation alongside

0:30:41.240 --> 0:30:42.600
<v Speaker 11>a reasonably good economy.

0:30:43.040 --> 0:30:45.040
<v Speaker 5>Equities are going to stand to benefit from that as well.

0:30:45.080 --> 0:30:47.800
<v Speaker 11>So I think there's a just a general flow into

0:30:47.840 --> 0:30:50.360
<v Speaker 11>those asset classes that benefit from a more sort of

0:30:50.360 --> 0:30:52.760
<v Speaker 11>reflationary or debasement type of trade.

0:30:52.960 --> 0:30:56.840
<v Speaker 4>But this continues, like if, like what could change it? Like,

0:30:56.920 --> 0:31:01.280
<v Speaker 4>I don't know, a new administration US getting its fiscal

0:31:01.280 --> 0:31:03.719
<v Speaker 4>house in order, although I don't know, I feel like

0:31:03.760 --> 0:31:06.760
<v Speaker 4>that ship has sailed or we've been talking about it

0:31:06.760 --> 0:31:08.080
<v Speaker 4>for a long time, but it does feel like at

0:31:08.080 --> 0:31:09.560
<v Speaker 4>some point we're going to have to get our house

0:31:09.600 --> 0:31:10.680
<v Speaker 4>in better fiscal order.

0:31:10.760 --> 0:31:12.040
<v Speaker 3>But like, what change is that?

0:31:12.280 --> 0:31:12.480
<v Speaker 7>Yeah?

0:31:12.560 --> 0:31:14.840
<v Speaker 11>I think the thing we would look at the reckoning

0:31:14.920 --> 0:31:16.840
<v Speaker 11>comes when the ten year breaks loose.

0:31:16.840 --> 0:31:18.240
<v Speaker 5>On the upside, if you get the.

0:31:18.200 --> 0:31:22.160
<v Speaker 11>Bond vigilanteism kind of returning to the markets. But until then,

0:31:22.240 --> 0:31:24.640
<v Speaker 11>I think if you've got a more dubvish FED and

0:31:24.720 --> 0:31:26.800
<v Speaker 11>we'll see where you know, the next FED chairs is

0:31:26.840 --> 0:31:30.200
<v Speaker 11>that comes to fruition next year, perhaps even more dubbish, right,

0:31:30.240 --> 0:31:32.240
<v Speaker 11>I mean, I think you run the risk then of inflation,

0:31:32.640 --> 0:31:35.160
<v Speaker 11>which sort of ties into all these themes on anchoring

0:31:35.200 --> 0:31:37.520
<v Speaker 11>to the upside. Certainly stuck right now at around three

0:31:37.560 --> 0:31:39.920
<v Speaker 11>percent on CPI. We'll see what it says on what

0:31:40.000 --> 0:31:42.120
<v Speaker 11>the report comes out to be on Friday. But if

0:31:42.120 --> 0:31:44.080
<v Speaker 11>we're stuck at that level, and then we're sort of

0:31:44.120 --> 0:31:47.239
<v Speaker 11>putting stimulus into an economy that's reasonably healthy, right, you know,

0:31:47.600 --> 0:31:50.920
<v Speaker 11>then yeah, you run the risk of retriggering inflation to

0:31:50.960 --> 0:31:54.240
<v Speaker 11>the upside, and then you get again the bond vigilanteism,

0:31:54.280 --> 0:31:57.240
<v Speaker 11>the term premium building back in in the ten year, pushing.

0:31:56.960 --> 0:31:57.880
<v Speaker 5>Back towards five percent.

0:31:57.920 --> 0:31:59.560
<v Speaker 11>Then you get the cascading effect like we saw in

0:31:59.560 --> 0:32:03.560
<v Speaker 11>twenty two to almost higher bond yields, perhaps lower stocks,

0:32:03.560 --> 0:32:06.160
<v Speaker 11>and then all this stuff sort of unwined alongside that.

0:32:06.400 --> 0:32:08.520
<v Speaker 1>That's the big risk, beating a picture of something that's

0:32:08.560 --> 0:32:09.120
<v Speaker 1>not so great.

0:32:09.280 --> 0:32:11.320
<v Speaker 11>Yeah, I'm not saying that's going to happen because I

0:32:11.360 --> 0:32:13.520
<v Speaker 11>think the base case for us is that the FED

0:32:13.560 --> 0:32:16.080
<v Speaker 11>stays more dubbish. The FED is focused on growth at

0:32:16.080 --> 0:32:18.320
<v Speaker 11>this point and the labor market as opposed to inflation,

0:32:19.000 --> 0:32:20.640
<v Speaker 11>so and then it's going to take some time for

0:32:20.680 --> 0:32:23.600
<v Speaker 11>inflation to take You think that's a mistake. We think

0:32:23.600 --> 0:32:25.719
<v Speaker 11>that the labor market is healthier than the FED, and

0:32:25.720 --> 0:32:27.200
<v Speaker 11>and a lot of people are giving it credit for it.

0:32:27.240 --> 0:32:29.200
<v Speaker 11>We think it's more of a normalization phase than it

0:32:29.240 --> 0:32:30.520
<v Speaker 11>is an outright fissure.

0:32:30.600 --> 0:32:32.560
<v Speaker 7>You know, what data are you seeing that show that? Well?

0:32:32.600 --> 0:32:34.960
<v Speaker 11>I think if you look at continuing claims, for instance,

0:32:34.960 --> 0:32:37.080
<v Speaker 11>as a percentage of the labor force still you know,

0:32:37.080 --> 0:32:39.680
<v Speaker 11>it's ticked up modestly, but it doesn't look overly concerning.

0:32:39.760 --> 0:32:43.000
<v Speaker 11>If you look at job openings, it's come down significantly

0:32:43.000 --> 0:32:45.680
<v Speaker 11>off the high, but it's still well above pre pandemic level.

0:32:45.680 --> 0:32:47.560
<v Speaker 3>I'd like to look at continuing claims. So we haven't

0:32:47.600 --> 0:32:48.520
<v Speaker 3>had data in a few weeks.

0:32:48.520 --> 0:32:51.200
<v Speaker 11>Oh right, just saying the LEXT numbers we got on

0:32:51.240 --> 0:32:53.280
<v Speaker 11>that looked reasonably good. But no, so you start to

0:32:53.280 --> 0:32:56.840
<v Speaker 11>paint a picture prime age, you know, labor force participation,

0:32:57.000 --> 0:32:58.560
<v Speaker 11>prime age employment rate.

0:32:58.560 --> 0:32:59.640
<v Speaker 5>Still in the mid threes.

0:32:59.840 --> 0:33:02.560
<v Speaker 11>There's some reasonably good data points out there to suggest that,

0:33:02.600 --> 0:33:05.080
<v Speaker 11>again what we're seeing is more of coming off the

0:33:05.080 --> 0:33:08.800
<v Speaker 11>boil and normalization of these levels as opposed an outright

0:33:08.840 --> 0:33:10.040
<v Speaker 11>sort of break in the labor market.

0:33:10.120 --> 0:33:12.000
<v Speaker 3>What does it feel so lousy for so many.

0:33:12.600 --> 0:33:14.080
<v Speaker 11>Well, I think there is a sort of K shaped

0:33:14.080 --> 0:33:16.640
<v Speaker 11>economy element too, where you do have the higher end

0:33:17.040 --> 0:33:21.120
<v Speaker 11>sort of consumer still spending in a really robust way

0:33:21.160 --> 0:33:23.720
<v Speaker 11>and supporting retail sales, where I think you're seeing this

0:33:23.760 --> 0:33:26.120
<v Speaker 11>sort of insidious level of inflation that continues to eat

0:33:26.120 --> 0:33:27.560
<v Speaker 11>at the lower end of the consumer.

0:33:27.640 --> 0:33:28.480
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, it's pretty wild.

0:33:28.480 --> 0:33:30.600
<v Speaker 1>I mean, we every few months talk to people who

0:33:30.640 --> 0:33:32.760
<v Speaker 1>are executives at private jet firms, and for the last

0:33:32.800 --> 0:33:34.720
<v Speaker 1>couple of years, what they've said does is basically a.

0:33:35.320 --> 0:33:37.200
<v Speaker 3>Definitely the higher end of the case.

0:33:37.320 --> 0:33:40.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but it's business has never been better. Yeah, And

0:33:40.600 --> 0:33:42.880
<v Speaker 1>there was a new one now, like a new startup

0:33:42.920 --> 0:33:45.360
<v Speaker 1>private jet firm anounced last week, got some private equity fund.

0:33:45.600 --> 0:33:48.280
<v Speaker 1>I mean, there's like the people who are doing well

0:33:48.880 --> 0:33:50.360
<v Speaker 1>are doing very very well.

0:33:51.080 --> 0:33:51.320
<v Speaker 5>Yeah.

0:33:51.360 --> 0:33:53.600
<v Speaker 11>I think that's that's continued to be the case. You know,

0:33:53.640 --> 0:33:55.800
<v Speaker 11>we kind of saw that play itself out post COVID

0:33:55.840 --> 0:33:58.440
<v Speaker 11>and has just become even more exacerbated I think over

0:33:58.480 --> 0:34:01.760
<v Speaker 11>the last several quarters in years now, and I think

0:34:01.760 --> 0:34:05.320
<v Speaker 11>that sort of continues unabated at this point. But that said,

0:34:05.360 --> 0:34:07.320
<v Speaker 11>I mean, if you look at median wage growth, if

0:34:07.360 --> 0:34:09.520
<v Speaker 11>you look at some other numbers that would suggest, you know,

0:34:09.520 --> 0:34:11.920
<v Speaker 11>sort of just wage growth. More broadly, you're still seeing

0:34:12.040 --> 0:34:15.440
<v Speaker 11>positive you know, real wages. So I think again this

0:34:15.480 --> 0:34:16.959
<v Speaker 11>goes back to the idea of is the labor market

0:34:16.960 --> 0:34:18.279
<v Speaker 11>fundamentally broken at this point?

0:34:18.360 --> 0:34:19.000
<v Speaker 5>We would say no.

0:34:19.480 --> 0:34:21.840
<v Speaker 11>So if that's the case, we've got a reasonably okay

0:34:21.920 --> 0:34:24.560
<v Speaker 11>labor market. Let's just say, let's assume that for a second,

0:34:24.800 --> 0:34:29.680
<v Speaker 11>the Fed's cutting they're adding stimulus to an economy that's okay,

0:34:30.120 --> 0:34:32.520
<v Speaker 11>reasonably healthy, you know. That to us then suggests that

0:34:32.560 --> 0:34:36.319
<v Speaker 11>nominal growth trends higher, inflation probably trends higher alongside that.

0:34:36.680 --> 0:34:38.359
<v Speaker 11>So that's where all of a sudden you start to say,

0:34:38.520 --> 0:34:40.839
<v Speaker 11>is the tenure appropriately priced at four percent? And that's

0:34:40.840 --> 0:34:43.040
<v Speaker 11>where you get the concern that could play out over

0:34:43.080 --> 0:34:46.239
<v Speaker 11>the next several quarters about bond yields sticking back up.

0:34:46.280 --> 0:34:47.680
<v Speaker 4>I want to go back though, to the case shape

0:34:47.680 --> 0:34:50.960
<v Speaker 4>for economy, and forgive me, I mentioned this before a

0:34:51.000 --> 0:34:53.000
<v Speaker 4>sister of mine, like I shared like a podcast and

0:34:53.040 --> 0:34:54.960
<v Speaker 4>it's this really rich guy I think he's ever in

0:34:54.960 --> 0:34:56.279
<v Speaker 4>New York percent but it says like, I don't want

0:34:56.320 --> 0:34:58.319
<v Speaker 4>to be this rich guy in a poor economy? Like

0:34:58.400 --> 0:35:02.160
<v Speaker 4>what are the implications? We can talk about records on

0:35:02.200 --> 0:35:05.600
<v Speaker 4>Wall Street, but what happened when there are a few

0:35:05.719 --> 0:35:09.400
<v Speaker 4>rich folks in what is a more generally poor economy?

0:35:09.480 --> 0:35:10.280
<v Speaker 3>That can't be good?

0:35:11.000 --> 0:35:12.759
<v Speaker 11>I think there are a lot of political implications that

0:35:12.800 --> 0:35:15.840
<v Speaker 11>come alongside that. Sort of populism comes to mind in

0:35:15.840 --> 0:35:18.680
<v Speaker 11>the first and foremost and then at some point is

0:35:18.719 --> 0:35:21.839
<v Speaker 11>there a day of reckoning as it relates to some

0:35:21.880 --> 0:35:26.160
<v Speaker 11>sort of incredibly large policy fissure. I guess, just sort

0:35:26.160 --> 0:35:28.640
<v Speaker 11>of the implications that would results as a function of

0:35:28.920 --> 0:35:31.880
<v Speaker 11>a real populous wave of taking hold, even more so

0:35:31.920 --> 0:35:34.719
<v Speaker 11>than we've seen thus far. But yeah, I mean, I

0:35:34.719 --> 0:35:37.040
<v Speaker 11>think if you come out it from a market's perspective, though,

0:35:37.360 --> 0:35:39.880
<v Speaker 11>as long as you're looking at these aggregate measures, right,

0:35:40.040 --> 0:35:42.279
<v Speaker 11>as long as the high end is still spending and

0:35:42.280 --> 0:35:44.680
<v Speaker 11>that's being baked into the aggregate and that's really driving

0:35:44.760 --> 0:35:47.880
<v Speaker 11>growth in the economy, and we're thinking about deploying capital

0:35:47.880 --> 0:35:50.480
<v Speaker 11>on behalf of clients in the most efficient fashion. From

0:35:50.520 --> 0:35:53.720
<v Speaker 11>a risk adjusted perspective, then it still looks pretty attractive

0:35:53.719 --> 0:35:55.560
<v Speaker 11>to put money to work in risk assets.

0:35:55.160 --> 0:35:56.200
<v Speaker 5>In that environment.

0:35:58.160 --> 0:36:00.439
<v Speaker 3>It's an interesting time, no doubt.

0:36:00.800 --> 0:36:03.840
<v Speaker 4>Come back soon. Great to have you here normally in Milwaukee.

0:36:03.920 --> 0:36:06.879
<v Speaker 4>Here in our Bloomberg Interactive Broker Studio Andrew Craih, He's

0:36:06.880 --> 0:36:09.080
<v Speaker 4>co CIO of Cruscent Grove Advisors.

0:36:09.360 --> 0:36:14.719
<v Speaker 2>This is the Bloomberg Business Week Daily podcast, available on Apple, Spotify,

0:36:14.800 --> 0:36:18.560
<v Speaker 2>and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live weekday

0:36:18.560 --> 0:36:22.600
<v Speaker 2>afternoons from two to five pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot com,

0:36:22.640 --> 0:36:26.560
<v Speaker 2>the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App.

0:36:26.760 --> 0:36:29.520
<v Speaker 2>You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube

0:36:29.760 --> 0:36:31.920
<v Speaker 2>and always on the Bloomberg terminal