WEBVTT - Phase 1 Trade Deal Is Just The Beginning: Leland Miller

0:00:02.640 --> 0:00:05.320
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Penl Podcast. I'm Paul swing you,

0:00:05.360 --> 0:00:07.640
<v Speaker 1>along with my co host Lisa Brahma wits. Each day

0:00:07.720 --> 0:00:10.240
<v Speaker 1>we bring you the most noteworthy and useful interviews for

0:00:10.280 --> 0:00:12.520
<v Speaker 1>you and your money, whether at the grocery store or

0:00:12.560 --> 0:00:15.480
<v Speaker 1>the trading floor. Find a Bloomberg Penl podcast on Apple

0:00:15.520 --> 0:00:17.959
<v Speaker 1>podcast or wherever you listen to podcasts, as well as

0:00:17.960 --> 0:00:20.840
<v Speaker 1>that Bloomberg dot com. We have our good friend Leland Miller,

0:00:21.079 --> 0:00:23.640
<v Speaker 1>CEO of the BA Shop China Basebook International. He'll give

0:00:23.720 --> 0:00:27.000
<v Speaker 1>us very informed thoughts on kind of what this means

0:00:27.000 --> 0:00:29.240
<v Speaker 1>for China. Should we get some informed thoughts from him,

0:00:29.280 --> 0:00:32.000
<v Speaker 1>Let's do it. I mean, I think that might be

0:00:32.000 --> 0:00:35.839
<v Speaker 1>better than me pretending it. I could. I'm happy to pretending.

0:00:36.840 --> 0:00:39.360
<v Speaker 1>Willam Mill are here in studio with us. What are

0:00:39.360 --> 0:00:43.080
<v Speaker 1>you looking for today? You know, I I don't think

0:00:43.080 --> 0:00:44.839
<v Speaker 1>that there's a chance of a breakdown. I think that

0:00:44.920 --> 0:00:48.560
<v Speaker 1>we're you know, the the deal is UH is pretty

0:00:48.640 --> 0:00:51.680
<v Speaker 1>much spelled out. It's a purse agreement. Not many people

0:00:51.720 --> 0:00:54.640
<v Speaker 1>are expecting big things on I P or other issues.

0:00:54.920 --> 0:00:57.720
<v Speaker 1>So look, I think you're you're looking for a lot

0:00:57.760 --> 0:01:00.840
<v Speaker 1>of CEOs clicking CHAMPAGEO US is and saying, you know,

0:01:00.840 --> 0:01:03.080
<v Speaker 1>we're gonna be friends for the next year, all right,

0:01:03.120 --> 0:01:07.280
<v Speaker 1>but you are you skeptical that this is a material

0:01:07.360 --> 0:01:09.320
<v Speaker 1>deal or I mean, is there anything it's a really

0:01:09.400 --> 0:01:11.680
<v Speaker 1>meat here? How are you kind of viewing this? The

0:01:11.720 --> 0:01:15.440
<v Speaker 1>meat is the purchases beyond what the Chinese have provided

0:01:15.440 --> 0:01:19.160
<v Speaker 1>are talking about buying. Uh No, there really isn't There

0:01:19.200 --> 0:01:22.200
<v Speaker 1>really isn't a core deal. The Chinese are putting in

0:01:22.319 --> 0:01:27.399
<v Speaker 1>certain I p uh measures, some of them they have

0:01:27.440 --> 0:01:31.480
<v Speaker 1>announced previously six months ago or longer. Uh So, look

0:01:31.520 --> 0:01:34.399
<v Speaker 1>this this the reason there's not a bigger deal is

0:01:34.400 --> 0:01:36.959
<v Speaker 1>that the two sides just decided that they couldn't come

0:01:36.959 --> 0:01:38.920
<v Speaker 1>to terms with either rolling back a ton of a

0:01:39.000 --> 0:01:41.640
<v Speaker 1>ton of terroiffs in order to get the big I

0:01:41.680 --> 0:01:43.840
<v Speaker 1>p forced tech stuff. And so they said, look, the

0:01:43.840 --> 0:01:45.160
<v Speaker 1>best way to do it is to is to go

0:01:45.280 --> 0:01:47.600
<v Speaker 1>right on in and and and just do buys. I'm

0:01:47.600 --> 0:01:50.480
<v Speaker 1>a big questions has been uh sort of the overlap

0:01:50.720 --> 0:01:54.800
<v Speaker 1>between between the w t O agreement that the fact

0:01:54.800 --> 0:01:59.120
<v Speaker 1>that the US, UH, the UK, or rather the U, S,

0:01:59.480 --> 0:02:02.120
<v Speaker 1>the E, and Japan have all teamed up to try

0:02:02.160 --> 0:02:06.240
<v Speaker 1>to pressure China to reduce their industrial subsidies at the

0:02:06.280 --> 0:02:08.880
<v Speaker 1>same time that we're signing this Phase one agreement. How

0:02:08.919 --> 0:02:13.639
<v Speaker 1>are these multilateral and bilateral tracks overlapping or not? Well,

0:02:13.680 --> 0:02:17.200
<v Speaker 1>I think that the administration realized early, well it realized

0:02:17.360 --> 0:02:21.120
<v Speaker 1>recently that it's better to have friends, and so at

0:02:21.120 --> 0:02:23.720
<v Speaker 1>the beginning, everything was bilateral, We're gonna get a Bilattal

0:02:23.760 --> 0:02:26.040
<v Speaker 1>trade deal, We're gonna get bilateral agreement from the Chinese.

0:02:26.160 --> 0:02:27.919
<v Speaker 1>Did not not to do this or to do that.

0:02:28.360 --> 0:02:30.320
<v Speaker 1>And they've come around to the idea that it's it's

0:02:30.400 --> 0:02:32.679
<v Speaker 1>it's an easier process if you get the rest of

0:02:32.720 --> 0:02:34.720
<v Speaker 1>the world on board. Is that true? I mean, so

0:02:34.960 --> 0:02:38.800
<v Speaker 1>the Trans Pacific Partnership would would be the arguably the

0:02:38.800 --> 0:02:44.320
<v Speaker 1>epitome of a multilateral group negotiating. They're not that, they're

0:02:44.320 --> 0:02:46.880
<v Speaker 1>still not supportive of those types of agreements, are they not? Yet?

0:02:46.919 --> 0:02:50.080
<v Speaker 1>But the t p P is very closely associated with Obama.

0:02:50.160 --> 0:02:52.720
<v Speaker 1>So if you, you know, you rename TPP Trump Pacific

0:02:52.720 --> 0:02:55.040
<v Speaker 1>Partnership three years from now, then is there a chance

0:02:55.080 --> 0:02:58.160
<v Speaker 1>that they come around to it. It's I've I've discussed

0:02:58.160 --> 0:03:03.400
<v Speaker 1>it with administration officials, ingest who knows. Look, there's a

0:03:03.440 --> 0:03:06.040
<v Speaker 1>there was a desire by the Trump White House to

0:03:06.160 --> 0:03:09.120
<v Speaker 1>break from everything Obama. Uh, some things are good, some

0:03:09.160 --> 0:03:12.079
<v Speaker 1>things are more controversial. But t p P was was

0:03:12.080 --> 0:03:15.720
<v Speaker 1>was not gonna work under Trump, but a revised version

0:03:15.720 --> 0:03:18.519
<v Speaker 1>of it in the future, who knows. So what precipitate

0:03:18.600 --> 0:03:22.960
<v Speaker 1>did this come to Jesus moment for the administration multilateralism? Well,

0:03:23.000 --> 0:03:25.280
<v Speaker 1>I think they wanted to continue to claim that that

0:03:25.360 --> 0:03:29.440
<v Speaker 1>they're pushing the Chinese on odd subsidies. So if you're

0:03:29.440 --> 0:03:31.280
<v Speaker 1>if it's not part of Phase one, and you don't

0:03:31.320 --> 0:03:33.880
<v Speaker 1>have Phase two coming about, then why not go with

0:03:33.919 --> 0:03:36.280
<v Speaker 1>your allies, the w t O and and then get

0:03:36.280 --> 0:03:39.200
<v Speaker 1>the Europeans and Japanese animated about Chinese subsidies which they

0:03:39.240 --> 0:03:41.440
<v Speaker 1>care about as well. So this is this is not

0:03:41.520 --> 0:03:44.040
<v Speaker 1>really a come to Jesus so much as if they're

0:03:44.080 --> 0:03:46.960
<v Speaker 1>not getting progress on this now, why not utilize the

0:03:46.960 --> 0:03:50.240
<v Speaker 1>other tools in the toolbox to to push China. And

0:03:50.360 --> 0:03:52.320
<v Speaker 1>this the shift of of course done been done by

0:03:52.400 --> 0:03:55.600
<v Speaker 1>from the beginning, but it's it's it's making its way

0:03:55.600 --> 0:03:58.880
<v Speaker 1>back there. President Trump also mentioned at one point that

0:03:59.120 --> 0:04:02.800
<v Speaker 1>once this is one deal assigned that he I believe said,

0:04:02.840 --> 0:04:05.480
<v Speaker 1>would go to China to begin negotiating a phase two.

0:04:05.680 --> 0:04:08.400
<v Speaker 1>Is there any reason to believe that that will occur,

0:04:08.720 --> 0:04:10.720
<v Speaker 1>and will we have any success If you have a

0:04:10.880 --> 0:04:13.440
<v Speaker 1>second Trump term, then yeah, there will be a continuation

0:04:13.560 --> 0:04:17.480
<v Speaker 1>of of of the trade war trade negotiations. Then, Uh,

0:04:17.520 --> 0:04:21.480
<v Speaker 1>there's nothing contemplated right now now. The one asterist I

0:04:21.480 --> 0:04:24.800
<v Speaker 1>would put on that is if the economy starts to

0:04:24.839 --> 0:04:28.159
<v Speaker 1>really slide, if stock markets start to tank, they have

0:04:28.800 --> 0:04:32.839
<v Speaker 1>they have created this phased uh sequencing uh for the

0:04:32.839 --> 0:04:35.200
<v Speaker 1>ability for for for the President simply to jump into

0:04:35.240 --> 0:04:38.520
<v Speaker 1>and say, I'm going to start negotiating again and We're

0:04:38.520 --> 0:04:40.679
<v Speaker 1>going to do more tariff bullback. So we're gonna grant

0:04:40.680 --> 0:04:42.560
<v Speaker 1>some other concessions and we're gonna get more in return.

0:04:42.839 --> 0:04:45.479
<v Speaker 1>And so it will allow him, if he finds it

0:04:45.560 --> 0:04:48.560
<v Speaker 1>politically necessary to do so, to jump back in in

0:04:48.640 --> 0:04:51.080
<v Speaker 1>two thousand twenty. But that's not the game play. And

0:04:51.240 --> 0:04:53.680
<v Speaker 1>right now I still have struggling with this idea that

0:04:53.720 --> 0:04:58.560
<v Speaker 1>we're bilaterally negotiating, that the US and China are bilaterally

0:04:58.640 --> 0:05:04.039
<v Speaker 1>negotiating while there's a multilateral push on another level. I'm

0:05:04.080 --> 0:05:07.039
<v Speaker 1>just wondering, does that mean that Phase two is going

0:05:07.080 --> 0:05:10.120
<v Speaker 1>to be a multilateral Phase two or does that mean

0:05:10.200 --> 0:05:14.680
<v Speaker 1>that Phase two will continue with added pressure from allies

0:05:14.760 --> 0:05:17.680
<v Speaker 1>and others. I think I think what Phase two has

0:05:17.680 --> 0:05:20.400
<v Speaker 1>always been sold as is, we're going to do the

0:05:20.480 --> 0:05:24.080
<v Speaker 1>big moves next, So don't don't hold us to this now,

0:05:24.240 --> 0:05:27.279
<v Speaker 1>but we're gonna do it next time. And look, anyone

0:05:27.320 --> 0:05:30.520
<v Speaker 1>who's dealt with the Chinese uh for for years will realize,

0:05:30.760 --> 0:05:33.440
<v Speaker 1>like like the administration now has. They'll realize that the

0:05:33.520 --> 0:05:35.920
<v Speaker 1>Chinese are very savvy negotiators, and they'll string this out

0:05:36.000 --> 0:05:37.560
<v Speaker 1>and they're not going to give up core things that

0:05:37.600 --> 0:05:40.039
<v Speaker 1>are important to them without a lot of pain. So

0:05:40.200 --> 0:05:43.320
<v Speaker 1>I think this is more of a situation where, uh,

0:05:43.520 --> 0:05:47.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, the White House realized that its administration was

0:05:47.960 --> 0:05:50.560
<v Speaker 1>divided on on what to go after. The President had

0:05:50.560 --> 0:05:53.120
<v Speaker 1>different priorities and some of his some of his other principles,

0:05:53.480 --> 0:05:57.520
<v Speaker 1>and they would go after agricultural purchases first, try to

0:05:57.520 --> 0:05:59.719
<v Speaker 1>get the trade deficit in order as much as possible.

0:06:00.080 --> 0:06:03.200
<v Speaker 1>And while they're waiting that out, they'll they'll start to

0:06:03.200 --> 0:06:06.160
<v Speaker 1>to maybe go back and and and utilize again these

0:06:06.200 --> 0:06:09.719
<v Speaker 1>other tools which involve using Europeans and Japanese and everyone

0:06:09.720 --> 0:06:11.640
<v Speaker 1>else to try to push back on the Chinese model.

0:06:11.800 --> 0:06:13.880
<v Speaker 1>I'm not even sure I even buy off on the

0:06:13.880 --> 0:06:17.280
<v Speaker 1>whole agricultural aspect of this phase one, weren't they They

0:06:17.279 --> 0:06:20.760
<v Speaker 1>were buying agriculture and soybeans and stuff before. Now it's

0:06:20.760 --> 0:06:22.520
<v Speaker 1>gone a year, they haven't been buying. Now they're gonna

0:06:22.520 --> 0:06:25.679
<v Speaker 1>start buying again. I'm not sure what's incremental here. Well,

0:06:25.760 --> 0:06:27.840
<v Speaker 1>the big question is can they hit any of these

0:06:27.839 --> 0:06:30.440
<v Speaker 1>targets that are that are quite big that they claim

0:06:30.480 --> 0:06:32.599
<v Speaker 1>to be able to do over two years. So the

0:06:32.680 --> 0:06:35.200
<v Speaker 1>promise is that they're not going to just get the

0:06:35.279 --> 0:06:37.640
<v Speaker 1>number back up to two billion, that they're going to

0:06:37.680 --> 0:06:39.840
<v Speaker 1>get another two hundred billion on top of that. So

0:06:39.960 --> 0:06:43.560
<v Speaker 1>if by some miracle of math they're able to do that,

0:06:43.600 --> 0:06:45.400
<v Speaker 1>then there would be a real DNT in the Bilottal

0:06:45.400 --> 0:06:48.159
<v Speaker 1>trade deficit. The problem is is that this is really

0:06:48.200 --> 0:06:50.760
<v Speaker 1>a one year trade deal because the administration and the

0:06:50.839 --> 0:06:54.000
<v Speaker 1>Chinese are both motivated to get through the election. Uh,

0:06:54.120 --> 0:06:57.680
<v Speaker 1>at frontloads some of those purchases. Keep keep the keep

0:06:57.680 --> 0:07:00.479
<v Speaker 1>the guns the guns and ammo dry and try to

0:07:00.480 --> 0:07:03.839
<v Speaker 1>get into see where the situation is there. But look,

0:07:03.880 --> 0:07:08.160
<v Speaker 1>these targets are extremely bold. Uh they're they're almost mathematically

0:07:08.200 --> 0:07:12.040
<v Speaker 1>impossible to hit, the agriculture not being the most difficult

0:07:12.040 --> 0:07:14.440
<v Speaker 1>to hit, and so you're gonna you're You're gonna see

0:07:14.480 --> 0:07:16.640
<v Speaker 1>a lot of challenging things here. And if the Chinese

0:07:16.680 --> 0:07:18.960
<v Speaker 1>are actually getting close to me those targets, they're gonna

0:07:18.960 --> 0:07:20.960
<v Speaker 1>really irritate all their other trading partners who they're no

0:07:21.000 --> 0:07:23.080
<v Speaker 1>longer buying from. So the Chinese are trying to thread

0:07:23.080 --> 0:07:25.800
<v Speaker 1>this needle. It's probably not possible, but what they want

0:07:25.800 --> 0:07:27.280
<v Speaker 1>to do is get through this year first, and then

0:07:27.280 --> 0:07:29.680
<v Speaker 1>they're gonna worry about it here too. Lela Miller is

0:07:29.720 --> 0:07:32.280
<v Speaker 1>the person joining us right now, chief executive officer of

0:07:32.480 --> 0:07:36.360
<v Speaker 1>China Beige Book International, as we await the signing of

0:07:36.440 --> 0:07:39.480
<v Speaker 1>this trade deal between the US and China at the

0:07:39.480 --> 0:07:43.240
<v Speaker 1>White House. It's been widely anticipated, but no one's actually read,

0:07:43.440 --> 0:07:45.920
<v Speaker 1>at least in the public, the eighties six page document.

0:07:45.960 --> 0:07:48.920
<v Speaker 1>A lot of questions remain about the details, in particular

0:07:49.000 --> 0:07:54.200
<v Speaker 1>any concessions that China gave aside from making these agricultural purchases.

0:07:54.520 --> 0:07:57.440
<v Speaker 1>That's been one question raised. Do we know anything about

0:07:57.480 --> 0:08:01.360
<v Speaker 1>further concessions that China might have made. No, uh, we don't,

0:08:02.600 --> 0:08:05.920
<v Speaker 1>um look that. Here's here's the difficulty. A lot of

0:08:05.960 --> 0:08:08.240
<v Speaker 1>the things that that has been talked about in terms

0:08:08.240 --> 0:08:10.160
<v Speaker 1>of I P have been things that the Chinese have

0:08:10.200 --> 0:08:13.680
<v Speaker 1>announced domestically over the last several months. Uh So, one

0:08:13.720 --> 0:08:16.000
<v Speaker 1>of the things that was recently touted was the fact

0:08:16.040 --> 0:08:18.680
<v Speaker 1>that you know, there will be heavier criminal penalties for

0:08:18.840 --> 0:08:22.320
<v Speaker 1>i P infringers. Okay, but we knew that months ago.

0:08:22.600 --> 0:08:24.800
<v Speaker 1>So what they're doing right now is they're trying to

0:08:24.840 --> 0:08:28.520
<v Speaker 1>scoop in all the developments that have happened in the

0:08:28.600 --> 0:08:32.240
<v Speaker 1>Chinese economy and Chinese corporate landscape for the last you know,

0:08:32.400 --> 0:08:35.240
<v Speaker 1>three six, nine months and say these are part of

0:08:35.280 --> 0:08:38.240
<v Speaker 1>the i P changes that the administration is pushing about. Um,

0:08:38.440 --> 0:08:40.920
<v Speaker 1>we're not going to try to quantify them. We're more

0:08:40.920 --> 0:08:44.719
<v Speaker 1>worried about the purchases. But this is more than just purchases.

0:08:45.200 --> 0:08:47.400
<v Speaker 1>Uh this is this is us really moving the system.

0:08:47.440 --> 0:08:50.160
<v Speaker 1>So thet the lack of clarity is something it's it's

0:08:50.200 --> 0:08:51.880
<v Speaker 1>sort of hard to get around. And Leland, I know

0:08:51.960 --> 0:08:54.360
<v Speaker 1>in the past, when you've been in our studios talking

0:08:54.360 --> 0:08:57.520
<v Speaker 1>to us about China, you said to us, it's about enforcement.

0:08:57.640 --> 0:08:59.680
<v Speaker 1>We have to be able to enforce this, and that's

0:08:59.679 --> 0:09:01.760
<v Speaker 1>been a challenge in the past. Is there any reason

0:09:01.800 --> 0:09:05.040
<v Speaker 1>to believe that this agreement will include some provisions for

0:09:05.280 --> 0:09:09.120
<v Speaker 1>proper enforcement, so so I have and others have been

0:09:09.240 --> 0:09:12.200
<v Speaker 1>very critical the idea of snapback tariffs or some sort

0:09:12.200 --> 0:09:15.600
<v Speaker 1>of automatic mechanism for the simple fact that nothing's automatic

0:09:15.679 --> 0:09:17.880
<v Speaker 1>if you've got a president who will be weighing the

0:09:17.920 --> 0:09:22.160
<v Speaker 1>political ups and downs of throwing tariffs back on. So

0:09:22.200 --> 0:09:25.079
<v Speaker 1>there's nothing automatic about an enforcement mechanism, and that was

0:09:25.120 --> 0:09:28.880
<v Speaker 1>always oversold. However, this deal in some ways was done

0:09:29.000 --> 0:09:32.480
<v Speaker 1>very cleverly because the Chinese are very motivated to do

0:09:32.520 --> 0:09:35.160
<v Speaker 1>the purchases for the first year. If they can get

0:09:36.120 --> 0:09:38.280
<v Speaker 1>the numbers up and the numbers to where President Trump

0:09:38.320 --> 0:09:41.199
<v Speaker 1>likes it, then after November, sometime in the November to

0:09:41.280 --> 0:09:44.160
<v Speaker 1>January period, they have been promised behind the scenes that

0:09:44.240 --> 0:09:46.920
<v Speaker 1>they will get a tariff rollback. So they have to

0:09:46.920 --> 0:09:49.720
<v Speaker 1>get President Trump elected. They have to honor their commitments,

0:09:49.720 --> 0:09:51.920
<v Speaker 1>and if they do, then you're gonna see a tariff

0:09:52.000 --> 0:09:56.400
<v Speaker 1>rollback in the first few months of a Trump second term. Meanwhile,

0:09:56.760 --> 0:09:59.000
<v Speaker 1>the trade agreement has yet to be seen, and we

0:09:59.040 --> 0:10:01.800
<v Speaker 1>will be getting the document and perhaps passed through it

0:10:02.320 --> 0:10:05.360
<v Speaker 1>in real time as we get the text of it.

0:10:05.600 --> 0:10:09.160
<v Speaker 1>There is a question about China's underlying economy, particularly how

0:10:09.160 --> 0:10:12.520
<v Speaker 1>they've adjusted to the ongoing trade tensions. We got some

0:10:12.559 --> 0:10:14.600
<v Speaker 1>trade data that was kind of interesting showing how they've

0:10:14.600 --> 0:10:18.079
<v Speaker 1>shifted some of their uh, their channels. Um. But also

0:10:18.200 --> 0:10:21.280
<v Speaker 1>what remains to be seen is supply chains getting truly

0:10:21.360 --> 0:10:24.840
<v Speaker 1>rejiggered and the impact on China. How much have we

0:10:24.960 --> 0:10:27.000
<v Speaker 1>seen that already go into effect. How much more are

0:10:27.040 --> 0:10:31.240
<v Speaker 1>we going to see supply chains move away from that nation? Plenty? Uh,

0:10:31.600 --> 0:10:33.920
<v Speaker 1>But the question is you know in what areas? So

0:10:34.040 --> 0:10:36.160
<v Speaker 1>if you're if you're a tech company and you're trying

0:10:36.160 --> 0:10:39.280
<v Speaker 1>to figure out how to uh to to play the

0:10:39.360 --> 0:10:41.880
<v Speaker 1>US China game, you're gonna have to make a decision.

0:10:41.920 --> 0:10:43.840
<v Speaker 1>It looks it looks like they're gonna be cracking down

0:10:43.840 --> 0:10:45.959
<v Speaker 1>more and more and more as things go by. You're

0:10:45.960 --> 0:10:48.120
<v Speaker 1>not gonna be able to supply Huawei if you're supplying

0:10:48.240 --> 0:10:52.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, US firms and and US government um. And

0:10:52.040 --> 0:10:54.839
<v Speaker 1>this is going to continue from there. On the manufacturing side,

0:10:54.880 --> 0:10:57.040
<v Speaker 1>I think there is also going to be more and

0:10:57.080 --> 0:11:01.400
<v Speaker 1>more of a concerted effort to separate the supply chains.

0:11:01.559 --> 0:11:05.400
<v Speaker 1>They're gonna have even foreign companies developing inside China for

0:11:05.520 --> 0:11:08.640
<v Speaker 1>the China's China market, and that's going to be separate

0:11:08.720 --> 0:11:11.559
<v Speaker 1>from where other firms are supplying the United States the

0:11:11.600 --> 0:11:14.959
<v Speaker 1>rest of the world, so a lot of this supply chain, uh,

0:11:15.040 --> 0:11:19.400
<v Speaker 1>decoupling is happening. Um. It doesn't mean that decoupling overall

0:11:19.520 --> 0:11:22.000
<v Speaker 1>has to happen in some sort of scary sense, but

0:11:22.040 --> 0:11:24.120
<v Speaker 1>there's no question things are going in this direction. And

0:11:24.160 --> 0:11:25.960
<v Speaker 1>on the tech side, this is going to be the

0:11:25.960 --> 0:11:28.199
<v Speaker 1>battle that people fight, you know, for the next five

0:11:28.480 --> 0:11:30.320
<v Speaker 1>fifteen years. You know what, while we have you here,

0:11:30.520 --> 0:11:32.280
<v Speaker 1>just give us kind of an update on how things

0:11:32.360 --> 0:11:36.719
<v Speaker 1>are in China broadly speaking from an economic perspective. Well,

0:11:36.720 --> 0:11:41.360
<v Speaker 1>it's it's it's interesting because people are less worried about

0:11:41.360 --> 0:11:44.240
<v Speaker 1>the Chinese economy right now than they were, say three

0:11:44.240 --> 0:11:46.880
<v Speaker 1>months ago or six months ago. Uh, and fair enough

0:11:47.080 --> 0:11:50.080
<v Speaker 1>because our fourth quarter data were an improvement on Q three,

0:11:50.280 --> 0:11:52.839
<v Speaker 1>their improvement on year from a very very weak Q

0:11:53.040 --> 0:11:56.440
<v Speaker 1>four of last year. But you know, it's it's it's

0:11:56.480 --> 0:12:02.040
<v Speaker 1>more of a temporary stability, I think, Um, we when

0:12:02.080 --> 0:12:05.720
<v Speaker 1>we talk to firms, they are investing more and they

0:12:05.720 --> 0:12:09.240
<v Speaker 1>are hiring more. So so the fourth quarter again beyond

0:12:09.280 --> 0:12:11.880
<v Speaker 1>even the top line look better than than the third quarter.

0:12:12.160 --> 0:12:13.680
<v Speaker 1>But why are they doing this? If you look at

0:12:13.720 --> 0:12:16.280
<v Speaker 1>new orders, new orders are weaker for the second quarter

0:12:16.280 --> 0:12:18.280
<v Speaker 1>in a row. You look at cash flow, cash flow

0:12:18.320 --> 0:12:20.360
<v Speaker 1>is the weakest we've seen in the entire history of

0:12:20.400 --> 0:12:23.760
<v Speaker 1>China Beige Book for the fourth quarter of two thousand nineteen. Now,

0:12:23.800 --> 0:12:25.800
<v Speaker 1>why are they investing then? Why are they hiring it? Well?

0:12:25.800 --> 0:12:27.920
<v Speaker 1>Are they? Are they just looking at trade war headlines

0:12:27.960 --> 0:12:30.880
<v Speaker 1>and seeing a truce and investing blindly. That's what we're

0:12:30.880 --> 0:12:33.560
<v Speaker 1>going to see in early We're gonna see whether this

0:12:33.640 --> 0:12:37.319
<v Speaker 1>is a refusal of companies to listen to their customers

0:12:37.320 --> 0:12:39.600
<v Speaker 1>who are or they invest more because the government tells

0:12:39.640 --> 0:12:41.400
<v Speaker 1>them to invest more to make the numbers look good

0:12:41.440 --> 0:12:44.720
<v Speaker 1>because we're going to Washington negotiating. Historically the answers yes,

0:12:44.840 --> 0:12:46.839
<v Speaker 1>and it's historically with state firms the answer is a

0:12:46.880 --> 0:12:48.840
<v Speaker 1>double yes. So we're gonna see how much of that

0:12:48.960 --> 0:12:51.360
<v Speaker 1>is is the government saying, look, improve conditions. But you

0:12:51.400 --> 0:12:53.560
<v Speaker 1>can't do that forever. You can you can order a

0:12:53.559 --> 0:12:57.079
<v Speaker 1>temporary tick up, but you know, economics are economics. So

0:12:57.280 --> 0:13:00.160
<v Speaker 1>I think early twenty will be a a look to

0:13:00.200 --> 0:13:02.520
<v Speaker 1>the government to see how much slower growth it's willing

0:13:02.520 --> 0:13:04.719
<v Speaker 1>to accept now that the trade wars is going to

0:13:04.760 --> 0:13:07.040
<v Speaker 1>be temporary. Out of the headlines, what do we look

0:13:07.080 --> 0:13:09.080
<v Speaker 1>at now. A lot of people say, well, you know,

0:13:09.160 --> 0:13:12.280
<v Speaker 1>this all sounds problematic, but there's such a fire hose

0:13:12.320 --> 0:13:16.760
<v Speaker 1>that the PBOC has to release to the market to

0:13:16.840 --> 0:13:19.400
<v Speaker 1>sort of prop everything up that it doesn't matter. How

0:13:19.440 --> 0:13:22.480
<v Speaker 1>long can that be true? Well, the big argument we've

0:13:22.520 --> 0:13:25.280
<v Speaker 1>had with the consensus over the past years, we think

0:13:25.320 --> 0:13:28.480
<v Speaker 1>the PBOC and the China's credit environment overall are very

0:13:28.520 --> 0:13:32.200
<v Speaker 1>active right now. Now. The pushback usually is, well, we

0:13:32.240 --> 0:13:35.160
<v Speaker 1>don't see all the building we saw in that is correct.

0:13:35.200 --> 0:13:39.280
<v Speaker 1>We are not seeing a style stimulus where it's you know, build,

0:13:39.400 --> 0:13:41.360
<v Speaker 1>build it and they will come. Uh, this is not

0:13:41.440 --> 0:13:45.720
<v Speaker 1>heavy infrastructure spending right now. Our transportation construction indicators sharply weaker,

0:13:45.920 --> 0:13:49.480
<v Speaker 1>commodities are weaker. Uh so we're not seeing a build out.

0:13:49.559 --> 0:13:52.679
<v Speaker 1>But we are seeing is tremendous provision of credit to

0:13:52.800 --> 0:13:57.400
<v Speaker 1>corporates are are borrowing numbers are sky high. Our bond

0:13:57.440 --> 0:14:00.720
<v Speaker 1>sales numbers have gone up six consecutive quarters. We're seeing

0:14:00.720 --> 0:14:03.360
<v Speaker 1>a resurgence in shadow finance, which has not yet been

0:14:03.360 --> 0:14:06.640
<v Speaker 1>publicly admitted by Beijing. So that the PBOC has already

0:14:06.640 --> 0:14:11.360
<v Speaker 1>been very very active. And what is the result. Well,

0:14:11.480 --> 0:14:14.480
<v Speaker 1>they've got a stable economy. Now, things aren't falling, but

0:14:14.520 --> 0:14:16.959
<v Speaker 1>they're not getting a jolt. So it's a little bit

0:14:17.040 --> 0:14:19.480
<v Speaker 1>disconcerting that the PBOC is as active as it is

0:14:19.560 --> 0:14:22.080
<v Speaker 1>right now and they're not seeing a surgeon growth. They're

0:14:22.120 --> 0:14:25.600
<v Speaker 1>simply avoiding a much worse outcome. I want to bring

0:14:25.600 --> 0:14:28.480
<v Speaker 1>in Andy Brown right now. Andy's editorial director of the

0:14:28.480 --> 0:14:31.320
<v Speaker 1>New Economy Forum at Bloomberg, And you were reading the

0:14:31.400 --> 0:14:34.040
<v Speaker 1>signing of the trade agreement, the Phase one trade agreement

0:14:34.040 --> 0:14:36.520
<v Speaker 1>between the US and China. What does it mean to

0:14:36.560 --> 0:14:41.160
<v Speaker 1>you this trade agreement. Less in this trade agreement than

0:14:41.600 --> 0:14:44.400
<v Speaker 1>meets the eye that's always been saying for quite some time.

0:14:45.200 --> 0:14:49.120
<v Speaker 1>Uh So, the tariffs on most Chinese imports into the

0:14:49.200 --> 0:14:53.600
<v Speaker 1>United States remain okay. And the concessions that the Chinese

0:14:53.600 --> 0:14:56.520
<v Speaker 1>side of making have been on the table or they

0:14:56.520 --> 0:14:59.840
<v Speaker 1>were working on them long before this trade will began,

0:15:00.360 --> 0:15:06.920
<v Speaker 1>which includes concessions on intellectual property, which includes apparently concessions

0:15:06.920 --> 0:15:10.840
<v Speaker 1>on currency manipulations. In fact, China hasn't been manipulating its

0:15:10.920 --> 0:15:13.200
<v Speaker 1>currency now for many years, has been propping it up

0:15:13.640 --> 0:15:17.360
<v Speaker 1>rather than allowing it to depreciate. Um And the reason

0:15:17.400 --> 0:15:20.720
<v Speaker 1>that China has been proceeding with these reforms is not

0:15:20.960 --> 0:15:23.440
<v Speaker 1>because of pressure from the White House, but because it's

0:15:23.520 --> 0:15:27.640
<v Speaker 1>good for the Chinese economy. Andy, we heard from the

0:15:27.680 --> 0:15:31.240
<v Speaker 1>Democratic candidates last night and they made clear in their

0:15:31.280 --> 0:15:34.200
<v Speaker 1>discussions about trade they weren't necessarily going to take a

0:15:34.240 --> 0:15:37.960
<v Speaker 1>softer line with China. How much is that kind of

0:15:38.000 --> 0:15:41.200
<v Speaker 1>weighing on the Chinese delegation's minds at this idea that

0:15:41.600 --> 0:15:44.280
<v Speaker 1>you know, it's not just about waiting it out and

0:15:44.320 --> 0:15:47.120
<v Speaker 1>waiting until President Trump if he gets reelected, and then

0:15:47.120 --> 0:15:50.560
<v Speaker 1>figuring it out from there. That you know is picking

0:15:50.880 --> 0:15:53.440
<v Speaker 1>you know, the lesser of evils and just to sort

0:15:53.480 --> 0:15:56.320
<v Speaker 1>of go with it. You know, I think that the

0:15:56.400 --> 0:16:00.520
<v Speaker 1>Chinese side are about as confused as everybody is over

0:16:00.600 --> 0:16:04.000
<v Speaker 1>a central contradiction which is at the heart of US

0:16:04.080 --> 0:16:08.520
<v Speaker 1>training policy to China, that the White House cannot cannot

0:16:08.560 --> 0:16:10.520
<v Speaker 1>figure out what it is it wants to get out

0:16:10.520 --> 0:16:13.480
<v Speaker 1>of this trading relationship. What we're all waiting for, of course,

0:16:13.560 --> 0:16:16.640
<v Speaker 1>is the Phase two deal. Now, this phase to deal

0:16:17.200 --> 0:16:20.960
<v Speaker 1>is the about the rolling back of state owned enterprise

0:16:21.080 --> 0:16:24.440
<v Speaker 1>privilege and power in the Chinese economy to level the

0:16:24.520 --> 0:16:28.080
<v Speaker 1>playing field for foreign investors, including US investors, now to

0:16:28.120 --> 0:16:31.520
<v Speaker 1>the extent that that succeeds, it will actually open the

0:16:31.560 --> 0:16:35.080
<v Speaker 1>door for more foreign investment, more US investment in the

0:16:35.160 --> 0:16:38.760
<v Speaker 1>Chinese economy, which is apparently precisely the opposite of what

0:16:38.880 --> 0:16:41.920
<v Speaker 1>some in the Trump White House want, which is to

0:16:42.200 --> 0:16:46.040
<v Speaker 1>bring jobs and bring manufacturing back to the United States

0:16:46.240 --> 0:16:49.960
<v Speaker 1>with the unstated goal, of course, of economically weakening and

0:16:50.080 --> 0:16:55.640
<v Speaker 1>economic and security competitor. So both Democrats and Republicans need

0:16:55.720 --> 0:16:58.080
<v Speaker 1>to really get to grips with this issue. What is

0:16:58.120 --> 0:17:01.920
<v Speaker 1>it that the US wants out of the trading relationship? Lelan?

0:17:02.440 --> 0:17:04.720
<v Speaker 1>What do you think the Chinese government? How do you

0:17:04.720 --> 0:17:06.800
<v Speaker 1>think the Chinese government is going to portray this phase

0:17:06.840 --> 0:17:10.840
<v Speaker 1>one deal? Is at a great victory for China economically

0:17:11.119 --> 0:17:13.399
<v Speaker 1>or is it just it's a step along the way

0:17:13.440 --> 0:17:15.800
<v Speaker 1>and it's not that big a deal. Well, I think

0:17:15.800 --> 0:17:17.680
<v Speaker 1>at the very beginning you didn't hear much in the

0:17:17.760 --> 0:17:19.920
<v Speaker 1>Chinese press about this because they couldn't figure that out.

0:17:20.280 --> 0:17:23.159
<v Speaker 1>And now that they are convinced that President Trump is

0:17:23.200 --> 0:17:25.960
<v Speaker 1>serious about having this done, we'll see in a few minutes.

0:17:26.440 --> 0:17:31.840
<v Speaker 1>Uh they are. They are conveying a sense of victory,

0:17:31.880 --> 0:17:33.960
<v Speaker 1>but this is just a small step on the road.

0:17:34.160 --> 0:17:36.680
<v Speaker 1>So you know, there there are many disagreements. The fact

0:17:36.760 --> 0:17:39.800
<v Speaker 1>we came together on this and found compromises is healthy.

0:17:40.000 --> 0:17:42.560
<v Speaker 1>But let's not pretend that this is the end of

0:17:42.560 --> 0:17:44.680
<v Speaker 1>the road for the trade war. They've They've made sure

0:17:44.720 --> 0:17:47.639
<v Speaker 1>to add that in quite often when discussing this in

0:17:48.000 --> 0:17:50.160
<v Speaker 1>the in the Chinese press. So I think that they

0:17:50.200 --> 0:17:53.639
<v Speaker 1>see this as a temporary truce. It is just a

0:17:53.640 --> 0:17:56.400
<v Speaker 1>temporary truce and uh, and they're waiting for the other

0:17:56.400 --> 0:18:01.359
<v Speaker 1>shoe to drop, all right. We're just to reiterate we

0:18:01.400 --> 0:18:03.960
<v Speaker 1>are waiting this trade agreement to be signed. And we

0:18:04.000 --> 0:18:06.520
<v Speaker 1>are speaking currently with Leland Miller, CEO of China beige

0:18:06.560 --> 0:18:09.840
<v Speaker 1>Book International, as well as Andy Brown, who runs a

0:18:09.840 --> 0:18:12.199
<v Speaker 1>New Economy forum here at Bloomberg for US, and we

0:18:12.200 --> 0:18:14.879
<v Speaker 1>really appreciate both of your perspectives. One question I have

0:18:15.080 --> 0:18:18.879
<v Speaker 1>is we're coming out about a delay of ten months

0:18:18.960 --> 0:18:22.119
<v Speaker 1>before the tariffs get ruled back that the US has

0:18:22.160 --> 0:18:25.199
<v Speaker 1>put on China, And this is sort of differ This

0:18:25.320 --> 0:18:27.879
<v Speaker 1>just differs from what we've heard earlier where these tariffs

0:18:27.920 --> 0:18:32.000
<v Speaker 1>would be rolled back as as China sort of agreed

0:18:32.040 --> 0:18:35.359
<v Speaker 1>with or sort of complied with certain requirements. Is this

0:18:35.400 --> 0:18:38.240
<v Speaker 1>a big deal, Andy, I think it is a big deal.

0:18:39.280 --> 0:18:41.720
<v Speaker 1>I mean you know, you've you've got tariffs on three

0:18:42.000 --> 0:18:45.200
<v Speaker 1>sixty billion dollars of Chinese exports to the US. That's

0:18:45.200 --> 0:18:49.600
<v Speaker 1>two covers two thirds of all of the exports. So um,

0:18:49.640 --> 0:18:52.479
<v Speaker 1>you know you you this hasn't this, This isn't the end,

0:18:52.640 --> 0:18:54.000
<v Speaker 1>of course, is not the end of the trade. Well,

0:18:54.040 --> 0:18:58.280
<v Speaker 1>this this represents at best a truce. And then you

0:18:58.359 --> 0:19:00.800
<v Speaker 1>have to look at what the Chinese need to do

0:19:01.080 --> 0:19:03.359
<v Speaker 1>in order to get these tariffs. Now they have to

0:19:03.400 --> 0:19:08.359
<v Speaker 1>comply with this purchase agreement two billion dollars, which includes

0:19:08.440 --> 0:19:12.399
<v Speaker 1>something like eighty billion dollars of manufacturers from the United States.

0:19:12.720 --> 0:19:15.240
<v Speaker 1>This is not going to be easy for the unit

0:19:15.320 --> 0:19:18.280
<v Speaker 1>either for the United States to fulfill. Uh, you know,

0:19:18.400 --> 0:19:21.840
<v Speaker 1>where where is this? Where is this additional industrial capacity

0:19:21.920 --> 0:19:24.399
<v Speaker 1>going to come from to supply the Chinese market? In

0:19:24.440 --> 0:19:28.040
<v Speaker 1>two billion dollars, by the way, implies something like increase

0:19:28.840 --> 0:19:33.159
<v Speaker 1>annual increase in US exports to China over what they

0:19:33.200 --> 0:19:36.280
<v Speaker 1>were in two thousand and seventeen before the trade war started.

0:19:36.320 --> 0:19:40.760
<v Speaker 1>How's that going to happen? So Leland within China itself?

0:19:41.080 --> 0:19:43.480
<v Speaker 1>Did you in your data at the China Bage book,

0:19:43.520 --> 0:19:46.199
<v Speaker 1>did you see data? Are you seeing data that the

0:19:46.320 --> 0:19:50.840
<v Speaker 1>trade war. The trade uncertainty has caused Chinese companies to

0:19:50.960 --> 0:19:53.359
<v Speaker 1>pull back on maybe some of their investment and growth

0:19:53.400 --> 0:19:56.440
<v Speaker 1>and you know, building new plants and so on. It's

0:19:56.440 --> 0:19:59.399
<v Speaker 1>had an effect. It's not the reason the Chinese economy

0:19:59.440 --> 0:20:01.719
<v Speaker 1>is descellering. It it it has had an effect. What you

0:20:01.760 --> 0:20:05.240
<v Speaker 1>saw in the early early tranches of tariffs was a

0:20:05.359 --> 0:20:08.280
<v Speaker 1>Chinese counter reaction. You know, they would there would there

0:20:08.320 --> 0:20:11.560
<v Speaker 1>was a devaluation, depreciation of the currency. There were some

0:20:11.600 --> 0:20:15.119
<v Speaker 1>backdoor subsidies to basically counteract the effects of the first

0:20:15.200 --> 0:20:19.080
<v Speaker 1>waves of tariff UH, and then you saw a bit

0:20:19.119 --> 0:20:21.480
<v Speaker 1>of pain come from the next wave. But I think

0:20:21.480 --> 0:20:24.360
<v Speaker 1>that the real fear has always been the nightmare scenario,

0:20:24.480 --> 0:20:29.199
<v Speaker 1>which is putting tariffs, probably very high tariffs on all

0:20:29.200 --> 0:20:33.359
<v Speaker 1>five billion plus of Chinese of Chinese imports and keeping

0:20:33.400 --> 0:20:35.879
<v Speaker 1>them on there, and that would cause significant pain to

0:20:35.880 --> 0:20:39.840
<v Speaker 1>the Chinese economy. And that is why this entire trade

0:20:39.840 --> 0:20:43.800
<v Speaker 1>war UH, as animated as has been, has come to

0:20:44.320 --> 0:20:46.439
<v Speaker 1>the point we are today, which the Phase one signing.

0:20:46.480 --> 0:20:48.960
<v Speaker 1>The Chinese realized that we're not here to win, We're

0:20:48.960 --> 0:20:51.200
<v Speaker 1>here to avoid worst case scenarios, and that's what they're

0:20:51.200 --> 0:20:53.919
<v Speaker 1>doing by settling for a Phase one deal that's not

0:20:54.000 --> 0:20:57.399
<v Speaker 1>great for them, but it's it's far from far from terrible.

0:20:57.840 --> 0:21:00.399
<v Speaker 1>Right now, just in the market, we're seeing record highs

0:21:00.520 --> 0:21:04.200
<v Speaker 1>for the NASTAC and the SMP five hundred as people

0:21:04.240 --> 0:21:07.720
<v Speaker 1>look at earnings and see that the companies are still

0:21:07.720 --> 0:21:10.120
<v Speaker 1>coming in strong, as they look to this trade agreement

0:21:10.440 --> 0:21:15.840
<v Speaker 1>and see tensions easing. Meanwhile, basically flat on the treasury

0:21:15.880 --> 0:21:18.639
<v Speaker 1>curve here. And meanwhile gold and this is where I

0:21:18.680 --> 0:21:21.960
<v Speaker 1>really wanted to go. Gold getting another bid up to

0:21:22.359 --> 0:21:25.520
<v Speaker 1>one thousand, five hundred and fifty dollars per ounce, and

0:21:25.560 --> 0:21:28.240
<v Speaker 1>it comes as we have Bridgewater, one of their co

0:21:28.400 --> 0:21:30.080
<v Speaker 1>c io is saying that he expects it to go

0:21:30.119 --> 0:21:33.800
<v Speaker 1>to two thousand dollars per ounce, a record high. And

0:21:33.920 --> 0:21:37.320
<v Speaker 1>this comes as we talk about d dollarization, and we

0:21:37.359 --> 0:21:40.239
<v Speaker 1>talk about in particular China and Essential Bank buying a

0:21:40.240 --> 0:21:44.000
<v Speaker 1>lot more gold and leland. I'm wondering how serious is

0:21:44.040 --> 0:21:45.840
<v Speaker 1>this and how much do we expect this to gain

0:21:45.960 --> 0:21:49.920
<v Speaker 1>steam as tensions persist between the U S and China. Well,

0:21:49.920 --> 0:21:52.960
<v Speaker 1>the Chinese have been buying loads of gold as of

0:21:53.119 --> 0:21:56.040
<v Speaker 1>as of others like Russia for for for years now. UM,

0:21:56.080 --> 0:21:58.560
<v Speaker 1>I don't think that that's what's what's moving the gold

0:21:58.600 --> 0:22:00.840
<v Speaker 1>price right now. I think people have had some visibility

0:22:00.840 --> 0:22:05.359
<v Speaker 1>on that for years. Um, look, it's it. There's most

0:22:05.400 --> 0:22:07.439
<v Speaker 1>people have wanted to take their cash and throw it

0:22:07.440 --> 0:22:09.119
<v Speaker 1>in the market because the market keeps going up and

0:22:09.200 --> 0:22:11.359
<v Speaker 1>up and up. And if you're doing that, then putting

0:22:11.560 --> 0:22:14.840
<v Speaker 1>your money in gold is is a much uh you know,

0:22:14.920 --> 0:22:18.119
<v Speaker 1>it is a much more depressing investment. But now as

0:22:18.160 --> 0:22:21.720
<v Speaker 1>I think you get a little more uncertainty, um, goal

0:22:22.000 --> 0:22:24.919
<v Speaker 1>becomes more interesting. And I think we're gonna have to

0:22:24.960 --> 0:22:28.359
<v Speaker 1>see how the markets markets react this year. And you know,

0:22:28.600 --> 0:22:32.040
<v Speaker 1>this trade negotiation with China has been unlike anything we've seen,

0:22:32.080 --> 0:22:34.520
<v Speaker 1>the Red arc as much at a much higher level,

0:22:34.800 --> 0:22:38.399
<v Speaker 1>tariffs going on coming down. Is this the new way

0:22:38.960 --> 0:22:44.159
<v Speaker 1>to negotiate with China and with other major trade partners

0:22:44.240 --> 0:22:47.240
<v Speaker 1>or is this just the Trump administration way? Do you think? No?

0:22:47.320 --> 0:22:49.439
<v Speaker 1>I think this is very much a new era in

0:22:49.520 --> 0:22:55.199
<v Speaker 1>global trade. Multilateral trade negotiations, UH, deals and institutions are

0:22:55.240 --> 0:22:59.679
<v Speaker 1>collapsing UH very very significantly. In the middle of this

0:22:59.760 --> 0:23:02.880
<v Speaker 1>whole trade war, you had the Trump White House essentially

0:23:02.920 --> 0:23:06.159
<v Speaker 1>crippling UH the w t O. It's now all about

0:23:06.240 --> 0:23:10.800
<v Speaker 1>these big bilateral deals in which log economies, UM will

0:23:10.840 --> 0:23:14.280
<v Speaker 1>have the upper hand over smaller ones. This is managed trade.

0:23:14.280 --> 0:23:17.360
<v Speaker 1>This isn't free trade. There's managed trade. I mean two

0:23:17.720 --> 0:23:21.359
<v Speaker 1>billion dollars, very clear target, broken down into categories, so

0:23:21.480 --> 0:23:27.400
<v Speaker 1>much gas, so much agricultural production, so much UH manufactured production.

0:23:27.480 --> 0:23:29.719
<v Speaker 1>And in fact, they haven't even released a schedule of

0:23:29.720 --> 0:23:31.800
<v Speaker 1>this because they say that it's going to influence as

0:23:31.840 --> 0:23:35.000
<v Speaker 1>would of course it would influence the markets. UM. So

0:23:35.119 --> 0:23:37.720
<v Speaker 1>you know this is a this isn't an anti free

0:23:37.760 --> 0:23:41.760
<v Speaker 1>trade and anti free market arrangement that these two countries

0:23:41.800 --> 0:23:45.760
<v Speaker 1>are putting together going forward. I'm wondering, is this, though,

0:23:45.760 --> 0:23:48.960
<v Speaker 1>a beginning at least that we are going to get

0:23:49.000 --> 0:23:51.200
<v Speaker 1>some meeting of minds? I mean, is this an encouraging

0:23:51.280 --> 0:23:53.800
<v Speaker 1>sign to you on some level? I know you're saying

0:23:53.800 --> 0:23:56.960
<v Speaker 1>it's underwhelming, but on some level that there has been

0:23:57.000 --> 0:23:59.320
<v Speaker 1>something done? I mean, are we sort of blowing over

0:23:59.359 --> 0:24:01.919
<v Speaker 1>that a little bit too much? Well? The question is

0:24:02.000 --> 0:24:03.879
<v Speaker 1>was it worth it? You know? I mean all of

0:24:03.920 --> 0:24:06.679
<v Speaker 1>the disruption that we've seen over the last you know,

0:24:06.640 --> 0:24:11.320
<v Speaker 1>a year or so of of of trade tensions. UM,

0:24:11.359 --> 0:24:14.560
<v Speaker 1>you know, has all that pain been worth the game

0:24:14.680 --> 0:24:16.879
<v Speaker 1>that we're going to get out of this? Trade deal today,

0:24:17.160 --> 0:24:21.440
<v Speaker 1>I'm skeptical. However, I think what I am relatively positive

0:24:21.480 --> 0:24:23.760
<v Speaker 1>about is that it has, in a sense, but a

0:24:23.840 --> 0:24:27.760
<v Speaker 1>flaw underneath the U S China relationship um and I

0:24:27.800 --> 0:24:30.800
<v Speaker 1>think that is what the Chinese will be celebrating more

0:24:30.840 --> 0:24:33.320
<v Speaker 1>than anything else. They do not want this, and neither

0:24:33.359 --> 0:24:36.240
<v Speaker 1>side does want this relationship to fall off a cliff.

0:24:36.240 --> 0:24:38.320
<v Speaker 1>There's too much at stake these two countries, of too

0:24:38.440 --> 0:24:43.680
<v Speaker 1>much mutual interest. So leland do the Chinese people to

0:24:43.720 --> 0:24:47.240
<v Speaker 1>get a sense that the Chinese people support this? I

0:24:47.240 --> 0:24:49.800
<v Speaker 1>guess heightened kind of back and forth between China and

0:24:49.760 --> 0:24:52.960
<v Speaker 1>the US on traders. Is there a perception within China

0:24:53.000 --> 0:24:56.040
<v Speaker 1>that it's it's not balanced and maybe the US has

0:24:56.040 --> 0:24:58.560
<v Speaker 1>taken advantage of US, or they're or they're not supporting us.

0:24:58.560 --> 0:25:01.560
<v Speaker 1>What's the feeling within China? You know, it's very hard

0:25:01.600 --> 0:25:05.320
<v Speaker 1>to pinpoint a monolithic feeling coming out of China. I'd

0:25:05.320 --> 0:25:09.719
<v Speaker 1>say there's certainly is a sentiment within China that the

0:25:09.840 --> 0:25:14.840
<v Speaker 1>US is attacking it in certain ways, attacking Huawei, attacking

0:25:15.040 --> 0:25:17.640
<v Speaker 1>national champions. On the other hand, there's also a very

0:25:17.680 --> 0:25:24.160
<v Speaker 1>noisy minority that is uh that is very uh positive

0:25:24.200 --> 0:25:26.520
<v Speaker 1>about what Trump is doing and saying the only time

0:25:26.520 --> 0:25:28.640
<v Speaker 1>the Chinese system is going to change in a material

0:25:28.680 --> 0:25:30.840
<v Speaker 1>way as if it's pushed on the outside. That's the

0:25:30.960 --> 0:25:33.600
<v Speaker 1>lesson of Chinese history. That's a lesson uh that that

0:25:33.720 --> 0:25:36.000
<v Speaker 1>that we're taking now. So I don't think you have

0:25:36.040 --> 0:25:40.200
<v Speaker 1>any type of strong uh sentiment that's just in one direction.

0:25:40.440 --> 0:25:42.960
<v Speaker 1>But this is certainly something that to the extent that

0:25:43.080 --> 0:25:46.680
<v Speaker 1>Chinese citizens have have optics on what's actually going on,

0:25:46.960 --> 0:25:49.159
<v Speaker 1>I think they're they're very much of two minds about this.

0:25:49.280 --> 0:25:52.400
<v Speaker 1>Can we talk about the defaults in China, how much

0:25:52.520 --> 0:25:55.520
<v Speaker 1>we were worried about the corporate defaults that have been

0:25:55.520 --> 0:25:57.720
<v Speaker 1>picking up. They're still pretty pretty small, But this is

0:25:57.800 --> 0:26:00.560
<v Speaker 1>unchartered territory because it's the first time that China has

0:26:00.560 --> 0:26:03.399
<v Speaker 1>allowed companies to default in this manner. Right, well, I

0:26:03.400 --> 0:26:06.119
<v Speaker 1>think China watchers should be rooting for more defaults, not

0:26:06.240 --> 0:26:08.480
<v Speaker 1>that it won't cause some rough times in the short term,

0:26:08.520 --> 0:26:10.960
<v Speaker 1>but because the only way that they're going to fix

0:26:11.320 --> 0:26:15.359
<v Speaker 1>the financial system and fix the financial the economic model

0:26:15.680 --> 0:26:18.760
<v Speaker 1>is by allowing risk to be injected in the system.

0:26:18.800 --> 0:26:22.399
<v Speaker 1>If people think that they're financial products can't go bust,

0:26:22.480 --> 0:26:25.400
<v Speaker 1>if they think that companies can't go bankrupt. If they

0:26:25.400 --> 0:26:30.200
<v Speaker 1>think that investments can't default, then there's no way you're

0:26:30.200 --> 0:26:33.320
<v Speaker 1>going to ever have a model that allows for a

0:26:33.840 --> 0:26:36.240
<v Speaker 1>for for for rejiggering of of what has always been

0:26:36.280 --> 0:26:40.359
<v Speaker 1>a government backstopped economy. That's that's that's in real problems

0:26:40.440 --> 0:26:44.280
<v Speaker 1>right now. The real issue has been that as the

0:26:44.359 --> 0:26:48.680
<v Speaker 1>Chinese government has been unwilling to allow companies to go bankrupt,

0:26:48.760 --> 0:26:51.160
<v Speaker 1>they just keep throwing good money after bad and that

0:26:51.200 --> 0:26:54.440
<v Speaker 1>means that you're gonna have slower You're gonna slower growth

0:26:54.440 --> 0:26:57.480
<v Speaker 1>over time because you're constantly putting good money in the

0:26:57.520 --> 0:27:01.280
<v Speaker 1>economy after bad investments, and it just stagnates the economy

0:27:01.320 --> 0:27:04.600
<v Speaker 1>and into a zombie economy over time. Are deep deep

0:27:04.640 --> 0:27:07.600
<v Speaker 1>thanks to both of you, Lilan Miller and Andy Brown.

0:27:07.880 --> 0:27:10.840
<v Speaker 1>We really appreciate all of your perspectives here. H Leland

0:27:10.840 --> 0:27:15.680
<v Speaker 1>Miller is the executive the head of China Beige Book International,

0:27:15.920 --> 0:27:19.520
<v Speaker 1>Andy Brown, editorial director of the New Economy Forum at Bloomberg.

0:27:35.119 --> 0:27:37.439
<v Speaker 1>We are less than an hour away from the signing

0:27:37.480 --> 0:27:40.520
<v Speaker 1>of a six page trade agreement, the Phase one deal

0:27:40.880 --> 0:27:43.760
<v Speaker 1>between the US and China that we have not seen yet,

0:27:43.760 --> 0:27:46.760
<v Speaker 1>but evidently when they sign it it does exist and

0:27:46.800 --> 0:27:49.080
<v Speaker 1>evidently they are going to release it, so we will

0:27:49.080 --> 0:27:52.040
<v Speaker 1>be passing through that. It has a lot to do

0:27:52.160 --> 0:27:55.280
<v Speaker 1>with agg purchases, agricultural purchases. So we are so pleased

0:27:55.280 --> 0:27:58.480
<v Speaker 1>to say sal GILBERTI joining us now President, chief investment

0:27:58.480 --> 0:28:02.640
<v Speaker 1>officer and co founder of two Trading UH in Brattleboro, Vermont.

0:28:02.960 --> 0:28:06.040
<v Speaker 1>So just give us a sense of what we do

0:28:06.200 --> 0:28:12.680
<v Speaker 1>know about the agricultural purchase agreement here within this trade pact,

0:28:12.800 --> 0:28:16.680
<v Speaker 1>that UM, China will be buying aggs again from the US,

0:28:16.760 --> 0:28:19.920
<v Speaker 1>and that that's about it. We don't have many more details, unfortunately,

0:28:20.200 --> 0:28:24.119
<v Speaker 1>but what we what we can assume pretty confidently is

0:28:24.119 --> 0:28:27.160
<v Speaker 1>that China will buy as much agricultural product as they

0:28:27.200 --> 0:28:30.680
<v Speaker 1>need from the United States. Whatever number is is or

0:28:30.800 --> 0:28:34.320
<v Speaker 1>is not stated in the agreement really doesn't matter. UM.

0:28:34.359 --> 0:28:37.200
<v Speaker 1>We think that using seen is a baseline. That's the

0:28:37.280 --> 0:28:40.120
<v Speaker 1>last time we didn't have trade war implications between the

0:28:40.160 --> 0:28:43.600
<v Speaker 1>two nations. In their trade, UM China brought about four

0:28:43.640 --> 0:28:46.000
<v Speaker 1>billion worth of US agricultural product. If you just take

0:28:46.040 --> 0:28:48.840
<v Speaker 1>their rate of GDP growth and agricultural usage is probably

0:28:48.840 --> 0:28:52.760
<v Speaker 1>a little faster. UM, that means they need about billion

0:28:53.160 --> 0:28:56.240
<v Speaker 1>right now. UM, we're here at two Green projecting about

0:28:56.240 --> 0:28:59.120
<v Speaker 1>thirty one billion in that they'll that they'll buy and

0:28:59.160 --> 0:29:01.240
<v Speaker 1>they're going to meet come in and buy pork, beef,

0:29:01.240 --> 0:29:04.880
<v Speaker 1>and soybeans. There's no question because they need those things. Um,

0:29:04.960 --> 0:29:07.400
<v Speaker 1>how much more they buy of other things is up

0:29:07.400 --> 0:29:09.680
<v Speaker 1>for debate, but we do have have some projections for

0:29:09.720 --> 0:29:12.680
<v Speaker 1>that which we've published a sal I'm looking at your

0:29:12.800 --> 0:29:15.480
<v Speaker 1>research and it's just amazing that looking at those numbers

0:29:15.480 --> 0:29:18.120
<v Speaker 1>you just were discussing, we're really talking about soybeans here

0:29:18.200 --> 0:29:21.360
<v Speaker 1>we talk about what China imports from the US. Is

0:29:21.360 --> 0:29:25.360
<v Speaker 1>there a sense that across the commodity spectrum, uh, that

0:29:25.840 --> 0:29:29.440
<v Speaker 1>China needs to maybe rebuild or restock their inventory and

0:29:29.480 --> 0:29:32.360
<v Speaker 1>say that you could see maybe some unusual surge and

0:29:32.400 --> 0:29:36.760
<v Speaker 1>demand over the first you know, six eighteen months. Yes, absolutely,

0:29:36.760 --> 0:29:39.360
<v Speaker 1>they they they've drawn down their soybean stocks. They've drawn

0:29:39.440 --> 0:29:42.960
<v Speaker 1>down their soy stocks, uh, they of all kinds, and

0:29:43.000 --> 0:29:45.320
<v Speaker 1>they've drawn down their corn stocks. They've also, you know,

0:29:45.760 --> 0:29:48.760
<v Speaker 1>massively drawn down their pork stocks. And so they'll come

0:29:48.760 --> 0:29:51.720
<v Speaker 1>in and immediately buy soybeans to rebuild. They'll buy some

0:29:51.800 --> 0:29:54.000
<v Speaker 1>corn to rebuild and freshen up what they had because

0:29:54.040 --> 0:29:56.520
<v Speaker 1>they had old inventory. They were they were stockpiling for

0:29:56.600 --> 0:29:59.480
<v Speaker 1>quite a while. Um, they've almost run out of pork

0:29:59.480 --> 0:30:02.280
<v Speaker 1>ifew will they really tight the releasing supplies for the

0:30:02.320 --> 0:30:04.400
<v Speaker 1>holiday coming up a week from Saturday when their new

0:30:04.480 --> 0:30:08.000
<v Speaker 1>year starts, where they have enormous pork usage, so they've

0:30:08.000 --> 0:30:11.000
<v Speaker 1>got to replenish their soybeans. They've got to repunish their pork.

0:30:11.040 --> 0:30:15.000
<v Speaker 1>They've also they're supplementing their their meat based protein with beef,

0:30:15.120 --> 0:30:17.120
<v Speaker 1>and so they'll they'll come in and buy beef quite

0:30:17.160 --> 0:30:19.360
<v Speaker 1>a bit too, as well as poultry. Chicken and eggs

0:30:19.720 --> 0:30:23.280
<v Speaker 1>um are are a small part of it, but they've

0:30:23.320 --> 0:30:26.000
<v Speaker 1>just been freed up to buy chicken feet in the

0:30:26.080 --> 0:30:27.959
<v Speaker 1>parts that the Chinese use where we just send their

0:30:27.960 --> 0:30:31.440
<v Speaker 1>rendering plants. So we think, um, soybeans, we think pork,

0:30:31.560 --> 0:30:34.560
<v Speaker 1>we think beef, we think no question poultry. Those will

0:30:34.560 --> 0:30:36.440
<v Speaker 1>be the things they come in and buy immediately. How

0:30:36.520 --> 0:30:39.960
<v Speaker 1>much are we gonna expect these increased purchases to uh

0:30:40.280 --> 0:30:42.760
<v Speaker 1>suspect the price here or to increase the price in

0:30:42.800 --> 0:30:45.600
<v Speaker 1>the US. That's the magic question. I think we can

0:30:45.640 --> 0:30:48.360
<v Speaker 1>expect the floor. I think I think there's no doubt

0:30:48.400 --> 0:30:50.720
<v Speaker 1>that it's reasonable to assume that there could be a

0:30:50.760 --> 0:30:54.160
<v Speaker 1>floor in prices, and understand, we've been trading soybeans and

0:30:54.240 --> 0:30:57.640
<v Speaker 1>corn in particular right near their cost of production anyway,

0:30:57.640 --> 0:31:00.280
<v Speaker 1>and they do trade for quite long periods of time

0:31:00.320 --> 0:31:02.720
<v Speaker 1>at their cost of production. That's the natural thing they do.

0:31:02.960 --> 0:31:06.200
<v Speaker 1>Then when there's a supply disruption, because demand is continually

0:31:06.240 --> 0:31:09.040
<v Speaker 1>growing um, you know, you often see pretty pretty good

0:31:09.040 --> 0:31:12.440
<v Speaker 1>spikes upward in the price. Historically, corns doubled twice in

0:31:12.480 --> 0:31:14.680
<v Speaker 1>the past thirteen years from right where it's trading now,

0:31:15.000 --> 0:31:17.960
<v Speaker 1>So you know, people are starting to layer in acid allocate.

0:31:18.160 --> 0:31:20.640
<v Speaker 1>We think once they signed and it's confirmed that they'll

0:31:20.680 --> 0:31:22.480
<v Speaker 1>be buying, and they will be buying because they need

0:31:22.480 --> 0:31:26.080
<v Speaker 1>our agricultural products, there's no question that there should be

0:31:26.160 --> 0:31:29.000
<v Speaker 1>a floor under the price. How much it goes up,

0:31:29.080 --> 0:31:31.120
<v Speaker 1>it remains to be seen. Depends how fast they buy.

0:31:31.160 --> 0:31:33.440
<v Speaker 1>It depends of course on the weather, and it depends

0:31:33.480 --> 0:31:36.640
<v Speaker 1>on some insight into um what the Chimes will be

0:31:36.720 --> 0:31:39.880
<v Speaker 1>doing in their economy, including ethanol. They are blending ethanol

0:31:39.920 --> 0:31:43.040
<v Speaker 1>into their fuel, and while they've um they were going

0:31:43.040 --> 0:31:46.040
<v Speaker 1>to enforce a ten percent mandate, they realized their infrastructure

0:31:46.040 --> 0:31:48.920
<v Speaker 1>is not capable of that. They're not abandoning ethanol in

0:31:48.960 --> 0:31:50.920
<v Speaker 1>any way, shape or form, and that's gonna put some

0:31:51.040 --> 0:31:54.720
<v Speaker 1>big demand on corn globally. And remember this is the

0:31:54.800 --> 0:31:57.280
<v Speaker 1>seventh year in a row that corn demand globally will

0:31:57.320 --> 0:31:59.520
<v Speaker 1>break a record. It's the third year in a row

0:31:59.600 --> 0:32:03.800
<v Speaker 1>the horn demand globally will outpace demand global production. Uh

0:32:03.840 --> 0:32:07.560
<v Speaker 1>this year, soybean demand globally will outpace production. So the

0:32:07.640 --> 0:32:10.920
<v Speaker 1>price is sitting where they are now. You know, you

0:32:10.920 --> 0:32:13.479
<v Speaker 1>can reasonably assume there's certainly for or how high they go,

0:32:13.760 --> 0:32:18.880
<v Speaker 1>we'll say odd question, is there enough inventory? Are the

0:32:18.880 --> 0:32:21.280
<v Speaker 1>American farmers can they meet the surgeon demand? Is there

0:32:21.280 --> 0:32:23.320
<v Speaker 1>a bunch of inventory in the Midwest and the farm

0:32:23.360 --> 0:32:27.600
<v Speaker 1>belt to get meet this surgeon demand? Yes, there is, um,

0:32:27.600 --> 0:32:30.960
<v Speaker 1>there's enough inventory certainly for this year. Um. You know

0:32:31.000 --> 0:32:33.680
<v Speaker 1>that's the interesting part about aggs. That's why prices you know,

0:32:33.720 --> 0:32:35.840
<v Speaker 1>in corn have doubled from these same levels place in

0:32:35.840 --> 0:32:38.960
<v Speaker 1>the past thirteen years. What happens is year to year

0:32:39.000 --> 0:32:41.560
<v Speaker 1>you can replace it. But the one year when you fail,

0:32:41.880 --> 0:32:44.920
<v Speaker 1>you're using eggs, they grow, you harvest them, there's a

0:32:44.920 --> 0:32:48.240
<v Speaker 1>big pile. You're using that pile until the following year's harvest.

0:32:48.600 --> 0:32:50.680
<v Speaker 1>And if the following year has a problem with harvest.

0:32:51.080 --> 0:32:53.240
<v Speaker 1>That's when the issue comes in. And so that's why

0:32:53.520 --> 0:32:56.080
<v Speaker 1>agg markets they always trade kind of at their cost

0:32:56.120 --> 0:32:58.960
<v Speaker 1>of production, and then they explode higher when you get

0:32:58.960 --> 0:33:01.840
<v Speaker 1>that blip and product because remember, demand just keeps going on.

0:33:02.000 --> 0:33:04.440
<v Speaker 1>That's just a steady bad SalCo birt day. Thank you

0:33:04.480 --> 0:33:06.800
<v Speaker 1>so much for joining a sales president and c I

0:33:06.880 --> 0:33:10.040
<v Speaker 1>O and co founder of Two Cream Trading Limited, based

0:33:10.040 --> 0:33:28.360
<v Speaker 1>in Brattleboro, Vermont, targ The shares are down over seven

0:33:28.400 --> 0:33:31.400
<v Speaker 1>percent this morning. The company posted a rare stumble on

0:33:31.600 --> 0:33:34.520
<v Speaker 1>holiday sales came in a week er than expected. To

0:33:34.560 --> 0:33:36.600
<v Speaker 1>help us dig into the details, we welcome our good

0:33:36.600 --> 0:33:40.240
<v Speaker 1>friend Jen Bartashes, senior US retail staples and a restaurant

0:33:40.240 --> 0:33:42.680
<v Speaker 1>analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence. He joins us on the phone

0:33:42.680 --> 0:33:45.959
<v Speaker 1>from bi's headquarters in Princeton, New Jersey. So, Jen, kind

0:33:45.960 --> 0:33:49.040
<v Speaker 1>of a rare stumble for Target. I seem to be

0:33:49.120 --> 0:33:52.080
<v Speaker 1>calling quarter after quarters some pretty solid top line numbers.

0:33:52.080 --> 0:33:55.040
<v Speaker 1>What happened? Yeah, good morning. UM. So Target has had

0:33:55.080 --> 0:33:58.280
<v Speaker 1>a stellar year thus far. Um, but really going into holiday,

0:33:58.720 --> 0:34:00.840
<v Speaker 1>it seems that perhaps there was a little bit of

0:34:00.920 --> 0:34:04.760
<v Speaker 1>a miscalculation with regards to the shorter selling season, but

0:34:04.840 --> 0:34:10.280
<v Speaker 1>they really underperformed in critical categories for holiday, which included toys, electronics,

0:34:10.320 --> 0:34:13.240
<v Speaker 1>and parts of the home decre part part of the store.

0:34:13.440 --> 0:34:16.239
<v Speaker 1>So we've had a bunch of hours to digest the

0:34:16.280 --> 0:34:19.600
<v Speaker 1>release and some of the possible explanations for it. Has

0:34:19.640 --> 0:34:22.560
<v Speaker 1>anything become clear in terms of how much this is

0:34:22.600 --> 0:34:25.480
<v Speaker 1>a Target specific issue and how much this is a

0:34:25.520 --> 0:34:30.640
<v Speaker 1>widespread likely disappointment for all retailers and the last holiday season, right,

0:34:30.760 --> 0:34:33.600
<v Speaker 1>So to put that into context, you know, you know, Target,

0:34:33.800 --> 0:34:36.239
<v Speaker 1>you know still posted positive same store sales growth, it

0:34:36.280 --> 0:34:38.920
<v Speaker 1>was just below expectations. Some of this seems to be

0:34:39.000 --> 0:34:43.080
<v Speaker 1>Targets specific because in certain categories at Target they did

0:34:43.200 --> 0:34:45.839
<v Speaker 1>very well. Apparel was up five percent, Beauty was up

0:34:45.840 --> 0:34:48.840
<v Speaker 1>seven um. And so it seems that there were some

0:34:48.880 --> 0:34:52.640
<v Speaker 1>miscalculations specific to Target in a couple of those critical areas.

0:34:52.880 --> 0:34:55.480
<v Speaker 1>But when you look at the broader retail landscape, you know,

0:34:55.520 --> 0:34:58.200
<v Speaker 1>it's been a really mixed holiday season, and so even

0:34:58.239 --> 0:35:02.560
<v Speaker 1>though consumer spending has been up, especially online spending um,

0:35:02.600 --> 0:35:06.920
<v Speaker 1>different retailers have really had posted mixed results. So, Jen,

0:35:07.000 --> 0:35:09.319
<v Speaker 1>I know from reading your research over the years, I

0:35:09.400 --> 0:35:12.000
<v Speaker 1>can't just look at top line same store sales also

0:35:12.200 --> 0:35:15.000
<v Speaker 1>have to look at promotion activities that goes right the

0:35:15.000 --> 0:35:17.640
<v Speaker 1>profit Margins did. What did we learn from target ors

0:35:17.640 --> 0:35:19.320
<v Speaker 1>maybe some of the other retailers you follow about the

0:35:19.320 --> 0:35:22.960
<v Speaker 1>promotional activity to drop those holiday sales. Yeah, so, so

0:35:23.200 --> 0:35:26.240
<v Speaker 1>one of the categories that we tracked very closely is toys,

0:35:26.360 --> 0:35:29.759
<v Speaker 1>and we tracked toy prices throughout the holiday season, and

0:35:29.800 --> 0:35:33.680
<v Speaker 1>Target consistently was more expensive than both Amazon and Walmart.

0:35:33.760 --> 0:35:35.880
<v Speaker 1>So that may be playing into some of the results

0:35:35.920 --> 0:35:39.120
<v Speaker 1>in toys that they had. UM With regards to promotions

0:35:39.160 --> 0:35:43.360
<v Speaker 1>over Black Friday and and Cyber Monday, UM, Targets promotions

0:35:43.400 --> 0:35:45.880
<v Speaker 1>were different this year. So last year on Cyber Monday

0:35:45.920 --> 0:35:48.240
<v Speaker 1>they gave fifteen percent off on everything on their site.

0:35:48.600 --> 0:35:53.440
<v Speaker 1>This year it was very strategic specific UM discounts. And

0:35:53.520 --> 0:35:56.040
<v Speaker 1>so even though that may be better for Margins overall,

0:35:56.160 --> 0:35:58.279
<v Speaker 1>it seems that it did have a definite impact on

0:35:58.320 --> 0:36:01.880
<v Speaker 1>top line sales going forward. Do we have a sense

0:36:01.960 --> 0:36:04.160
<v Speaker 1>of Walmart. We know that their shares also fell in

0:36:04.200 --> 0:36:06.279
<v Speaker 1>sympathy with Target, Are they going to face some of

0:36:06.320 --> 0:36:12.200
<v Speaker 1>the same issues, well, you know, with regards to specifically toys, UM,

0:36:12.239 --> 0:36:14.560
<v Speaker 1>you know, we think that they may have fared a

0:36:14.640 --> 0:36:17.120
<v Speaker 1>little bit better just because they were more price competitive

0:36:17.160 --> 0:36:19.480
<v Speaker 1>and they're out of stocks Rose, which implies that they

0:36:19.520 --> 0:36:21.600
<v Speaker 1>ran through their inventory at a little bit of a

0:36:21.640 --> 0:36:25.120
<v Speaker 1>faster pace than Target did across the season. Um, across

0:36:25.160 --> 0:36:27.880
<v Speaker 1>the broader store. UM, it's hard to say. Um. They

0:36:27.880 --> 0:36:30.920
<v Speaker 1>also had a strong holiday last year. UM. And so

0:36:31.160 --> 0:36:33.400
<v Speaker 1>it could well be that they did well in certain

0:36:33.440 --> 0:36:36.040
<v Speaker 1>categories and less well in other category as much as

0:36:36.080 --> 0:36:38.680
<v Speaker 1>Target did. JEN what do we learn from the e

0:36:38.760 --> 0:36:42.319
<v Speaker 1>commerce side of Target? I remember, you know, last four

0:36:42.920 --> 0:36:46.480
<v Speaker 1>quarters really strong e commerce reven or growth kind of

0:36:46.680 --> 0:36:48.880
<v Speaker 1>led me to believe that the Targets and the Walmarts

0:36:48.880 --> 0:36:50.120
<v Speaker 1>of the world have kind of figured out how to

0:36:50.160 --> 0:36:54.560
<v Speaker 1>compete against Amazon. Well, what was interesting about the revenue

0:36:54.600 --> 0:36:57.960
<v Speaker 1>growth and and the percentage it was for Target over

0:36:58.000 --> 0:37:01.680
<v Speaker 1>the holiday season, which is not bad, um, But what

0:37:01.719 --> 0:37:04.319
<v Speaker 1>we're really seeing is that a big portion of that

0:37:04.400 --> 0:37:07.319
<v Speaker 1>overall growth came from same day fulfillment options. So that's

0:37:07.360 --> 0:37:08.920
<v Speaker 1>where you order it Neither you pick it up at

0:37:08.960 --> 0:37:11.600
<v Speaker 1>the store, um, delivered to your car, or you go

0:37:11.640 --> 0:37:14.160
<v Speaker 1>in the store to pick it up. And that actually

0:37:14.239 --> 0:37:16.640
<v Speaker 1>is the part that is interesting with regards to competition

0:37:16.680 --> 0:37:19.760
<v Speaker 1>against Amazon, because even though Amazon has free next Days,

0:37:19.800 --> 0:37:22.760
<v Speaker 1>you know, shipping and in some markets free same day shipping.

0:37:23.160 --> 0:37:26.319
<v Speaker 1>UM it's still very difficult to compete with UM a

0:37:26.360 --> 0:37:29.080
<v Speaker 1>Target or a Walmart who can offer that same service

0:37:29.320 --> 0:37:30.799
<v Speaker 1>and you know that you're going to have it in

0:37:30.840 --> 0:37:33.279
<v Speaker 1>hand by the end of the day. Just real quick here, Jed.

0:37:33.360 --> 0:37:37.960
<v Speaker 1>Earlier you're speaking about the target experience. What is the

0:37:38.000 --> 0:37:41.959
<v Speaker 1>target experience? Well, when you know, when when their their

0:37:41.960 --> 0:37:44.600
<v Speaker 1>core customers go in and they expect to be delighted,

0:37:44.640 --> 0:37:48.359
<v Speaker 1>and a lot of the they do. I mean, you know,

0:37:48.440 --> 0:37:50.640
<v Speaker 1>when when you go in, you're a lot of the

0:37:50.680 --> 0:37:54.560
<v Speaker 1>target core customers are into looking for that new piece

0:37:54.600 --> 0:37:58.399
<v Speaker 1>of fashion, that new accessory, the new beauty product. Um

0:37:58.440 --> 0:38:01.279
<v Speaker 1>And and a lot of the Turket has made in

0:38:01.320 --> 0:38:04.160
<v Speaker 1>their stores has really been to reformat the stores to

0:38:04.200 --> 0:38:07.279
<v Speaker 1>make it easier to you know, access and to be

0:38:07.360 --> 0:38:09.960
<v Speaker 1>inspired by the products that they have their UM and

0:38:10.000 --> 0:38:12.600
<v Speaker 1>that has really bolstered same store sales over the last year.

0:38:12.719 --> 0:38:14.880
<v Speaker 1>Now they're coming to where they've done a lot of

0:38:14.880 --> 0:38:18.040
<v Speaker 1>those remodels, so it'll be interesting to see going forward

0:38:18.080 --> 0:38:20.520
<v Speaker 1>whether they're able to sustain that same amount of traffic

0:38:20.600 --> 0:38:23.279
<v Speaker 1>into their stores that they were able to generate off

0:38:23.320 --> 0:38:26.000
<v Speaker 1>the heels of those renovations. Jen Bratashes, thank you so

0:38:26.080 --> 0:38:29.320
<v Speaker 1>much of Bloomberg Intelligence. Paul literally turning my mic off

0:38:29.520 --> 0:38:32.320
<v Speaker 1>and saying, don't do it. Whatever you're gonna say, don't

0:38:32.320 --> 0:38:35.120
<v Speaker 1>do it, and I gotta say my My only point

0:38:35.200 --> 0:38:38.040
<v Speaker 1>is the big box stores. The whole design of them

0:38:38.360 --> 0:38:40.080
<v Speaker 1>was to make it look like you're going to get

0:38:40.080 --> 0:38:42.640
<v Speaker 1>a deal, not an experience, right, I mean that was

0:38:42.680 --> 0:38:45.399
<v Speaker 1>sort of the idea. I understand going in and being

0:38:45.440 --> 0:38:48.440
<v Speaker 1>excited about getting something that you can get, but delighted.

0:38:48.520 --> 0:38:51.440
<v Speaker 1>I mean, yes, I guess that's what the millennials and

0:38:51.480 --> 0:38:56.120
<v Speaker 1>the gen xers want. They want experiences. I don't disagree

0:38:56.200 --> 0:38:58.719
<v Speaker 1>with that, but I'm just I think people just want

0:38:58.760 --> 0:39:01.400
<v Speaker 1>a good deal. Okay, thanks for listening to the Bloomberg

0:39:01.440 --> 0:39:04.080
<v Speaker 1>pen L podcast. You can subscribe and listen to interviews

0:39:04.160 --> 0:39:07.319
<v Speaker 1>at Apple Podcasts or whatever podcast platform you prefer. I'm

0:39:07.320 --> 0:39:10.759
<v Speaker 1>Paul Sweeney. I'm on Twitter at pt Sweeney. I'm Lisa Bramwoyits.

0:39:10.800 --> 0:39:13.800
<v Speaker 1>I'm on Twitter at Lisa Bramwoyits one before the podcast.

0:39:13.840 --> 0:39:16.440
<v Speaker 1>You can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio