Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Markets Podcast. I'm Paul Sweeney alongside
Speaker 1: my co host Matt Miller. Every business day we bring
Speaker 1: you interviews from CEOs, market pros, and Bloomberg experts, along
Speaker 1: with essential market moving news. Find the Bloomberg Markets Podcast
Speaker 1: on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts, and
Speaker 1: at Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. Well, the money machine
Speaker 1: that is better known as the NFL did it again.
Speaker 1: They sat down with their broadcast quote unquote partners, negotiated
Speaker 1: new deals beginning a couple of years, and they're going
Speaker 1: all the way to the bank, and that includes going
Speaker 1: digital in a big way with a Thursday Night package.
Speaker 1: Let's break it all down. We can do that with
Speaker 1: Neil Pilson. He's a founder and president of Pilson Communications,
Speaker 1: former president of CBS Sports. Neil, thanks so much for
Speaker 1: joining us here. Let's start with the Amazon aspect to
Speaker 1: this deal. Boy, it's the first time where you get
Speaker 1: a big digital player stepping up and getting a notable package,
Speaker 1: in this case Thursday Night game. What do you make
Speaker 1: of that? Well, I'm not surprised. Uh. The other networks,
Speaker 1: the broadcast networks didn't want it. They didn't have much
Speaker 1: interest in Thursday Night. It was expensive, the schedule wasn't
Speaker 1: that good. They didn't need it as long as they
Speaker 1: retained their Sunday afternoon, Sunday Night, and Monday night schedules. Uh. Frankly, Uh,
Speaker 1: the NFL didn't have interest from from those guys. So
Speaker 1: the digital components understandable, Uh, predictable. But I think, frankly,
Speaker 1: the big story you missed. The big story is the
Speaker 1: broadcast networks and ESPN reaffirmed their permanence uh in broadcast
Speaker 1: sports for the next eleven years. I think everybody was predicting,
Speaker 1: you know, the demise of the networks, the end of
Speaker 1: living your television. Uh, the networks are going to go away. Uh. No,
Speaker 1: the networks are here too, here for the next eleven years. Uh.
Speaker 1: That's the important story. I think the fact that Thursday
Speaker 1: Night went to digital is is predictable. Uh. It represents
Speaker 1: about I think thirteen of the total financial pie. But
Speaker 1: the fact is that on just about every major sport
Speaker 1: where uh there was broadcast television and digital television side
Speaker 1: by side, digital never got over five. So uh, you know,
Speaker 1: one day, yes, we probably will all be in the
Speaker 1: digital format. But right now, the broadcast networks I think
Speaker 1: got to be very pleased with their packages, Neil, I
Speaker 1: mean to that to your point, cable systems must be
Speaker 1: so happy about this, because I can't think of any
Speaker 1: other reason I would stay with an the top box
Speaker 1: other than being able to get network sports. I mean,
Speaker 1: is that the only big Isn't that a huge big
Speaker 1: draw for cable? Sure, it is very important to them.
Speaker 1: The cable folks have to be very pleased with the
Speaker 1: outcome of the NFL negotiations, no question about it. But
Speaker 1: even more pleased are the television station and the television networks,
Speaker 1: the broadcasters, because I don't think the NFL is going
Speaker 1: to be the only UH network to continue with broadcast
Speaker 1: television with its major major events. I can't see the
Speaker 1: NBA moving away. UH. The NHL just made a long
Speaker 1: term deal with ESPN, which is more UH in the
Speaker 1: broadcaster mode. UH. They're actually a hybrid because they have
Speaker 1: SPN plus, but ESPN is regarded as one of the
Speaker 1: traditional broadcasters. UH. Then you have Major League Baseball, which
Speaker 1: basically has long term agreements with with the with the broadcasters. UH.
Speaker 1: So it's a it's a statement. The Olympics are long
Speaker 1: term with the broadcasters. I'm running through in my mind.
Speaker 1: The n c A A tournament is long term with
Speaker 1: CBS and Turner. My point is that those in the
Speaker 1: media who predicted the end of linear television, they were wrong.
Speaker 1: There it's continuing. Uh, it's going to have to share
Speaker 1: the spectrum and share audience with digital, but linear television
Speaker 1: for the foreseeable future. And I think we're talking now
Speaker 1: about the next ten years is going to be a force.
Speaker 1: It's it's it's real. It's uh, it's not going away. Hey, Neil,
Speaker 1: I want to talk about the economics of some of
Speaker 1: these rights deals. It's just downs me here. Every time
Speaker 1: they come up from renewal, the fee seemed to double.
Speaker 1: And I remember your former boss, Mel Karmers and at
Speaker 1: CBS when they when CBS got its package back that
Speaker 1: it had lost years ago. He famously said that an
Speaker 1: investor conference, when asked about the profitability, we will make
Speaker 1: a dollar is what he said, basically implying that's a
Speaker 1: break even business. And obviously they look at sports playing
Speaker 1: it a little further. Okay, I was there when we
Speaker 1: lost the NFL yes with Larry Tish back in four uh,
Speaker 1: and I predicted to Larry that CBS would lose more
Speaker 1: money without the NFL then they might lose with the NFL.
Speaker 1: He didn't believe me. Well, it happened, and four years later,
Speaker 1: CBS came crawling back to the NFL saying basically, give
Speaker 1: us any package, name your price. We've got to get
Speaker 1: back with professional football. And they did. Uh. NBC went
Speaker 1: through the same discussion because NBC had a slightly stronger network.
Speaker 1: They lasted eight years without the NFL, then they came
Speaker 1: crawling back. So, uh, it's not the issue of whether
Speaker 1: you make any money or lose any money. The issue
Speaker 1: is will you lose more money if you lose the NFL.
Speaker 1: And the answer to that is yes. And that explains
Speaker 1: the current deal. Is the is the NFL completely dominant?
Speaker 1: I mean we have Neil international listeners who maybe you
Speaker 1: don't understand the importance of football, you know, American football
Speaker 1: in America. The word is completely and I think you
Speaker 1: used it. Yes, it is the dominant. Uh. You know,
Speaker 1: you look at the NFL ratings on a given weekend,
Speaker 1: if you include the pregame shows and and Thursday Friday said, Thursday, Saturday, Thursday, Sunday, Monday,
Speaker 1: the NFL is getting seventy or eighty rating points every weekend,
Speaker 1: and no other entertainment property or sports property comes close
Speaker 1: to that. Uh. And it's and it's steady, it's it's
Speaker 1: almost it is guaranteed just about. So it is totally
Speaker 1: unique property, unique to the USA. But you know, you
Speaker 1: look at World Cup ratings around the world. You look
Speaker 1: at the the ratings that the Premier League gets, the
Speaker 1: importance of European soccer, Well, this is our premier League
Speaker 1: by a larger margin than in Europe because there's so
Speaker 1: much more competition here. We have so many more professional
Speaker 1: and college sports programming in the US compared to any
Speaker 1: other country in the world. And the fact is the
Speaker 1: NFL is the dominant by far. Is anything important property
Speaker 1: entertainment property as well? Is anything? Uh do you see
Speaker 1: any big growth anywhere? I mean, I'm living over here,
Speaker 1: so I watch, you know, Formula one religiously. Everybody watches
Speaker 1: Premier League, but it doesn't seem to have picked up
Speaker 1: in the US. Is there anything that you see as
Speaker 1: a shooting star as a big growth in terms of
Speaker 1: sports properties? Well? Uh, first of all, is the major
Speaker 1: properties occupy a tremendous amount of attention so it's very
Speaker 1: hard to kind of grow into that stature. But frankly, uh,
Speaker 1: international soccer is growing in the US, it is doing better.
Speaker 1: International soccer gets much better ratings nationally than MLS. Uh.
Speaker 1: That's not widely known, but MLS has very strong local interest,
Speaker 1: but so far they have not cracked the national ratings. Uh.
Speaker 1: Very well. Um, there, No, I don't. I don't see
Speaker 1: any any new sport or any sport that currently exists
Speaker 1: growing to the point where it is comparable to not
Speaker 1: just NFL, but comparable to college football, which frankly is
Speaker 1: the second highest rated programming. And then we have nine
Speaker 1: or ten other other sports. You know, we have NASCAR,
Speaker 1: we have the we have Major League Baseball, we have hockey,
Speaker 1: we have the NBA, we have college basketball, we have
Speaker 1: tennis and golf. No other network, no other country has
Speaker 1: that level of major sports that takes up so much
Speaker 1: audience it almost prevents a new sport from from growing
Speaker 1: that quickly. It's true, It's true. I mean, Paul, you know,
Speaker 1: soccer is everything here and there really isn't a second
Speaker 1: run people watch another sport the way they do in
Speaker 1: the US. Yeah, Hey, Neil, thanks so much for joining us.
Speaker 1: I really appreciate it. Neil Pilson, founder and president of
Speaker 1: Pilson Communications. We had the diplomats from the US and
Speaker 1: China UH beginning a set of meetings yesterday in Alaska,
Speaker 1: and apparently things did not get off on the right foot.
Speaker 1: Let's see what that means for UH future discussions and
Speaker 1: relations between the US and China. There's absolutely nobody better
Speaker 1: that we like to talk to and we talk China
Speaker 1: than Leland Miller. He's the CEO of the China based
Speaker 1: book International. Leland, what should we take away from kind
Speaker 1: of what we saw yesterday? A little bit unusual about
Speaker 1: how you know, aggressive the rhetoric was on both sides. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I've got a real kick out of all the reporting
Speaker 1: from this because you know, the the reporting says that
Speaker 1: that this broke down into acrimony and that there was
Speaker 1: a tense exchange. You know, you know, look, both sides
Speaker 1: got exactly what they wanted out of this event. Now
Speaker 1: you know, there was never a chance of a reset.
Speaker 1: There was never desired by at least the Biden side,
Speaker 1: to really to move on the issues. Um, this is
Speaker 1: this is the way that tract you dialogues are typically done.
Speaker 1: So if if for anyone who hasn't participated in them.
Speaker 1: You know, you have the US on one side and
Speaker 1: they sort of look sternly across the table is saying,
Speaker 1: we are America. We love democracy, we love our allies,
Speaker 1: we love the rules based order. We are America. And
Speaker 1: then on the other side of the table, you've got
Speaker 1: the Chinese who's also have stern expressions, and they say,
Speaker 1: you know, we are China. We are strong, we also
Speaker 1: love democracy, we also love the rules based order, but
Speaker 1: not your rules. We are strong by the way you
Speaker 1: are weak. You know, we are China. And and this
Speaker 1: is how these things work on a regular basis. Now
Speaker 1: they don't have to have open, you know, sharp tones,
Speaker 1: but this is sort of the back and forth they'll
Speaker 1: be playing out for domestic audience on each side. So
Speaker 1: the fact that this didn't accomplish anything or was there
Speaker 1: was a lot of sort of loud pushback, that is
Speaker 1: exactly what should have been expected from this. There was
Speaker 1: never going to be a real accomplishment coming from this
Speaker 1: meeting other than the two sides coming at each other saying, Okay,
Speaker 1: we're tough and we're not going to give in. The
Speaker 1: one accomplishment I thought they could achieve, and maybe they
Speaker 1: still will. Is a meeting between Biden and hijin Ping,
Speaker 1: or at least that was teased as a possibility on April.
Speaker 1: Do you think it will happen. At some point, it
Speaker 1: will happen. I don't. I don't see why the Biden
Speaker 1: team would want it sooner. But you know, look on
Speaker 1: on the one side, these are these are the two
Speaker 1: most powerful nations in the world. The two leaders getting
Speaker 1: together makes some sense. It's simply how you know, what's
Speaker 1: the timing on this? If it does happen, I don't
Speaker 1: expect anything really to come of it, other than at
Speaker 1: some point in the first year. I do expect that
Speaker 1: they're going to reopen a consolate or two. They're gonna
Speaker 1: let some journalists back into China, perhaps some some some
Speaker 1: goodwill gestures, But there's no desire right now on the
Speaker 1: U S side to make serious concessions or to get
Speaker 1: They don't really need anything from from from Beijing, so
Speaker 1: there's no real desire for this for this to be
Speaker 1: a priority right now. The big priority for Biden is
Speaker 1: to not look weak on China so that his administration doesn't,
Speaker 1: you know, encounter problems in Congress dealing with its other priorities.
Speaker 1: So whether or not she in And and Biden meet
Speaker 1: in the near future, which I wouldn't expect, but who knows.
Speaker 1: I don't expect anything real to come of it anytime soon.
Speaker 1: So Leland, what is the China policy or what will
Speaker 1: be the China policy? What should be the China policy?
Speaker 1: Do you think of the Biden administration um again towards China. Well,
Speaker 1: what they're what they're saying now, and it's it's other
Speaker 1: than you know, we're reviewing everything, is that we're going
Speaker 1: to keep most elements of the Trump tough on China
Speaker 1: policy in place, but we're going to adapt it over
Speaker 1: time to our mindset, which is we need to but
Speaker 1: more priority on consensus and bringing in allies, etcetera. Now,
Speaker 1: the problem with that is it's a process, not a strategy.
Speaker 1: So yes, it makes a lot of sense to do that,
Speaker 1: But then where do you go with this? And they
Speaker 1: don't know yet, And I think that there's some big
Speaker 1: questions coming up with Taiwan, how we're gonna have how
Speaker 1: the United States is gonna handle handle uh relations with Taiwan,
Speaker 1: and and and certainly the tech company is a big
Speaker 1: one UH. And then of course the Shinjong situation is
Speaker 1: hang over everything because China is hosting the Olympics next
Speaker 1: year and so there will be a lot of pressure
Speaker 1: to back out of that. So a lot of big
Speaker 1: decisions are coming out out of you know, to come
Speaker 1: out in future months. But they don't have a set
Speaker 1: policy on this yet right now. The messages we're dealing
Speaker 1: with COVID, We're getting to that later, Leland. I've watched
Speaker 1: the car industry and a couple of things necessary to
Speaker 1: build a good ev rare earths and chips are seemingly
Speaker 1: controlled by China, or at least you know, a large
Speaker 1: portion of that industry is will we move it back
Speaker 1: to the US or will we make a deal? Has
Speaker 1: that get worked out? Yeah? I think to two issues
Speaker 1: with semi god ducts, and look, there is nothing more
Speaker 1: important than semiconductors and the semiconductor discussion right now. But
Speaker 1: I think two issues are being conflated. And the first
Speaker 1: is we've got a global semiconductor shortage, and that's due
Speaker 1: to a lot of dynamics. There are supply dynamics, UH,
Speaker 1: supply chain dynamics breaking down in COVID. There's some bad
Speaker 1: decisions by companies like car companies on the demand side
Speaker 1: not to order more. You've got some US China trade
Speaker 1: stuff that's interfering. So you've got you've got a global
Speaker 1: semi conductor shortage and that's gonna hit GDP and that's
Speaker 1: hurting companies, and so there's just sort of a panic
Speaker 1: coming out from from from different industries to do something
Speaker 1: about it. Separate from that is you at the you know,
Speaker 1: is US China competition at the very top of the
Speaker 1: food chain, which is you know, uh seven animetor chip
Speaker 1: fourteen animeter, chips seven five three going onto two in
Speaker 1: the future, and right now there's only there are very
Speaker 1: few companies that can produce is. Essentially Taiwan semi Conductor
Speaker 1: is the company producing this, and the US is ring
Speaker 1: fencing their production from going to China. So there's a
Speaker 1: big debate, you know, are we too reliant on Taiwan
Speaker 1: semi conductor? Should the US have other alternatives? Yes, this
Speaker 1: is very important to discuss, but it's totally different from
Speaker 1: the global semiconductor shortage that we're seeing right now across
Speaker 1: this affecting markets in GDP. But people in industry right
Speaker 1: now see subsidy dollars, and they're like, well, well let's
Speaker 1: just talk about panic and and everything's anti China, so
Speaker 1: let's let's get some more money findistry. The strategy is
Speaker 1: not craft out in a way where it looks like
Speaker 1: this thing is being done in a in a way
Speaker 1: to really craft out an intelligence strategy on advanced chip manufacturing. Leland,
Speaker 1: thanks so much for joining us. Really appreciate your insight.
Speaker 1: Always fun talking to you as well. Leland Miller, CEO
Speaker 1: of the China Beige Book International. All right, so Paul
Speaker 1: was just talking about FedEx. They had surging package volumes
Speaker 1: and price gains. Those two things offset increased labor costs.
Speaker 1: But you know, for the economy, increased labor costs are
Speaker 1: good too. Let's bring in UM right now, Christina Hooper,
Speaker 1: she's the chief global market strategist for Investo. Christina, is this,
Speaker 1: you know, one of the telltale signs of an economy
Speaker 1: that is booming? Well, certainly it is, and that's what
Speaker 1: we should be expecting. We are saying, UM, what is
Speaker 1: likely to be a very robust and inclusive economic recovery
Speaker 1: in and this is just part of of that kind
Speaker 1: of of robust recovery. And when you say inclusive, explain that,
Speaker 1: because that's definitely a buzzword these days. Is it really
Speaker 1: going to Are we going to see women come back
Speaker 1: in the labor force? Are we going to see people
Speaker 1: of color come back in the labor force and get
Speaker 1: pay raises? Well, I certainly think we're going to see
Speaker 1: a more re entering the labor force. So when I
Speaker 1: say inclusive, I'm thinking specifically about this being um, what
Speaker 1: I would term a job full recovery recovery as opposed
Speaker 1: to a job less recovery, which is what we saw
Speaker 1: for a number of years following the global financial crisis.
Speaker 1: I think this is going to be different because we
Speaker 1: have more fiscal stimulus UM that that has been provided,
Speaker 1: and because of the nature of this recovery. This is
Speaker 1: not a confidence game. We're not trying to rebuild confidence.
Speaker 1: We're not going to have a slow recovery. This is
Speaker 1: a situation where, um, once we get enough vaccines in people, UM,
Speaker 1: we are going to get closer to her immunity, and
Speaker 1: it's going to be off to the racist. It's going
Speaker 1: to be much more like a switch turning on. Christina,
Speaker 1: what did you make of FED chairman Pale and his
Speaker 1: comments earlier this week, he seemed to suggest that the
Speaker 1: FED is still lower for longer. What did you take away?
Speaker 1: So my takeaway is that he the Fed really means
Speaker 1: what it says in terms of the policy framework changing,
Speaker 1: and that they're really abandoning this concept of preemptive tightening.
Speaker 1: That's really really important because that means they are going
Speaker 1: to let this economy run because and if they do
Speaker 1: see some kind of increase in inflation this year, they're
Speaker 1: going to be most uh most predisposed to treat it
Speaker 1: as transitory and sit on their hands. So this is
Speaker 1: this is very exciting. It's a big departure from the past,
Speaker 1: and so I think it's a positive for the economy. Now.
Speaker 1: Of course, it can be a double edged sword for
Speaker 1: markets because markets are worrying about a rise in inflation,
Speaker 1: and of course that's causing or one of the reasons
Speaker 1: why we're seeing that rise in in treasury yields. But
Speaker 1: markets are only worried about a rising inflation, or mainly
Speaker 1: worried about rising inflation because they think that will move
Speaker 1: the FED to raise rates, thus killing the recovery. Right,
Speaker 1: So if you take the FED at its word, that
Speaker 1: they're gonna let the economy run hot because they believe
Speaker 1: it's only transitory. Then you can assume that they're not
Speaker 1: going to raise rates even if we see it, right,
Speaker 1: That's part of it. This is almost a chicken and
Speaker 1: egg conversation, right because uh, fear of inflation does have
Speaker 1: an impact on the ten year yields, and so there
Speaker 1: are concerns that if the Fed is not willing to
Speaker 1: control uh the yield curve further out, that that is
Speaker 1: going to present problems in and of itself, even if
Speaker 1: it keeps the said funds right where it is. So
Speaker 1: that can be a bit problematic, especially for the stock market, right,
Speaker 1: And that's what we're seeing on days like today and
Speaker 1: what we saw yesterday. All right, Christina, So given what
Speaker 1: we have with this backdrop, will we heard from Chairman
Speaker 1: Powell the expectations on inflation? Um, how are you you
Speaker 1: guys at invest go where are you looking for opportunities
Speaker 1: right now? So? First of all, Um, it is still
Speaker 1: an environment that favors risk assets, especially if you have
Speaker 1: a longer time horizon. But even if you have a
Speaker 1: shorter time horizon, this year, I think we are going
Speaker 1: to see stocks outperform other asset classes, but they're going
Speaker 1: to do that with significantly more volatility. That's just the
Speaker 1: nature of this recovery. We made huge gains in the
Speaker 1: last year. Uh, and now we're going to be coming
Speaker 1: up against a few headwinds. I think it's more a
Speaker 1: matter of digestion, that that at each new level that
Speaker 1: we hit with the ten year yield, that there is
Speaker 1: going to be a period of digestion. But I still
Speaker 1: think that this is going to be a positive year
Speaker 1: for stocks. Uh. We're likely to see cyclicals the more
Speaker 1: value side of the stock market outperformed growth this year,
Speaker 1: but that doesn't mean to abandon growth. I think you
Speaker 1: still want exposure there. And again, Uh, this is going
Speaker 1: to be a year that underscores the importance of diversification.
Speaker 1: To really smooth out that volatility, we need to have
Speaker 1: exposure to a variety of asset classes. Are you, I
Speaker 1: mean this conversation is focused on US assets, I guess,
Speaker 1: but European stocks have also done well, and UM analysts
Speaker 1: like European stocks, but we don't have vaccines getting into
Speaker 1: arms the same way. Is that going to be a problem. Well,
Speaker 1: I certainly think that's going to slow down the timeline
Speaker 1: for an economic recovery in Europe. Also, the effect of
Speaker 1: noss of of the vaccines being used in Europe may
Speaker 1: play a role as well. Um, But if you're a
Speaker 1: long term investor, that's not really that important. The timeline
Speaker 1: can shift a little bit, can be delayed a little bit. Um,
Speaker 1: it's more about valuations, uh, it's more about longer term
Speaker 1: prospect and so I would say this is an environment
Speaker 1: where valuations look very attractive in Europe, but they also
Speaker 1: look attractive in Asia, especially Asia e m uh. And
Speaker 1: so so that's an area as well to be looking at. Christina,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for joining us. We always appreciate
Speaker 1: getting your views on the markets on a global scale.
Speaker 1: Christina Hooper, Chief Global Market Strategies for Investo. They have
Speaker 1: one point three trillion with a T and assets under management.
Speaker 1: They're located in a plant. Let's talk a little bit
Speaker 1: more about vaccines right now. This is not just because
Speaker 1: I'm angry or bitter that, Um, the place I live
Speaker 1: is so slow. Well, you know what think the word
Speaker 1: inefficient is a great word to use when talking about
Speaker 1: Germany's vaccine delivery, and the same can be true can
Speaker 1: be said. I should say about um other European countries.
Speaker 1: Terres Raphael joins us to talk about why even Switzerland
Speaker 1: has really dropped the ball compared with the efficiency of
Speaker 1: states like West Virginia, um Terres. Normally we think of
Speaker 1: Germanic people as super efficient. I guess that's just not true. Well,
Speaker 1: in this case it seems not to be. And that's um,
Speaker 1: you know, was for me the most surprising finding when
Speaker 1: I began to question whether the problem was really all
Speaker 1: about supply, because right the narrative has been that, um,
Speaker 1: the countries that produced the vaccines and manufacturers, they're fine
Speaker 1: and vaccinating their people, um. But um. But but other
Speaker 1: places are starved to supply and therefore can't roll out
Speaker 1: the vaccine. But when you drill down a little bit deeper,
Speaker 1: it's not just the supply issue. Obvious, the supplies hugely important,
Speaker 1: but some of the most vanted health care systems in
Speaker 1: the world UH fall down on delivery. And that's for
Speaker 1: a number of reasons. But one of the big ones
Speaker 1: I found was a lack of basic electronic health records,
Speaker 1: which you know, the World Health Organization has been pushing
Speaker 1: for a long time, and only about half of developed
Speaker 1: countries have it. But the places that have really good
Speaker 1: digitized systems which enable them to get the message out UH,
Speaker 1: to to have an efficient booking system to track who's
Speaker 1: been vaccinated, those were places that were able to vaccine
Speaker 1: at a higher rate. And there were other factors as well,
Speaker 1: such as whether they were able to use kind of
Speaker 1: traditional UM pathways for delivering healthcare, such as in the
Speaker 1: UK with the National Health Service or in Israel with
Speaker 1: the health maintenance organizations tryas. One of the issues that
Speaker 1: we're finding here in the United States is reluctance from
Speaker 1: some people sizeable percentage of population to get vaccines US
Speaker 1: sometimes labeled as anti vaxers. Is that a big issue
Speaker 1: across Europe? Is a very country to country. What are
Speaker 1: they finding It definitely varies from country to country. So
Speaker 1: in the UK UM we've found a really strong, robust
Speaker 1: uptake of the vaccine. Now it's trailing off just a
Speaker 1: little bit as they get down through the age group,
Speaker 1: so they're now looking at vaccinating UH the under fifties
Speaker 1: and UH just this week we're hearing that some people
Speaker 1: are not making their appointments. Younger people are feeling not
Speaker 1: quite as vulnerable to the virus and and may not
Speaker 1: be as eager for the vaccine. UH. France has had
Speaker 1: a much bigger problem. And you know that's that's a
Speaker 1: longstanding issue UM in France, and and it's when the
Speaker 1: government has just been really poor at trying to counter
Speaker 1: and is now trying to make up lost ground. But
Speaker 1: you know, again, if you were to rank the problems
Speaker 1: of vaccination rollout, you put supply first, but then you
Speaker 1: put delivery systems and then maybe you put vaccine hesitancy
Speaker 1: or anti vaxers at the very bottom. Why doesn't somebody
Speaker 1: in charge here just say send them out. When we
Speaker 1: get the supplies into all uh, you know, drug stores, pharmacies, vets,
Speaker 1: nail salons, why not just get them everywhere? Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: that's an interesting question. And every country has is doing
Speaker 1: it differently, and in many countries, you know, Germany with
Speaker 1: the lender, Switzerland with the cantons, America with the states.
Speaker 1: In the US, for example, the federal government has done
Speaker 1: a really good job of sending out supply to the
Speaker 1: different states, but then it's left it up to the
Speaker 1: states and the localities to decide what to do, and
Speaker 1: they have adopted a whole mishmash of UH. Different systems.
Speaker 1: So you know, someone was telling me that in a
Speaker 1: suburb of Chicago there are three or four different websites
Speaker 1: to register for the vaccine, and sometimes you couldn't get
Speaker 1: an appointment or you'd have to try different websites. They
Speaker 1: all use different systems. Uh. You have some towns that
Speaker 1: are vaccinating out of town commuters, but not the elderly
Speaker 1: who live in the town. So there's you know, this
Speaker 1: is a huge logistical operation, and for health care systems
Speaker 1: and local authorities that aren't good at logistics or have
Speaker 1: never confronted something on this scale, they're falling down treas.
Speaker 1: You know, before the pandemic, we used to talk to
Speaker 1: you almost on a daily basis about Brexit and you
Speaker 1: would help us, uh improve our understanding of what's going on.
Speaker 1: There is the pace of role well in the UK
Speaker 1: versus the EU being seen in the UK has a
Speaker 1: referendum on Brexit. Hey, we've made the right decision. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't think there's any doubt that it has, you know,
Speaker 1: reinforced Boris Johnson's message that Britain can do it better alone.
Speaker 1: Now that may not be the case at all, because
Speaker 1: the UK could have approved the vaccines on its own
Speaker 1: without the EU, it could have ordered its own supply.
Speaker 1: But the reality is UM that that that that's the
Speaker 1: that's where the the optics are. It does show you
Speaker 1: the difference right between how Brits operate and how Europeans operate.
Speaker 1: Europeans prefer to take a heck of a long time
Speaker 1: doing things. They like to have tons of bureaucracy that
Speaker 1: makes it almost impossible to act, whereas Bridge just get
Speaker 1: down to it and solve the problem. Well, the thing
Speaker 1: they did right here is the government realized that they
Speaker 1: had to take it out of government and they put
Speaker 1: a private sector venture capitalist with a uh, you know,
Speaker 1: pharmacy of a bio background, in charge of a task
Speaker 1: force who identified the vaccines, did the deals with the companies,
Speaker 1: and they recognize that that the rollout had to be
Speaker 1: through the NHS, which is very good at this It
Speaker 1: has the electronic health records and they get the military
Speaker 1: involved and that just work. Now, if you know, we
Speaker 1: go back and talk to the PPE crisis or the
Speaker 1: handling of the pandemic up to this point, it's really
Speaker 1: a different story, isn't it. But when it comes to UM,
Speaker 1: you know, being able to innovate on this. You know,
Speaker 1: on this particular front, Britain was just way out ahead,
Speaker 1: and you know they deserve to be taking the credit
Speaker 1: that they're very happily, you know, happily eating up right now.
Speaker 1: Terres is the expected expectation of things are going to
Speaker 1: improve here and over what time frame? I mean, are
Speaker 1: there are things improving across the EU in terms of
Speaker 1: getting shots and arms? Yeah, I don't think that the
Speaker 1: big supply crisis is is you know, is that um,
Speaker 1: you know, is that damning for the EU right now?
Speaker 1: I think that you're going to see a lot more
Speaker 1: supply coming in and that the target um I think
Speaker 1: of the adult population by the end of July. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's that's that's pretty much achievable. So um, you know,
Speaker 1: I think we are going to see things getting a
Speaker 1: lot better. And of course we also have, um, the
Speaker 1: seasonal effect on our side, but there's no question that
Speaker 1: Britain will be way out ahead and that that's going
Speaker 1: to affect travel and all sorts of other things in
Speaker 1: addition to you know, the political um knock on effects
Speaker 1: that you just mentioned, and the US is is ramping
Speaker 1: up quite rapidly as well, not because it's got great
Speaker 1: delivery systems, although some states like West Virginia that I
Speaker 1: wrote about do, but because it's got tremendous manufacturing um
Speaker 1: power when it comes to, you know, producing these vaccines.
Speaker 1: Hey Trades, thanks so much for joining us. We love
Speaker 1: chatting with you. A great column here today, you know,
Speaker 1: kind of comparing a couple of places you wouldn't necessarily compare, uh,
Speaker 1: Switzerland and West Virginia as it relates to the vaccine rollout, well,
Speaker 1: because Berland is so rich, right, and for those who
Speaker 1: don't live in the US, West Virginia is a very
Speaker 1: poor state. So it's um the contrast is amazing, Yeah,
Speaker 1: it is. And again we'll have to keep a track
Speaker 1: of how that's developing. In your red headline. Crossing the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg terminal, the CDC says schools can allow three feet
Speaker 1: of distance in classroom, down from six ft, so hopefully
Speaker 1: that will accelerate the reopening of schools across the US.
Speaker 1: Point thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Markets podcast. You
Speaker 1: can subscribe and listen to interviews with Apple Podcasts or
Speaker 1: whatever podcast platform you prefer. I'm Matt Miller. I'm on
Speaker 1: Twitter at Matt Miller venty three on Fall Sweeney. I'm
Speaker 1: on Twitter at pt Sweeney Before the podcast. You can
Speaker 1: always catch us worldwide at Bloomberg Radio